For overview information about occupation data from the 1921 Census, see https://www. visionofbritain.org.uk/census/ EW1921GEN/8
Read Friedrich Engels’ iconic work Conditions of the Working Class in England free online at https://archive.org/details/in.ernet. dli.2015.22153
Read Charles Booth’s Life and Labour of the People in London 1898-3 free online at Gutenberg.org – see https://familytr.ee/Booth
Read My Apprenticehship by Beatrice Webb free online at the Internet Archive – seehttps://familytr.ee/Webb
Subscribers to Ancestry can read or browse the Commissioner’s Report of Children’s Employment, 1842 at Ancestry – see https://familytr.ee/AncestryCRCE and search it at: https://www.ancestry. co.uk/search/collections/34775/
In towns & suburbs, working life could be less gruelling and many built up thriving businesses
In the 1841 Census return (see left) for Mme Dentiche and her ‘girls’, they are clearly shown as dressmakers. By way of a little background to this household, a newspaper report from 1841 Morning Herald (London) 30 July 1841, page 4, covered the court case of Madame Dentiche and her ladies (Odo is named in the article as grisette/housekeeper; grisette is ‘dressmaker’ in French) who had been taken to court for theft from a French dressmaker in St James, London. St James was a notorious haunt for up-market prostitutes. As ‘modistes’ – they had a ‘modiste’ brass plaque on their door – they should have been able to make their own dresses! The whole court knew what they are but the word prostitute is never mentioned.
Sewing at once, with a double thread A shroud as well as a shirt. (Thomas Hood 1843)
With 267,791 people plying their trade of dressmaker/ milliner in 1851, this made it the seventh most populous occupation. Beaten into eleventh position were 152,672 tailors. Seamstress/shirtmakers tagged behind at 73,068. Overall, 493,531 individuals worked in the clothing trade and all were undertaking or had completed an apprenticeship. Many, however, worked appalling hours for pitiful wages – so why do it? One reason was the beckoning bony finger and shame of the workhouse. The second, a seamstress/dressmaker was considered far more respectable than a factory hand. High quality sewing was also a transferable skill indispensable after marriage.