CHANGE IN ENGLISH HABITS.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume VIII, Issue 250, 17 October 1873, Page 4

CHANGE IN ENGLISH HABITS.

A correspondent writing to a Melbourne paper makes these observations :— " A very short acquaintance with London, or indeed with any English town, suffices to show an Australian wbo has been for iong resident in Melbourne that a very great change has come over the manners and CDBtoms of the English within the last few years. No longer can it be said that they are a saving or a frugal people. The habit of living op to their means, if not indeed beyond them, is almost universal. Micawber's famous maxim — 6 Income one hundred a year; expenditure ninety-nine pounds nineteen shillings and elevenpence — result, happiness? income one hundred a year? expenditure one hundred pounds and one penny — result, misery,' seems to be entirely forgotten, or if remembered is certainly not acted upon. Improvidence is not confined to any class, it is universal, and even the most poorly paid section of the community expend a considerable portion of their wages in cheap and not always innocent amusements. One very remarkable change which has come over the working classes in particular is, that they no longer take so much pride in their work as formerly. Many employers complain that the class of skilled workmen is gradually becoming extinct, and that the young men who now come to the trade are only anxious that their work should be^ just good enough to prevent its being rejected; that the conscientiousness and devotion to duty which made an artizan expend all his labor aud skill upon whatever he had in hand, and lent a dignity to his labor, are now rarely or never found among English workmen. The middleclaases blame the trades unioos for the change — they should rather blarira themselves. They set an example of unmitigated selfishness to their men, and it is not very wonderful if the latter improve upon the lesson. My own experience in London has convinced me of one rather singular anomaly, to which I should not have attached much importance if it had not been corroborated by several i ex- Victorians wbo have had to do withf workmen both in London and Melbourne. V The wages of laborers here are four shillings, and of carpenters six and sixpensefor nine hours' work; the usual rate in Melbourne ia six shillings for^ laborers, and at least nine for mechanics,/ for a day of eight hours; and yet con/ tractg cost quite as much in London as if Melbourne. I am afraid that the onlf solution of the parodox is that in the one city men either cannot or will not work anything like so hard as in the otbfer. Whether the difference arises from fin- ! ability or disinclination I would not dare to decide, but it is quite certain that eVeo skilled workmen must find it very 2iffi- , cult to get a sufficiency of wholesome jw<l nutritious food when meat is froni a shilling to fourteenpence a pound, and" i6 mere laborers flean diet must be an almost nnknovrn luxury. National greatness lis-, after all, pretty much a matter of fobd, and with dear fuel and dear meat The supply of carbon must be remarkaHly short." V