NOTES TO CHAPTER 9
1 For discussions of the institutional similarities and differences from a modern vantage point, see Robert A. Pollak, ‘‘A Transactions Cost Approach to Families and Households,” Journal of Economic Literature 23:2 (1985), 581—608 and Paula England and George Farkas, Households, Employment, and Gender.
A Social, Economic, and Demographic View (New York: Aldine Publishers, 1986).2 Elissa Braunstein and Nancy Folbre, ‘‘To Honor or Obey: The Patriarch as Residual Claimant,” Feminist Economics 7:1 (2001), 25—54.
3 Braunstein and Folbre, ‘‘To Honor or Obey.”
4 David Levine, Family Formation in an Age of Nascent Capitalism (New York: Academic Press, 1977).
5 Ann Kussmaul, Servants in Husbandry in Early Modern England (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1981).
6 ‘‘Proposals for an Improved Census of the Population,” The Edinburgh Review (March 1829), p. 8, reprinted in Population Problems in the Victorian Age, vol. 1. (Westmead: Gregg International Publishers Limited, 1973).
7 The 1841 census included some family workers and excluded others. See Catherine Hakim, ‘‘Census Reports as Documentary Evidence: The Census Commentaries, 1801—1951,” Sociological Review 28:3 (1980), 551—80.
8 ‘‘Occupations of the People,” Westminster Review 48 (1854), reprinted in Population Problems in the Victorian Age.
9 1851 Census of Great Britain, Occupations, Table XXIV.
10 Joan Wallach Scott, ‘‘A Statistical Representation of Work. La Statistique de L'Indus- trie a Paris, 1847—1848,” 113—38 in Joan Wallach Scott, Gender and the Politics of History (New York: Columbia University Press, 1988).
11Jacques Dupaquier, Rene le Mee, Joseph Goy, Maurice Garden, Herve: le Bras, Bernard Lepetit, Jean-Pierre Poussou, Daniel Courgeau, Jean-Pierre Bardet, Alain Bideau, Jean-Noel Biraben, Jacques Leonard, Bernard Lecuyer, Patrice Bourdelais, Agnes Fine, Martine Sega- len, Yves Charbit, Andre: Begin, Histoire de la Population Franςaise de 1789 a 1914 (Paris: Presses Universitaire de France, 1988); Recensement de 1851, France.
Population Selon les Professions, Table 25; Christian Topalov, Une revolution dans les representations du travail: L,emergence de la categories statistique de ‘population active’ au XIXe siecle en France, en Grande-Bretagne et aux Etats-Unis,’’ Revue Francaιsc de Sociologie 40:3 (1999), 445—73.12 Historical Statistics of the U.S. Colonial Times to 1970. Part I (Washington: Bureau of the Census), Series D 152—66, p. 138.
13 Carroll Wright, The History and Growth of the U.S. Census (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1900), pp. 135, 147.
14 Wally Seccombe, Weathering the Storm. Working-Class Families from the Industrial Revolution to the Fertility Decline (London: Verso, 1993), p. 19.
15
Bernard Bailyn, Voyagers to the West (New York: Random House, 1986).
1851 Census of Great Britain, p. 86.
L. V. Chambers-Schiller, Liberty, A Better Husband. Single Women in America: The
16
17
Generations of 1780—1840 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984), p. 5.
18 Alan MacFarlane, Marriage and Love in England 1300-1840 (New York: Basil Blackwell, 1986).
19 Samuel Hollander, Malthus (London: University of Toronto Press, 1997), p. 778.
20 David Ricardo, On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation. The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, Volume I, ed. Piero Sraffa (Cambridge: The University Press, For the Royal Economic Society, 1966), p. 93.
21 Michele Pujol, Feminism and Anti-Feminism in Early Economic Thought, (Aldershot, Hants: Elgar, 1992) pp. 18—21; Mark Blaug, Economic Theory in Retrospect, 4th edn (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985), 75—6.
22 Wally Seccombe, A Millenium of Family Change: Feudalism to Capitalism in Northwestern Europe (New York: Verso, 1992);
23 Census of Great Britain, Population: viz. Enumeration and Parish Registers; According to the Census of MD CCCXXI (1822), p. xxx.
24 Brian Inglis, Poverty and the Industrial Revolution (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1971) P.104.
25 Gary Langer, The Coming of Age of Political Economy, 1815—1825 (New York: Greenwood Press, 1987), p. 162.
26 Clark Nardinelli, Child Labor and the Industrial Revolution (Bloomington: Indiana U. Press, 1990), p. 12; B. L. Hutchins and A. Harrison. A History of Factory Legislation, first published 1903 (New York: Augustus M, Kelley, 1966).
27 Ibid., p. 137.
28 Raymond Cowherd, Political Economists and the English Poor Laws. An Historical Study of the Influence of Classical Economics on the Formation of Social Welfare Policy, (Athens OH: Ohio University Press, 1977), p. 100.
29 Raymond G. Cowherd, The Humanitarians and the Ten Hour Movement in England (Boston: Baker Library, Publication Number 10 of the Kress Library of Business and Economics, Harvard University, 1956), p. 5.
30 Langer, The Coming of Age, p. 181.
31 James Huzel, ‘‘Malthus, the Poor Law, and Population in Early Nineteenth-Century England,” Economic History Review 22:3 (1969), 430—51; and ‘‘The Demographic Impact of the Old Poor Law: More Reflections on Malthus,” Economic History Review 33:3 (1980), 367-81.
32 Seccombe, Weathering the Storm, p. 50.
33 Crane Brinton, French Revolutionary Legislation on Illegitimacy, 1789—1804 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1936), pp. 42, 50, 57.
34 Susan K. Grogan, French Socialism and Sexual Difference. Women and the New Society, 1803—44 (London: Macmillan, 1982), p. 7.
35 Robert Dimand, ‘‘Women in Nassau Senior’s Economic Thought,” p. 224—40 in The Status of Women in Classical Economic Thought, ed. Robert Dimand and Chris Nyland (Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar, 2003).
36 Cited in Cowherd, Political Economists, p. 276.
37 Report from his Majesty's Commissioners for Inquiring into the Administration and Practical Operation of the Poor Laws (London: B.
Fellowes, Ludgate St., 1834), p. 176.38 Report from his Majesty's Commissioners, p. 350; Cowherd, Political Economists, p. 269; Dimand, ‘‘Women in Nassau Senior,’’ p. 233.
39 Philip Foner, Women and the American Labor Movement. From Colonial Times to the Eve of World War I (New York: Free Press, 1979), p. 54.
40 Ivy Pinchbeck, Women Workers and the Industrial Revolution, 1750—1850 (London: Frank Cass), p. 22; Jane Humphries, ‘‘Enclosures, Common Rights, and Women: The Proletarianization of Families in the late Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries,’’ The Journal of Economic History 50:1 (1990), 17—42.
41 Seccombe, Weathering the Storm, p. 32.
42 Felicity Hunt, ‘‘Opportunities Lost and Gained: Mechanization and Women’s Work in the London Bookbinding and Printing Trades,’’ Unequal Opportunities. Women’s Employment in England 1800—1918, ed. Angela V. John (New York: Basil Blackwell, 1986): pp. 71—94.
43 Pinchbeck, Women Workers, p. 179.
44 Andrew Ure, The Philosophy of Manufactures (New York: Augustus M. Kelley, 1967), p. 475.
45 Angela V. John, ‘‘Introduction,’’ Unequal Opportunities. Women’s Employment in England 1800—1918, ed. Angela John (New York: Basil Blackwell, 1986), p. 15.
46 Evelyn L. Forget, ‘‘The Market for Virtue: Jean-Baptiste Say on Women in the Economy and Society,” pp. 206—23 in The Status of Women in Classical Economic Thought, eds Robert Dimand and Chris Nyland (Cheltenham UK: Edward Elgar, 2003).
47 Joan Wallach Scott, ‘‘L’ouvriere! Mot impie, sordide...Women Workers in the Discourse of French Political Economy, 1840—1860,” in Gender and the Politics of History (New York: Columbia University Press, 1988), pp. 139—66.
48 Forget, ‘‘The Market for Virtue,” p. 211.
49 Cited in Ivy Pinchbeck, Women Workers and the Industrial Revolution, 1750—1850 (London: Frank Cass, 1969), p. 313.