COST OF LIVING IN FRANCE.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 496, 1 May 1909, Page 10

COST OF LIVING IN FRANCE.

COMPARISON WITH ENGLISH CON- ', DITIONS. ;A, : :comparisdn''Volume to those issued lasl year on the coat of living in the United King dom;'and iji Germany ( haßlieen issued'by tin , Btmrd of Trade'under!the name "Report of'ar innmry .into working-class rents; housing,-one retail prices,'together with the rates ,of wage* in certain occupations in the principal indus' trial, towns of France." s . ; It is, like the first two, a; bulky volume "oi more than "400 pages, constructed on a similai >plnn- and referring in its, data to the samt •'month . of-, October, , 1905. The inquiry embraces thirty, towns distributed all over France, and cbntainirigAan 1 aggregate of.ovSr six ioil: ■ lion! inhabitants,: ana the i industrial occupations covered by. the reports is very ex tensive. • . . ■ ' In- .order to arrive, at '• some ■ estimate of ', th< standard of living prevalent among the French industrial-classes, over 5600 budgets, were obtained and analysed in respect of the expenditure of .food. . Absolute figures will, tell the' general reader little,'and .it is to Part .ll' of : the general report,.containing a comparison between the. conditions in France and in England that he will turn most naturally , and ,with- greater, profit. It .is.true, :as the report remarks;'-"that' interns 011 # comparisons of this nature are full of uimculhes arising from differences of national . habits , and tastes" jv nevertheless, ■ even with theso limitations they aro instructive,'as shoeing tho general; tendencies. ' • . V - In. the matter of'housing, it must be borne in minu fcuat whilein. England the, predomintmt type of working-class houses consists of "four or ? V a ™?ce the predominant type is a Hat or cottage of. two .or three' rooms. Also the sanitary, arrangements are decidedly inferior , As .against that, it'must .be remembered that the average; working-class family in Franco is smaller than in England; also that the rooms are. considerably larger. however, somewhat' lower in ? t j ..% an '.i®'; iwlani;Without entering into details,'it.is sufficient to note that they are only from 78 to 86 per; cent, of the cones- | ponding .rents <in England 'and' Wales,'or, dei'ffS?}! m the .case'.of English rents local taxation, they are .to £he English as 08 to 100. Tho comparison of family budgets is much Wore';complicated/; owing to'.'o'-multitude oi . vanous Actors.lt would seem that.in'general a French famjly.. spends "on food a smaller of ifa income that a corresponding English family, but the absolute amounts pet head would seem to.be greater. The difference mS l tt to the difforenca in the diet and ?o"d * E r P nces tie articles ol : A' comparison,of-the latter shows' that amons eleven articles .'which form the bulk of the consumption :o.f the working classes, only two--butter, and! - milk—are cheaper in France than m England, so ,that the food consumed in an average working-class. family in England i ? ' e?S lncllng certain, items, costs in Eneland 11073 d. a w?ek,; would at French nricE cost 1933 d. - . It means that if an averagi Pritish- working-class family were to emigrate •to France, and there live in accordance with its ; former it-would find its cost ol hving .dearer in the ratio, of 100 to 118, br in three StS JTmmt tho; engineering, ..and the printing trades-art coneernedrure distinctly, lower in France thin in England. Thoy form in tho mean but 75 pei cont. of the corresponding averago wages in England. On the other hand, 4c hours ol labour. lnjFrance are much higher, exceedin S on an av «-ago' by soino 11 Combining the wages and' hours of labour iii a, mean hourly rate of money wages we find that, m the trades sclected.fqr'comparison, the ra n _ m Francois to that in Englhnd as'fi-l to 100. . Hence the eenoral conclusion from the comparison betweenlhe industrial conditims io tho two countries is that the French workmaj earns. less, works _ harder, and has to pay f 0 his living more than his English colleagues