Henry Mayhew’s London Labour and the London Poor (1849-1851)

In the context of saving visual cultural heritage there is a poignant tale which goes back to the earliest days of photography in Victorian London.

Who was Henry Mayhew?

Henry Mayhew was a social reformer. He was also a journalist and a co-founder of the satirical magazine Punch in 1841. But his most famous legacy is the recorded personal narratives of the impoverished peoples of London, which began as a series of newspaper articles the Morning Chronicle (1848) and then published as a weekly serial by Henry Mayhew as London Labour (1849-1851) which became  a three-volume compilation London Labour and the London Poor (1851) and finally a four volume edition published by Griffin & Bohn in 1861 which contained material from other writers and parts of the original Morning Chronicle articles.

The Victorian appetite for illustration.

Although photography was released to the world in 1839 it is notable that the Victorians consumed most of their published visual content in the form of engraved illustration. Mayhew’s Punch is well known for its illustrated cartoons but the Illustrated London News (est. 1842), The Penny Illustrated Paper (est. 1861), The Illustrated Police News (est. 1864)and many other magazines launched just after photography was invented. This is the same for the woodblock illustrations that are published in London Labour and the London Poor.

Why aren’t there actual photographs in Victorian newspapers and magazines?

The simple answer is the technology didn’t exist to easily print photographs for the large print runs magazines demanded. The very first issue of the Illustrated London News sold 26,000 copies, this increased to 60,000 by the end of that year (1842) and was at 300,000 circulation by 1860. It wasn’t until the half-tone printing technique was adopted at the turn of the 20^th Century that real photographs were published in the news media.

Using photography as a reference to produce Victorian illustrations.

Although the Victorians were unable to print photographs in news media, what they did do is copy photographs very effectively. It is no surprise that so many illustrated magazines surfaced after the invention of photography. It was easier to copy photographs than to wait for an artist to produce a work from text alone. Added to this, the industrial revolution, including the Victorian railways, increased the distribution networks that led to larger circulation and demand for illustrated magazines.

Daguerreotypes, Salt Prints, and Wet Plate Collodion.

Two forms of photography were invented in 1839.  In the UK, Henry Fox-Talbot invented the Salt Print which produced a paper negative that needed to be printed out for a positive print, which as a result is generally soft images. The Calotype or Talbotype introduced shortly afterwards in 1841 improved exposure times but did little to improve quality. The advantage of Talbot’s invention was that multiple prints could be made, albeit with the limited durability of the paper negative.

Whereas, in 1839 France, Louise Daguerre unleashed the daguerreotype. This produced a positive image on silver (plated metal) without the need of printing out. The quality of the daguerreotype was far superior, but it was a one off and the mirrored silver finish meant that special cases were required to diminish the reflection to the viewer.

When Frederick Scott Archer invented the wet plate collodion process, which enabled printing on glass to produce high quality and inexpensive prints, or direct positives on glass (ambrotypes) or metal (tintypes), in 1851, the popularity of daguerreotypes and talbotypes waned.

Competition and patents of 1839. Are there fewer daguerreotypes from the UK and the British Empire?

An easy answer would be to say that naturally Henry Fox-Talbot as an Englishman meant that the UK favoured the local invention and vice-versa for Daguerreotypes in France. In reality, the situation was more complex. By accident or intention Louis Daguerre signed agency to the Daguerreotype process in England and Scotland which was patented just days before the French government pensioned the invention from Daguerre and made photography “free to world”, except for the UK and the British Empire who needed to pay for a license. Understandably, the additional cost did lessen the appeal of Daguerreotypes but although the Talbotype needed a license in England the immediacy of the Daguerreotype, particularly for studio portraits meant that it was widespread.

The illustrations of London Labour and the London Poor (1849-1851)

After laying down the context of photography at the time of Henry Mayhew’s groundbreaking publication we notice a few things. Firstly, as a co-founder of Punch and the massive popularity in illustrated magazines at the time, the need for Mayhew to illustrate his narratives must have been paramount. Secondly, the raw nature of stories demanded that the illustrations also be real, therefore photographic reference, to create lifelike woodblock engravings was an obvious choice. Thirdly, Daguerreotypes or Calotypes were the only two photographic options available and for the quality and accuracy it is no surprise that a photographer who used the daguerreotype process was hired. His name was Richard Beard.

I owned a beaten up first edition of volume 1 of London Labour and the London Poor and I also have an edited 2010 Oxford University Press edition which has some useful introductory notes by Robert Douglas-Fairhurst. In it he states: “Most (of the illustrations) were engraved from daguerreotypes taken by Richard Beard, a London photographer who opened the first portrait studio in Europe in 1841 and, according to the 1851 census, by the time of his engagement by Mayhew, was one of only 51 professional photographers in Great Britain. Printing technology did not yet allow  photographs to be reproduced, and Beard’s original daguerreotypes have been lost, but the woodcuts represent some of the most accurate representations we have of working class Victorians, their faces, clothes, belongings, and a sense of personal identity.”

The loss of visual cultural heritage.

Beard’s missing daguerreotypes is a massive loss to us all and it is common story that continues today for photographic archives and collections. I have seen 4 volume editions of London Labour and the London Poor on sale which contain 90 plates. Some of these will be maps and illustrations but Henry Mayhew was only actively involved with the first 3 volume set published in 1851 and the third volume only contained 1 illustration referenced from Beard’s daguerreotypes.

In total Richard Beard created at least 41 daguerreotypes that were used as references for the published engravings, he may have created more that were not published. If they survived, it is very likely they would be the earliest examples of social documentary photography in existence.

Why, or how, did Beard’s daguerreotypes go missing?

We are lucky that we have a good number of editions of London Labour and the London Poor which contain printings directly from the original woodblocks. Original woodblocks were retained by publishers for future editions and occasionally for re-use in another work. It also known that the woodblocks of Illustrated London News were shared, or possibly licenced, to similar foreign magazines, for example L’Illustration in Paris and Illustrirte Zeitung in Leipzig. As publishing companies closed, or merged, and new editions of older works ceased, many of the Victorian woodblocks were destroyed. In addition, advancements in printing technology did not require woodblocks and revived editions could be made from photographic copy of original printed works. Therefore, it is surprising and fortunate that 5 trays of original woodblocks used to create London Labour and the London Poor have survived and are preserved at the St Bride Foundation, London.  Their blog article, written by Chris Anderson, gives us a good idea of how the Beard daguerreotypes went missing. Henry Mayhew commissioned Beard during the period of his own controlled weekly serial of London Labour between 1849-1851. It is possible, but unlikely, that Richard Beard kept or was returned the original daguerreotypes after the woodblocks were created. It is referenced that Woodfall, the printers, took Henry Mayhew to court for unpaid bills and seized his assets. It might be that Woodfall came into possession of the daguerreotypes for the original creation of the woodblocks and printing. David Bogue, Mayhew’s publisher, reacquired copyright of the work and was in possession of the woodblocks in preparation to relaunch before Bogue died in 1856. It was then bought by Griffin and Bohn in 1861 who successfully issued the 4 volume set, without Mayhew. Despite selling copyright to Maxwell in 1871, the Griffin archive retained the woodblocks which passed to St Brides in 1973 but the daguerreotypes were not present. It is understandable that they were lost in all these change of hands, particularly as they were no longer needed for the work itself. As a by-product the original photography was surplus to requirement despite the value we may place on it today.

The legacy of London Labour and the London Poor

When reflecting on the loss of Beard’s daguerreotypes, one places them in the context of the publication. The characters that came to life via Beard’s photographs were able to tell their story where millions were not. Their deeply moving personal narratives allow us to catch a glimpse of what life was like for the struggling working class of London in 1850. Each story leaves us asking for more and sadly they are no longer here to ask the unanswered questions. Likewise, the surviving woodblock illustrations give us a visual sense of the hardship and struggle that these individuals endured, we can see details behind fine lines of the engravers but sadly the daguerreotypes which could have shown us much more are gone.

Illustrations from Richard Beard’s daguerreotypes:

• Doctor Bokanky – The Street Herbalist
• Flushing the sewers
• Henry Mayhew
• Hindoo Tract Seller
• London nightmen
• Long-song seller
• Old Sarah The Well Known Hurdy Gurdy Player
• One of the few remaining climbing sweeps
• Orange mart Dukes Place
• The Able Bodied Pauper Street Sweeper
• The Baked Potato Man
• The Blind Bootlace Seller
• The bone grubber
• The Boy Crossing Sweepers
• The Coster Boy and Girl Tossing the Pie Man
• The Coster Girl
• The crippled street bird seller
• The Groundsel Man
• The Irish Street Seller
• The jew old clothes man clo clo clo
• The London Coffee Stall
• The London Costermonger
• The London dustman – Dust hoi Dust hoi
• The London scavenger
• The London Sweep
• The Lucifer Match Girl
• The mud lark
• The Oyster Stall
• The ratcatchers of the sewers
• The Rubbish Carter
• The Sewer Hunter
• The Street Comb Seller
• The Street Rhubarb and Spice Seller
• The Street Seller of Crockeryware
• The Street Seller of Dogs Collars
• The Street Seller of Grease Removing Composition – Victorian Lon
• The Street Seller of Nutmeg Graters
• The Street Seller of Walking Sticks
• The Street Stationer
• The Wallflower Girl
• Woman of the Bosjes Race (this image is unlikely to be commissioned by Mayhew but was published in the 4 volume set)