The Condition of the Working Class in England

• 1. Introduction

  ›

  The Condition of the Working Class in England began as a young man's act of witness. Friedrich Engels was just twenty-four years old when he arrived in Salford and Manchester to work at his father's textile firm, and what he found there radicalized him far beyond anything he had encountered in Germany. Between 1842 and 1844, he walked through the slums, read the official reports, and gathered enough evidence to fill a book that would shape socialist thought for generations. The central claim was stark: the Industrial Revolution had made workers worse off, not better. That argument raises questions that still haven't settled. How bad were conditions really? What numbers did Engels marshal? Who translated his German into English, and how did the book find its audience? And what did Engels himself think of the work, decades later, when he looked back at the young man who wrote it?

• 2. Numbers at the Heart

  ›

  In cities such as Salford, Manchester, and Liverpool, mortality from diseases like smallpox, measles, scarlet fever, and whooping cough ran four times higher than in the surrounding countryside. Death from convulsions was ten times as high. The overall death rate in Manchester and Liverpool sat significantly above the national average: where the national figure stood at roughly 1 in 45 or 46 deaths per head, Manchester registered 1 in 32.72, Liverpool 1 in 31.90, and in the worst cases 1 in 29.90. Engels did not simply assert the toll; he tracked it across time. In the industrial town of Carlisle, before mills arrived between 1779 and 1787, 4,408 out of every 10,000 children died before their fifth birthday. After the mills came, that figure climbed to 4,738. Among adults in Carlisle, 1,006 out of 10,000 died before reaching thirty-nine in the pre-mill era. Afterward, the figure rose to 1,261 out of 10,000. These were not impressionistic complaints. They were tallied from what Engels called the detailed contemporary reports that were being collected and put on record in Britain more systematically than anywhere else in the world.

• 3. The Making of a Radical

  ›

  Engels was the eldest son of a successful German textile industrialist, a background that gave him both access to industrial enterprise and a reason to scrutinize it. His radicalization began in journalism before he was sent to England, but it deepened sharply during those two years in Salford and Manchester. Manchester was the city at the heart of the Industrial Revolution, and his time there produced not just data but a moral position: that workers in industrial cities had lower incomes than their pre-industrial peers and lived in conditions that were more unhealthy and more unpleasant. In 1844, in Paris, Engels met Karl Marx for the second time. He showed Marx the manuscript, and Marx read it with what Engels later described as profound impression. That encounter convinced Marx that the working class could serve as the agent and instrument of what he called the final revolution in history. The book's argument about wages and living conditions would echo through the Marxist historians of the twentieth century who revisited the Industrial Revolution and debated whether workers had truly suffered during it.

• 4. A German Book Finds English

  ›

  Florence Kelley, an American, translated the book into English in 1885. She worked under her then-married name Florence Kelley Wischnewetzky. Engels authorized the translation and wrote a new preface for it. The English edition appeared in New York in 1887 and in London in 1892. Those editions carried a small but telling addition to the title: the qualification "in 1844" was appended, anchoring the work in its historical moment. That addition was not merely bibliographic. By the time the London edition appeared, Engels knew that much of what he had documented had changed, and the new preface acknowledged as much.

• 5. Engels Looks Back

  ›

  In his 1892 preface, Engels wrote that the author at that time was young, twenty-four years of age, and that his production bears the stamp of his youth with its good and its faulty features. He expressed no shame about either. His assessment of what had changed was precise. The repeated visitations of cholera, typhus, smallpox, and other epidemics had, he argued, shown the British bourgeoisie the urgent necessity of sanitation. The most crying abuses described in the book had either disappeared or been made less conspicuous. But Engels did not treat this as a vindication of industrialization. He redirected the argument outward. France, Germany, and especially America were, by 1892, arriving at roughly the same phase of development that England had occupied in 1844. He noted the same struggles for a shorter working day, the truck system in full operation, and the cottage system used by employers as a means of domination over workers in rural districts. The theoretical standpoint of the book, he admitted, did not exactly coincide with his standpoint of 1892. He described the work as one of the phases of the embryonic development of modern socialism, tracing its intellectual descent from German philosophy in the way that a human embryo, in his analogy, still reproduces the gill-arches of fish ancestors.

• 6. Legacy and Reach

  ›

  The book was originally addressed to a German audience, yet it became what many consider a classic account of the universal condition of the industrial working class. Engels had argued in his original German preface that proletarian conditions existed in their classical form only in the British Empire, and that Germany would inevitably reach the same degree of acuteness unless the nation adopted measures providing a new basis for the whole social system. That warning proved prescient as industrialization spread. The book has been continuously reissued and remains in print in several different editions, ensuring that Florence Kelley's 1885 translation, authorized and prefaced by Engels himself, is still the text most readers encounter.