Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T03:34:05.116Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sordid Class, Dangerous Class? Observations on Parisian Ragpickers and Their Cités During the Nineteenth Century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 February 2009

Alain Faure
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Everybody knows that refuse is a ragpicker's raison d'être. Continuous collection of the waste from big city consumption, along with the rubbish and the refuse, led to collection efforts that gradually brought about a wholesale trade and an industry for recycling these wastes back into production. Until the famous prefectorial decree of 24 November 1883, garbage was left on the public thoroughfares and collected by the dust carts of the licensed garbage collectors at daybreak. During the night, the bins were searched by the ragpickers, who constituted a unique category of workers known as ramasseurs (gatherers). They seemed to work with standard equipment from the beginning of the nineteenth century onwards. Each carried a hook, a basket suspended from the back (a “dummy”), and a lantern. They sought and garnered a wide variety of products, from fabric to cork, ranging through metals, bones and skins, each item serving a specific purpose, from the most common-place (old papers and rags for paper production) to the most extraordinary (crusts of bread for the crumbs used by butchers for frying). Around 1900, the ragpicker's take consisted of all kinds of old papers, twine, rags for manufacturing paper (50 to 60 per cent), all types of bones (20 to 25 per cent), and an infinite variety of objects (15 to 30 per cent). At this time, however, the rag industry changed dramatically as a result of technological advances (especially the new manufacture of paper from wood pulp). The subsequent collapse of most of the markets exacerbated the recent differentiation between ragpickers. Nevertheless, ragmen still siphoned off 13 per cent of the tonnage of garbage in Paris. Annual exports of this capital resource by the rag trade totalled 27 million francs.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Review of Social History , Volume 41 , supplement S4: “Peripheral” Labour? Studies in the History of Partial Proletarianization , December 1996 , pp. 157 - 176
Copyright
Copyright © Internationaal Instituut voor Sociale Geschiedenis 1996

References

1 Office du Travail, L'industrie du chiffon à Paris (Paris, 1903), p. 40Google Scholar. For an extensive list of classifications, with price lists for merchandise gathered, see e.g. Barberet, J., Monographies professionnelles Vol. 4, Les chiffonniers (Paris, 1887), pp. 103–104Google Scholar.

2 Considering that “the offenders fool the police surveillance by arming themselves like the ragpickers with a hook that they use to steal and to kill, a basket in which they can easily conceal stolen objects, and a lantern that enables them to recognize their surroundings [ … ]. ” (excerpts from the text of the ordinance by de Belleyme of 1 September 1828). Regarding the regulations until the modern era, see File DB 194 at the Archives de la préfecture de Police.

3 Durieu, Joseph, Les Parisiens d'aujourd'hui Vol. I, Les types sociaux de simple récolte et d'extraction (Paris, 1910), p. 168Google Scholar.

4 The ragpicker studied by Le Play in 1849–1851 left home at six o'clock in the morning (seven in the winter) and returned at nine o'clock to eat; he then went on a new round from half past ten until five o'clock in the afternoon and from seven o'clock in the evening until midnight: Les Ouvriers européens (Paris, 1860), p. 272.

5 Another category consisted of the dust cart ragpickers (454 in 1903), who helped manage the bins for low wages (known as the “21 sous”) and the right to rummage through them along their route.

6 Report from the chief of police for security of 8 May 1883. DB 194.

7 Commission d'enquête parlementaire, p. 246.

8 Conseil d'hygiène publique, De Luynes, , Rapport sur les dépots de chiffons (Paris, 1886), p. 4Google Scholar.

9 Office du Travail, L'industrie du chiffon, p. 17.

10 Including 4,000 placiers, 2,000 wandering coureurs or rouleurs, 1,050 ragpickers and second-hand dealers. Quoted by Barberet, Monographic professionnelles, 4, p. 83.

11 Office du Travail, L'industrie du chiffon, p. 14.

12 Durieu, Les Parisiens d'aujourd'hui, pp. 126–132.

13 Quoted by Barberet, Monographies professionnelles, 4, p. 102. These “Notes d'un chiffonnier” were imparted to Barberet by Desmarquet, one of the witnesses in 1884.

14 In the nineteenth century, the rag trade was a choice refuge both for aristocrats and for foremen from failed industries. The origins undoubtedly date back to the melodrama of Pyat, Felix, Le chiffonnier de Paris (1847)Google Scholar and his character the Comte Crion-Carousse, who took up a basket on his back by sheer coincidence. The work has a moralizing theme and is rife with expected turns of events: punishment for wealth acquired improperly, vanity of earthly goods, etc. Nevertheless, an element of truth prevails: Mény, Georges (in the Chiffonnier de Paris (Paris, 1905)Google Scholar refers to the case of a descendent of du Måconnais (an old family of aristocrats) who used his protection to claim the rubbish bins of Palais-Royal and the minister of the colonies. Before him, Privat d'Anglemont had described this special class of ragpickers as “philosophical bohemians, who had once been important and who had, through various misfortunes – almost always involving misconduct – become trapped in a downward spiral culminating in the dregs of society”: Privat d'Anglemont, Paris inconnu (Paris, 1861), p. 53Google Scholar.

15 DB 194. This file comprises ten registration forms dated between 1849 and 1863: the average age was 45.5. Two applicants listed a previous occupation.

16 Barberet, Monographies professionnelles, 4, p. 92. Further on, Desmarquet describes recruitment to the trade: “First, there are ragpickers by birth, who are the children of ragpickers and who have never practised any other trade” (p. 102).

17 Privat d'Anglemont, Paris inconnu, p. 52.

18 Barberet, Monographies professionnelles, 4, p. 94.

19 Privat d'Anglemont, Paris anecdote (Paris, 1860), p. 320Google Scholar.

20 The nègres were children hired by the ragpickers.

21 G. Mény, Le chiffonnier de Paris (Paris, n.d.), pp. 8–9.

22 Ibid., p. 11. Four persons could thus gather an average of 200 kg. a day.

23 Barberet, Monographies professionnelles, 4, pp. 102–103.

24 lbid. pp. 85–88; Mény, Le chiffonnier de Paris, p. 24.

25 L'Histoire, 3 April 1870.

26 Durieu, Les Parisiens d'aujourd'hui, p. 147.

27 See Barberet, Monographies professionnelles, 4, p. 100; Privat d'Anglemont, Paris inconnu, p. 54. In 1872 the police commissioner for the Combat district noted that many of the 500 badges from his jurisdiction were linked to a site in Paris (Enquete parlementaire sur les ouvriers. Archives de la préfecture de Police, BA 400).

28 Barberet, Monographic professionnelles, 4, p. 91.

29 Ibid., p. 93.

30 Durieu, Les Parisiens d'aujourd'hui, p. 127.

31 La Paix, 8 January 1892. As stated by de Paulian, Louis, the author of an important work on ragpickers, La hotte du chiffonnier (paris, 1885)Google Scholar.

32 See Barberet, Monographies professionelles. 4, pp. 94–95.

33 The first case of theft (15 November 1906) involves a ragpicker of the rue Nationale who had kept a package he found in a dustbin on the rue d'Aboukir containing certificates and securities; the second, rather interesting case concerns a ragman who traded second-hand goods accused of stealing a pair of trousers and a vest (valued at 5.5 F) from an individual. The insult to officers (23 March 1907) occurred in the Jeanne-d'Arc cité a very specific area of the arrondissement.

34 Mény, Le chiffonnier de Paris, p. 23.

35 Rapport général sur les travaux de la Commission pendant I'année 1851, p. 11.

36 Office du Travail, L'industrie du chiffon à Paris, pp. 22–23. The absolute figures are of little interest: only the proportional distribution is significant.

37 Le Monde illustré, 4 August 1894.

38 “Given this name because its forty or fifty rooms are the size of a cell [at the Mazas prison]”: Barberet, Monographies professionnelles, 4, p. 96.

39 “ De Paulian, La hotte du chiffonnier, p. 55. This individual bequeathed the site to the community.

40 Barberet, Monographies professionnelles, 4, p. 95.

41 Office du Travail, L'industrie du chiffon à Paris, pp. 21–22.

42 Durieu, Les Parisiens d'aujourd'hui, pp. 92–93.

43 Commission des logements insalubres. Rapport pour I'année 1851, p. 12.

44 De Luynes, Rapports sur les dépots de chiffons, p. 12.

45 Privat d'Anglemont, Paris aneedote, pp. 307–308.

46 An article in Le Matin (22 August 1908) estimated the number of ragpickers in this arrondissement at 2,000.

47 De Paulian, La hotte du chiffonnier, p. 55.

48 du Mesnil, Octave, L'habitation du pauvre à Paris (Paris, 1890), p. 39Google Scholar.

49 A. Coffignon, Le pavé parisien (Paris, n.d.), pp. 41–42.

50 Bory, P., Les métamorphoses d'un chiffon (Abbeville, 1897)Google Scholar.

51 This equality was relative. Even before the distinction between placiers and coureurs, a hierarchy existed among the population of ragpickers. The arrangement was sometimes institutionalized, as in the Pot d'Etain entertainment facility on the border of Fontainebleau, which was divided into three halls: “la Chambre des Pairs” (reserved for people who owned baskets and hooks in good condition), “la Chambre des Députés” (for the common people), and the “cercle des vrais prole'taires” (for everyone whose equipment consisted merely of a bag). “Disciplinary penalties” were issued to anyone entering a hall restricted to people with greater mean (Le Monde, 7 June 1872). In 1857, upon the establishment of a mutual benefit society, this hierarchy was replaced with a common banqueting hall, although it quickly reappeared (Moniteur universel, 5 November 1857).

52 ” Privat d'Anglemont, Paris anecdote, p. 321.

53 Durieu, Les Parisiens d'aujourd'hui, p. 97.

54 Ville de Paris, 5 October 1883.

55 In Gentilly: 0.25 to 0.50 F; in Saint-Ouen: from 0.60 to 0.90 F: Office du travail, L'industrie du chiffon à Paris, p. 12.

56 Mé;ny, Le chiffonnier de Paris, p. 12.

57 Rents: 7 F weekly, 6 F monthly, 5 F monthly. Du Mesnil, L'habitation du pauvre à Paris, p. 264.

58 Ragpickers often sold their take on the basis of “gross weight”: the product that dominated the lot determined the price. The ragmen had always objected to this unfair system. The masters attributed its need to the heavy losses after processing. On the other hand, ignorance of the wholesale prices (if only because of the considerable range of products) always made the ragmen believe that these natives of Auvergne (who had a reputation for swindling their subordinates in business) were taking advantage of them.

59 Commission d'enquete parlementaire (1884), p. 246.

60 Mény, Le chiffonnier de Paris, p. 13.

61 Such was the case among certain coureurs studied by Durieu, Les Parisiens d'aujourd'hui, pp. 126–137.

62 See Office du Travail, L'industrie du chiffon à Paris, pp. 79–83.

63 Exceptions occurred in certain very specific sectors of the occupation: nearly all dustbin ragpickers were unionized (they were semi-wage-earners), as were their counterparts in pulverization plants. According to Durieu, the union succeeded in regulating the work at the Issy plant (only for the choice positions). This solidarity is attributable to the exceptional conditions: “At the Saint-Ouen plant, the ragpickers were there to stay and set up extremely inconvenient warehouses for rags”: Rapport sur les opérations du service d'inspection des établissements classés (1907), p. 31.

64 Le Matin, 22 August 1908.

65 Durieu, Les Parisiens d'aujourd'hui, pp. 156–169.