The reference of Marshall’s writing after the early studies.
- Progress of the Working Class. 1832-1867 July 2016 HESTA, Melbourne
OU, Akira (WANG, LiangLiang)1
Osaka University, Graduate school of Economics
A. Marshall had a strong concern with the living conditions of the working classes. He
theorized the possibility of a new era of civilization, characterized by a widespread ‘moral’
and ‘mental’ refinement. There is no doubt that his ideas were based on the arguments
of J.S. Mill. However new light should be spotted on the reports and materials which
influenced Marshall’s mind. This paper sharpen into the book which written by J.M.
Ludlow (1821-1911) and Lloyd Jones (1811-1866), published in 1867, and indicate that
Marshall’s 1873 conference paper had been strongly influenced by this book, Progress of
the working class: 1832-1867.
After the Reform Bill of 18322, J.M. Ludlow and Lloyd Jones wrote a book with
full of testimonies, detailed descriptions and statistics which argued a marked material,
moral, intellectual, and political progress of the working classes. They compared an early
period of the industrial revolution with later period. It showed the social, national gain
from the working classes. They argued not only each worker, benefit from the shortening
in working hours, sanitary and education, but also voluntary associations for social
security, labour bargaining, and co-operation in retail trade and production. During the
follow-up survey, they gradually noticed that the most important aspect is education.
Apart from general education in public and private schools, Ludlow and Jones presented
evidence of the progress made in a variety of less formal institutions and associations
designed for workers education.
Born in China, educated in Japan.
The Representation of the People Act 1832 (known informally as the 1832 Reform
Act, Great Reform Act or First Reform Act to distinguish it from subsequent Reform
Acts) was an Act of Parliament (indexed as 2 & 3 Will. IV c. 45) that introduced wideranging changes to the electoral system of England and Wales.
1
2
1
This is the material which gave a new idea to Marshall, and also the reason that
he placed a special emphasis on the spread of “skills” but old “population thesis”. It is
clear that in his economic thesis, a fundamental ingredient for updating “skills” was
education with multi-degree approach, where the last pages of his papers are devoted. A
conclusive proof should of course required some deeper archive research. For point after
point, Marshall presented the sketch of a theoretical counterpart to their work.
1. Introduction
A. Marshall was tried to help refine the condition of working classes3. There is important
question that should be made clear. Marshall shares many of ideals and views with
predecessors, especially Mill, but have a different theory of wages and education strategy.
This question requires some evidences of the progress made by the society and the
working classes from the 1830s. The possibilities of the working classes in Britain
depended on the late-industrial revolution, and the Factory Acts introduced around of
the mid-19th century.
In the year, Mill died (on 8 May 1873) and his Autobiography published,
Marshall gave a speech on “The future of the working classes” similar to Mill’s “On the
Probable Futurity of the Labouring Classes”. Marshall built in a similar ideas into his
own papers, but in a more refined form. According to previous research, it tells that Mill’s
Principles had an “enormous influence” on the economic study of Marshall (Groenewegen,
1995, p. 145). Marshall shared with Mill (and others, of course) a concept of economics
as a science, and aim, which was to help the working classes improve their life style and
condition. Marshall mentioned Mill’s Autobiography at the conference, and said
following;
The course of inquiry which I propose for to-night will never lie far apart from that
pursued by Mr. and Mrs. Mill, but it seldom exactly coincides with it.4
J.M. Ludlow (1821-1911) and Lloyd Jones (1811-1866) wrote a book in 1867 that
argued a progress of the working classes after the Reform Bill of 1832. The feature of
Ludlow and Jones’s book is the social gain from the overall advancement of the working
“The problem which guided Marshall’s work throughout the whole of his life raising
the standards of life of the working class until they had reached those of “gentlemen”
(Groenewegen, 1994, p. 278).
4 Marshall, 1925 [1873]
3
2
classes. It was included important contents which explaining us the condition of working
classes in detail. This is the material that gave a new idea to Marshall, and also the
reason that he placed a special emphasis on the spread of “skills” but “population”.
Moreover, it is clear that a fundamental ingredient for updating “skills” was education5
with multi-degree approach, where the last pages of Marshall’s paper are devoted.
His logical scheme, adopted which followed closely in the footsteps of Malthus
and Mill. The continuing rapid increase in population was a “great hindrance” 6 for
working classes. However, after a few years from the 1873 paper7, Marshall changed his
mind about the population thesis. The post-1846 free trade, emigration to, and the
economic progress of America and colonial lands, switched the situation that shaped the
opinions of the young scholar. Finally he replaced the old theory of wages based on
population with a theory based on the “productivity” of labour.
The paper unfolds in six sections. In section two, an account is provided the
information of Authors (Christian Socialists) and its history. Then, in section three, the
working classes condition from the 1830s to the 1880s and relationship with Marshall’s
discussions are provided. In section four, an account is provided the difference between
Mill and Marshall in population issue. Stronger religious self-reinforcing mechanism will
be argued in which a rising standard of life (comfort) determined a balance on population
growth in Marshall, could reflect the influence of Victorian Christian Socialism. In
section five, Marshall’s post-conference paper is analyzed. Then conclusion in section six.
2. “Progress of the Working Class. 1832-1867” and The Christian Socialism8
Briefly introduce the authors and some keywords. John Malcolm Forbes Ludlow was
educated in France, where he was influenced by socialists and social Catholics, he came
to London in 1838 to study law and was called to the bar in 1843. At Lincoln's Inn he
came into contact with F.D. Maurice, and from Paris during the 1848 Revolution he wrote
his famous letter to Maurice, insisting that “the new Socialism must be Christianized.”
A new system of children and adult education had approved by congress in the 1870
Education Act.
6 Marshall, 1925, p. 116-117
7 Marshall, A. (1925) [1873]. The Future of the Working Classes. In A.C. Pigou (Ed.),
Memorials of Alfred Marshall. Reprints of Economics Classics, New York, Kelley: 101118.
8 For the formation and central tenets of Victorian Christian Socialism see Hughes
(1876); Seligman (1886), Dorfman (1941), Lewis (1951), Masterman (1963), Ludlow
(1981) and Masterman (1984).
5
3
The Chartist fiasco of 1848 united him with Maurice and Charles Kingsley into the
Christian Socialist movement, but it was Ludlow who was the real leader and who
supplied the social ideas-cooperative associations being one of his main contributions.
With Maurice he edited the short-lived journal Politics for the People, and in 1850 edited
alone a new journal Christian Socialist, which contained the first attempt to state
coherently the Christian view of a socialist society. He had wide contacts with trades
union and workers' leaders; he had a large part in the Industrial and Provident Societies
Act (1852); and he conceived the scheme for the Working Men's College, which he and
Maurice opened in 1854, and in which he taught for many years.
Ludlow profoundly believed that religious as well as intellectual education must
accompany political and industrial emancipation, and this led him to concentrate on
educational work in later life, though in no way abandoning the official organs of
Christian Socialism. The relationship of Christian Socialist movement and Ludlow was
well informed by Davis J. Gilchrist and Gregory C.G. Moore, in “John Malcolm Ludlow,
Victorian Christian Socialism and the Friendly Society Act of 1875”.
Lloyd Jones was a Socialist, union activist, advocate of co-operation, journalist
and writer. He was born in Bandon, County Cork in 1811. Described by Sidney and
Beatrice Webb as one of "the more thoughtful working-men leaders" and referred to by
Karl Marx as "The Tailor", he was a friend, supporter and biographer of Robert Owen
(his The Life and Times of Robert Owen was published posthumously in 1889) and aided
Samuel Plimsoll in his campaign to improve safety at sea. He left Ireland for Manchester
in 1827 in pursuit of work. Where he followed his father's trade taking employment as a
fustian cutter and soon after joining the Journeyman's Union of Fustian Cutters was
appointed its Secretary. When there was some expectation of another Peterloo Massacre,
Lloyd Jones, like many thousands of others in the North, provided himself with arms,
with a view to active resistance.
He joined the Salford Co-operative Society in 1829 and ran its free school until
1831. He subsequently became the chief platform advocate for Robert Owen's plan of
village companies and later, when Owen's emphasis shifted to the utopian and religious,
Lloyd Jones was a paid Owenite "Social Missionary". He continued evangelizing until
the mission was ended in 1845. For many years these plans were vigorously opposed by
the clergy who regarded Owen's theories as immoral. Lloyd Jones had a good presence
and a fine voice, with readiness and courage in controversy. He was regarded as the best
public debater of his day, and was in more discussions than any other of Owen's
supporters. When the Chartists' proposal of a month's annual holiday was put forward
in 1839 with a view to showing practically the importance of the labouring classes, Lloyd
4
Jones was appointed to address the Chartists of the Manchester district with whom the
strength of the movement rested. An audience of five thousand men assembled in the
Carpenters' Hall and a further five thousand outside. After Lloyd Jones' speech in
opposition to the "sacred month" the project was abandoned. He was later appointed a
member of the first Parliamentary Committee of the Trades Union Congress and was
the first secretary of the Labour Representation League.
Victorian Christian Socialism, by definition the term applies to the activities of
a group of Anglicans between 1848 and 1854, but their ideas inspired subsequent
generations. They reacted against the dominant utilitarianism of the age, laissez-faire
economics, and the indifference of the Anglican Church to social issues. Though not
united politically, they were united in believing that Christianity stood for a structure of
society which would enable men to live and work as brethren, and that competition is
not a universal law. Ludlow was the founder of the movement, but Maurice was its
prophet and thinker. Maurice had a dread of societies and hated the prospect of Christian
Socialism's becoming a party.
The day following the failure of the Charter, the group brought out a poster
introducing the Christian element into socialism. This was followed by the short-lived,
much-criticized journal Politics for the People. Workers suspected this journal as a
middle- class trap, but in 1849 the group began regular meetings with workingmen,
which improved relations. Kingsley, meanwhile, wrote his novels Yeast and Alton
Locke in defense of working-class aspirations 9 , and Ludlow produced a program of
founding workers' cooperatives. In 1850 associations of tailors, bakers, needlewomen,
The way in which these events prompted the intellectual products of the Christian
Socialists is reflected in the later accounts prepared by the participants, such as in
Hughes’s (1876) memoir of Charles Kingsley:
In order to understand and judge the sayings and writings of Parson Lot [the
nom de plume of Charles Kingsley at this time] fairly, it is necessary to recall the
condition of the England of that day. Through the winter of 1847-8, amidst widespread distress, the cloud of discontent, of which Chartism was the most violent
symptom, had been growing darker and more menacing, while Ireland was only
held down by main force. The breaking-out of the revolution on the Continent in
February increased the danger. In March there were riots in London, Glasgow,
Edinburgh, Liverpool, and other large towns. On April 7th, ‘the Crown and
Government Security Bill’, commonly called ‘the Gagging Act’ was introduced by
the Government, the first reading carried by 265 to 24, and the second a few days
later by 452 to 35. On the 10th of April the Government had to fill London with
troops, and put the Duke of Wellington in command, who barricaded the bridges
and Downing Street, garrisoned the Bank [of England] and other public buildings,
and closed the Horse Guards.
9
5
builders, bootmakers, and printers were formed, together with a Society for the
Promotion of Working Men's Associations. Through lack of money, some of the
associations foundered, but the group did make a direct contribution to the Industrial
and Providential Societies Act (1852), which gave cooperatives their charter. In 1850 a
new journal Christian Socialist appeared and met with much hostility. The driving force
of the group was its Monday evening Bible study, though on Fridays it met to discuss
social problems and the action to be taken. There were, however, clashes in the group,
and from associations Maurice began to turn his attention to education, founding in 1854
the first workingmen's college, soon to be followed by others throughout the country.
The failure of several associations, the rising prosperity of England, and the
indifference of the church at large ended the Christian Socialists, but the movement
marked the beginning of modern social concern in the Anglican Church, inspired the
later Guild of St. Matthew, the Christian Social Union, and the twentieth-century
protests, as well as influenced trades unions, cooperative legislation, and working-class
education.
3. Characteristics of Ludlow and Jones’s book10
After the Reform Bill of 1832, J.M. Ludlow and Lloyd Jones wrote a book with full of
testimonies, detailed descriptions and statistics, which argued a marked material, moral,
intellectual, and political progress of the working classes. They compared an early period
of the industrial revolution with later period, which from 1832.
Before the year of 1832, those days was characterized by “large fortunes (...)
made by numbers of men”11 , and also by the worst educational, moral and physical
aspects of the new factory system, the legal obstacles to worker associations 12 , the
destruction of many old artisan’s trades, low and fluctuating wages, uncertainty of work,
bitter contrasts between workers and employers. On the other hand (after the 1832~), it
was characterized by a social regulation of the factory system, the development of Trade
Societies, steadily increasing wages, steadier labour market conditions, and a
Even though it concerns mainly the English workmen of the manufacturing districts,
there are also a series of testimonies and data on miners, sailors, artisans, while little is
said on agricultural workers “a class (...) amounting to less than half of the industrial
class, and which diminishes as the latter increases” (Ludlow and Jones, 1867, p. 4).
11 Ludlow and Jones, 1867, p. 9
12 The so called “Combination laws” of 1796 and 1799, which made any voluntary worker
association legally impossible, had been repealed in 1824 and replaced by the
Combination Act of 1825, which allowed Trade Societies, but still restricted their activity.
10
6
strengthening in character, intelligence and social consciousness of the working classes.
It showed the social, national gain from the working classes. They argued not only each
worker, benefit from the shortening in working hours, sanitary and education, but also
voluntary associations for social security, labour bargaining, and co-operation in retail
trade and production.
Around 1832, the public opinion of employers changed very much. The
employers opposed the claims of labour on the argument that high wages would diminish
domestic production in favour of foreign competition and also lead capital to migrate out
of Britain, workers would spend wages in inappropriate way and disturb public order.
Since all these did not actually happen, public opinion slowly changed and became aware
of the common benefits of the new regime.
They gradually noticed that the most important aspect is education. Apart from
general education in public and private schools, Ludlow and Jones presented evidence of
the progress made in a variety of less formal institutions and associations designed for
workers of various age brackets.
(1) The public opinion on factory labour and its possibilities
Take a focus on the first major point. Around 1832, they argued a transformation of
working classes. There had been a “great awakening”13 “amongst the thoughtful and
intelligent portions of our working people in the manufacturing districts of Great
Britain”14. The shaping of this new opinion on the possibilities of factory labour has been
mostly determined by Trade Societies. It also meant that the public opinion more
sympathetic to employees very much.
At the first, employers was taking care about competition with foreign powers,
how to hold the capital inside Great Britain, but workers’ payment. They thought higher
wage will spend in improper way and a shorten period of time assigned for work, lead
children to run in idleness around, and women to be deprived of their income15, according
to the wage fund. All believed that any wage rise should be transformed direct into an
increase in marriages and fertility rate. Since all this didn’t happen, public opinion
gradually changed and became aware of the common benefits of the new regime.
(2) Education and social development
The second major point is education. Ludlow and Jones present much evidence
13
14
15
Ludlow and Jones, 1867, p. 87
ibid, p. 85
Ludlow and Jones, 1867, p. 91
7
of the progress made in a variety of less formal institutions and associations. Specifically
designed for workers education. The shortening of daily working time opened many
possibilities: the old Sunday schools proved of far more value to the adult than they
originally were to the children, the Evening Class was becoming an even “more effective
means of adult education”16, the Union of Mechanics’ Institutes “have born excellent
fruit, springing up almost of necessity wherever the spirit of association is strongly
manifested”17, as well as the Working Men’s Colleges, Clubs and institutes18.
The spreading among the working classes of reading rooms, newspapers and
literature made the working man “a man of fuller information, better judgment, and
wider sympathies than the workman of thirty years back, who had to content himself
with gossip and rumour”19. This intellectual advancement made a series of rational forms
of activities well received by some working people. The activities, which were, in the
judgment of the Authors, often baneful and degrading, like betting, were being somewhat
balanced by more refined ones, until now reserved for the upper and middle classes, like
literary and musical entertainment, cricket, rowing, excursions, and industrial
exhibitions. Trades Societies had fostered by general worker associations and all this
booming of workers cultural associations and this new demand for recreation, in
particular20.
(3) Marshall’s arguments and relationship with the 1867 material
Marshall saw the intellectual and moral progress of the working classes that material
had described. The improvement of working condition gave chances for labors to make
something better than before. The problem was that increase in leisure and in wages
would not provide any progress by itself. All depended on how to use it. Otherwise the
working classes were never able to get out from the negative chain. A wise use consisted
in more education, rational enjoyment, provident habits, and “care and judgment in
expenditure”21. On the other hand, an unwise use consisted in grosser ways of spending
time, like the public house or sporting activities, indulgence in unnecessary food and
16
17
18
19
ibid, p. 167-168
ibid, p. 170
ibid, p. 174-180
ibid, p. 187
We believe that there is no school like that of the Trade Society to teach the working
man the value of (individual strength, sobriety, mutual trust and confidence, and distrust
of the noisy, the plausible, the violent, the self-seeking); that it has taught and is teaching
it to them (Ludlow and Jones, 1867, p. 228).
21 Marshall, 1920, p. 689
20
8
drink 22 . Trades societies played a critical part in the book and witnessed. Those
associations lead working classes to acquire knowledge, in Marshall’s ward “skills”, for
lead them into proper decision.
What was happening that the “skills” were rapidly spreading and increasing?
In Marshall’s hypothesis, the working classes in the narrower sense tended to disappear
and “all labour would be skilled” (Marshall, 1925, p. 112). School education for character,
self-respect and social duties had been considered the anchor to any permanent
improvement in the life of labours since Malthus’s book, and both Mill and Marshall have
emphasized this. However, he placed a special emphasis on education for industrialskills:
Knowledge is power and man would have knowledge. Inventions would
increase and they would be readily applied. (...) There would be no premium
on setting men to tasks that required no skill23.
A high standard of education, once attained by the working classes, “would be unfailingly
maintained” and transferred to the following generation, because:
An educated man would not only have a high conception of his duties to his
children; he would be deeply sensitive to the social degradation which he
and they would incur if he failed in it.24
4. Population for J.S. Mill and Marshall
After the 1830s, the personal and social possibilities of the working classes in Britain
made a leap forward as described. Therefor the theory of wage for working classes was
still bounded under the influence of Malthus’s Essay on Population. Any wage rise should
be transformed direct into an increase in marriages and fertility rate. This was no longer
at Mill’s times. He could observe the intellectual and moral improvement of the factory
worker of Britain. From his standpoint, there was a hope that the “moral restraint” could
spread into the working classes. Mill mentioned that;
A well-educated laboring class could, and we believe would keep up its condition to
22
23
24
ibid, p. 689
Marshall, 1925, p. 112
ibid, p. 144
9
a high standard of comfort, or at least at a great distance from physical destitution,
by the exercise of the same degree of habitual prudence practiced by the middle
class.25
A further element of contrast with Malthus and Mill is well-known positive attitude
towards birth control. From the autobiography;
Malthus’s population principle we took up with ardent zeal in the contrary sense as
indicating the sole means of realizing that improvability by securing full
employment at high wages to the whole labouring population through a voluntary
restriction of the increase of their numbers.26
Marshall considered the population as affirmative when he published Principal, and
emphasizes his difference to Mill. Only when “the wheat fields of the world are at their
full power” dose it follow that “a rise in the standard of comfort may rise wages merely
by stinting the growth of numbers”.
Mill is condemnation of some characteristic aspects of the social life of his time,
like “trampling, crushing, elbowing, and treading each other’s heels”, as “disagreeable
symptoms of one of the phases of industrial progress” 27 can be interpreted as the
problem that must be settled. The struggle for riches and an increased material
production per se, were indefensible on ethical grounds and were a “false ideal of
society”28. Mill could not accept that that kind of progress should have no other final goal
than that of increasing the numbers of the population, as predicted by the economists of
the past generations. He needed some kind of theory in support of an improvability in
the conditions of life, and found it in a proper interpretation of the population principle.
Assuming that such an improvability was fully in view of the current generation of
workers, as he believed it was, the industrial progress and its “disagreeable symptoms”
could be temporarily accepted as a means for fulfilling an end of a higher order.
(1) A habitual standard of comfortable living
Mill emphasized an inverse relationship between comfortable living and fertility: the
higher the number of children, the lower the standard that can be passed on to them and
25
26
27
28
Mill, 1967 [1845], p. 379
Mill, 1989 [1873], p. 94
Mill, 1929, p. 748
ibid, p. 752
10
vice versa. The diffusion of social habits aimed at improved comfort through further
restraints in fertility, is the main force driving a permanent increase in real wages, and
to still further betterment in living standards.
In Mill’s theory, because the rise in wages involved a falling rate of profit and
thereby a falling “effective desire of accumulation”29, thus eventually leading to Mill’s
stationary state, characterized by high wages, high living standards and very moderate
habits of fertility. He used that Ricardo’s idea which in technical progress (as well as
openness to new international trade) can only postpone (rather than prevent) the reach
of a stationary state. The effect of technical progress on the Mill’s doctrine to the
stationary state, was not that of increasing population, but that of increasing real wages:
technical progress, by dropping the price of commodities relative to wages, is an
independent source of an upward shift in the trade-off, and a morally progressive
laboring population would increase its standard of comfort at a constant or falling rate
of population growth.
(2) Marshall’s contrast between standard of life and standard of comfort
The contrast between those different ways of living, which parallels Mill’s contrast
between comfortable living and fertility. Mill’s and Marshall’s different ways of spending
resources are alternative, that the more that is expended in one way, the less that is
expended in the other. And the progress of the working classes depended on what “way”
was chosen.
Marshall’s argument was that the higher the wage, the higher the indexes of
both activities (standard of life and comfort) that can be reached. However, the wage rate
and the standard of life are not independent, the basis of given wages, affects future
wages. Any increase in the standard of life would soon determine, by competition for
more productive workers, a wage rise; conversely, a wage rise obtained artificially by
“particular devices”30 would soon return them to their previous level. Furthermore, an
independent drop in living standards would not fail, according to Marshall, to affect
future wages negatively.
There is a clear logical analogy between Mill’s and Marshall’s visions of progress.
Both of them relied on a cumulative, self-reinforcing process. The voluntary action of
workpeople, learning to live in a certain way is required. This “way” involved the same
intellectual and moral values: in this respect, Marshall’s “standard of life” corresponds
29
30
ibid, p. 165
Marshall, 1920, p. 704
11
to Mill’s “standard of comfort”. They differed, however, in the evaluation of the fertility
issue. This was the key element for Mill, but played no role in the future Marshall.
5. Marshall’s works from the 1873 paper to the Principles
In the Principles, Marshall’s opinions are expressed in a more balanced way. The precise
distinction between skilled and unskilled labour is acknowledged to depend on historical
circumstances, and he does not venture to say that unskilled labour will ever disappear.
Nonetheless, the importance of a material inter-generational movement from unskilled
to skilled labour is still very much emphasized:
The children of unskilled workers need to be made capable of earning the wages
of skilled work: and the children of skilled workers need by similar means be
made capable of doing still more responsible work.31
After a few years from the 1873 paper, Marshall changed his mind on population growth
being a “great hindrance” to the power of progress. Marshall was now careful to stress
his differences to Mill. The post-1846 free trade, emigration to, and the economic
progress of America and Australia, changed the situation that shaped the opinions of
Mill and the young Marshall. The latter’s American tour in the summer of 1875 may
have contributed to this change in judgement. The “vast agricultural lands of North and
South America and Australia” now provided the English workman with wheat “in
sufficient quantities for his family at a total cost equal to but a small part of his wages”
(Marshall, 1920, p. 691). This new factual evaluation has been reinforced by an explicit
rejection of the theory according to which wages can be raised by merely making labour
scarce: the old „work-fund‟ theory had “no foundation” (Marshall, 1920, p. 697).
The main premises of Mill’s argument fell. This does not mean that Marshall
completely abandoned Mill’s course of inquiry. In spite of the different factual premises,
he built, in the Principles, an argument which was very similar to Mill’s from a logical
point of view. A better, nobler life was still held to be at the same time the cause and the
effect of economic progress. A double-sided relationship between the manner of living
and wages, able to generate a Millian self-reinforcing mechanism, is the cornerstone of
the concluding chapter of the Principles.
Marshall replaced the old theory of wages based on population with a theory
based on the “net product” of labour. In order to properly understand Marshall’s
31
ibid, p. 206, and p. 718
12
cumulative causation and the precise mechanisms through which it generates social
progress, have to distinguish between his new conceptions of the “standard of life” and
“comfort”. The former consists of a series of activities conducive to positive moral
attitudes, and the latter consists of the satisfaction of material wants, above the mere
decencies and necessaries of life.
He thought this distinction was necessary, because the term “comfort”, which
had been used by Mill (and Malthus), “may suggest a mere increase of artificial wants,
among which perhaps the grosser wants may predominate” (Marshall, 1920, p. 690). Now,
it is true that “a rise in the standard of comfort will probably involve some rise in the
standard of life”, but “the only direct effect of an increase of wants is to make people more
miserable than before” (Marshall, 1920, p. 690). Only insofar as the increased wages
and/or leisure “open the way to new and higher activities” is efficiency increased, thus
determining a net social gain, an enduring basis for the higher wages and the possibility
of a further rise.
6. Concluding remarks
In Marshall’s thought, the working classes are assumed to live with the same kind of
moral and mental development that Mill predicted some twenty years before. However,
Marshall used new arguments, which had been affected or influenced by some “series of
reports”32. We have argued that Marshall’s specific course of research can be understood
in the light of the evidence put forward by Ludlow and Jones in their 1867 book. A
conclusive proof should of course require some deeper archive research. For point after
point, Marshall presented the sketch of a theoretical counterpart to their work. A special
emphasis is placed on the spread of skills, but there is no sign of Mill’s argument with
population. The Principles introduced some novelties: the population argument is
completely dropped and the “skills” argument supported by education is refined in much
more detail.
Marshall’s optimistic theory, concerning the future of the working classes, derived from
his conviction that these virtues were deeply spreading in the working classes: the
various activities referred in Section 2, concerning leisure, work, associations, education,
and ways to expend wages, are descriptions of the evidence at the end.
32
Marshall, 1925, p. 116
13
References
Biagini, E. (1995). The Anglican ethic and the spirit of citizenship: the political and social
context. In Raffaelli T., E. Biagini and R. McWilliams Tullberg (Eds. 1995), pp.
24-46.
Ekelund R.B. Jr. and Kordsmeier W.F. (1981). J.S. Mill, Unions, and the Wages Fund
Recantation: A Reinterpretation – Comment. The Quarterly Journal of
Economics, 96 (3): 531-41.
Ekelund R.B. Jr and R.D. Tollison (1976). The New Political Economy of J.S. Mill: The
Means to Social Justice. The Canadian Journal of Economics, 9 (2): 213-231.
Davis J. Gilchrist and Gregory C.G. Moore (2007). John Malcolm Ludlow, Victorian
Christian Socialism and the Friendly Society Act of 1875. History of Economic
Thought Society of Australia: 156-186.
Dorfman, J. (1941) ‘The Seligman Correspondence IV’. Political Science Quarterly, 56(4).
573-99.
Ekelund R.B. Jr. and Kordsmeier W.F. (1981). J.S. Mill, Unions, and the Wages Fund
Recantation: A Reinterpretation – Comment. The Quarterly Journal of
Economics, 96 (3): 531-41.
Ekelund R.B. Jr and R.D. Tollison (1976). The New Political Economy of J.S. Mill: The
Means to Social Justice. The Canadian Journal of Economics, 9 (2): 213-231.
Groenewegen, P. (1994). Alfred Marshall and the Labour Commission 1891-1894. The
European Journal for the history of Economic Thought, 1 (2): 273-295.
Groenewegen, P. (1995). A soaring eagle: Alfred Marshall 1842-1924. Cheltenham:
Edward Elgar.
Groenewegen, P. (1995). Was John Stuart Mill a Classical Economist? History of
Economic Ideas, Vol 13 (3): 9-31.
Hughes, T. (1876) ‘Prefatory Memoir to Charles Kingsley’s Alton Lock’, in Kingsley, C.,
Alton Lock, Gutenberg on-line books.
Krik, N. (1985) The Growth of Working Class Reformism in Mid-Victorian England.
Groom Helm Australia.
Lewis, G.K. (1951) ‘The Ideas of the Christian Socialists of 1848’, Western Political
Quarterly, 4(3): 397-429.
Ludlow J.M. and Jones L. (1867) [1973]. Progress of the Working Class. 1832-1867. New
York: Augustus M. Kelley Publishers.
Ludlow, J.M. (1981) John Ludlow: The Autobiography of a Christian Socialist, edited and
introduction by A. D. Murray, London, F. Cass.
14
Malthus T.R. (1826) [1989]. An Essay on the Principle of Population. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Marshall A. (1920). Principles of Economics. 8th edition, London: Macmillan.
Marshall, A. 1873) [1925]. The Future of the Working Classes. In A.C. Pigou (Ed.),
Memorials of Alfred Marshall. Reprints of Economics Classics, New York,
Kelley: 101-118.
Marshall A. (1930). The Pure Theory of Foreign Trade – The Pure Theory of Domestic
Values. London: The London School of Economics and Political Science,
University of London.
Marshall, A. (1996). Official Papers of Alfred Marshall: A Supplement (Edited by P.D.
Groenewegen). Cambridge: Cambridge University for the Royal Economic
Society.
Masterman, Neville. C. (2008). John Malcolm Ludlow: The Builder of Christian
Socialism. Cambridge University Press.
Masterman, N.C. (1984) ‘Ludlow, J.M’, in Bayley, J.O. and Gossman, N.J. (eds)
Biographical Dictionary of Modern British Radicals, Volume 2, 1830-1870,
Brighton, Harvester Press.
McWilliams Tullberg, R. (Ed. 1990). Alfred Marshall in Retrospect. Aldershot: Edward
Elgar.
Mill, J.S. (1845) [1967]. The claims of labour. In J.M. Robson (Ed.), Collected Works of
John Stuart Mill, University of Toronto Press, Vol. IV: 631-668.
Mill, J. S. (1871) [1929]. Principles of Political Economy. 7th edition, edited with an
introduction by Sir W.J. Ashley. London: Longmans.
Mill, J.S. (1873) [1989]. Autobiography. Edited with an introduction of J.M. Robson.
London: Penguin books.
Opocher, A. (2010). The future of the working classes: A Comparison between J.S. Mill
and A. Marshall. Taylor & Francis Journals, vol.17 (2), pages 229-253.
Raffaelli, T. (1995). Of microscopes and telescopes; with directions for their combined use
in the social sciences, adapted to the elementary instruction to women. In
Raffaelli T., E. Biagini and R. McWilliams Tullberg (Eds., 1995): 3-23.
Raffaelli T., E. Bigini and R. McWilliams Tullberg (Eds., 1995). Alfred Marshall’s
Lectures to Women (foreword by Giacomo Beccattini). Aldershot: Edward
Elgar.
Raven, Charles E. (1920) Christian Socialism, 1848-1854. London: Macmillan.
Seligman E.R.A. (1886) ‘Owen and the Christian Socialists’, Political Science Quarterly,
1(2): 206-49.
15
Webb, Sidney; Webb, Beatrice (1920). The History of Trade Unionism, 1666–1920.
London: Printed by the authors for the Trade Unionists of the United
Kingdom. p. 340
16