§ ON the Question that the Speaker do leave the Chair, on the House going into Committee on the Factories' Regulation Bill,
Mr. Robert Fergusonsaid, that he would embrace that opportunity of stating his general opinion on that very important Bill. But first, he would state, that his reason, and he believed that of many other hon. Members, for voting in favour of the appointment of a Commission, was not grounded on a desire for delay, but arose from an anxiety to have the fullest information before the House. And here he would give the noble Lord, with whom the Bill originated, the greatest credit for the patience he had shown. In order to bring the grounds of his opinion before the House, it would be necessary for him to refer to the Report of the Central Board of Commissioners, which contained a recommendation respecting the regulation of the young people and children, which was fraught with mischief, and, he thought, impracticable. The recommendation was, that children from ten to fourteen years of age should be employed eight hours, and those above that age ten hours. If this were to be determined on, it would be found, that the adults would be unable to 884 complete the work left unfinished by the children, unless at a ruinous expense to the manufacturers. In no places would there be found a sufficient proportion of infantile population to supply the deficiency of time, and the general result would be the substitution of machinery, which would rather tend to increase distress than to reduce it. But it had been said, recourse could be had to the foundling hospitals for a supply of children; that was an alter native which he could neither recommend, nor could the manufacturers depend on it, unless, indeed, it was intended, that these establishments should be increased throughout the country. Looking over the evidence that had been obtained, he must say, that the recommendation of the Central Board was not supported by the evidence of the other Boards in the Commission. The answers of Mr. Buchanan to several questions which had been proposed to him, clearly showed, that the proposed plan would render it necessary to have relays of workpeople, and that, in many counties in which there were factories, it would be impossible to obtain a sufficient number of hands to form relays; besides which, by limiting the hours of labour, the wages would be reduced to nearly one-half what they were at present. He had also received a letter from a gentleman in Scotland intimately acquainted with the subject, which also showed the impracticability of carrying the proposed plan into execution, and upon similar grounds to those stated by Mr. Buchanan. He would also advert to the evidence of the medical men, from which it appeared, that the most delicate period in the life of a female (and two-thirds of the juvenile labour in factories were performed by female children), was from thirteen to eighteen, and yet, by this Bill, children above fourteen years of age might be worked for any number of hours. He had, therefore, come to the conclusion, that the restriction of hours of adults or children by legislative enactment would be attended with anything but a benefit. If the Bill passed, he hoped the hours of labour for children would be extended to eleven, for he felt confident that period was not too long. One very valuable recommendation made by the Commission was, the appointment of visitors who could at any period visit the factories, and see that the children were well taken care of, and not over-worked. He thought the 885 House would not object to the expense necessary for such a purpose, and that would do away with the necessity of many of the clauses of the Bill.
§ The House then resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.
§ The first Clause was postponed.
§ The Chairman road the second Clause, relative to the labour of persons under eighteen years of age to ten hours a-day.
§ Lord Ashley moved to fill up the first blank in the clause with the word eighteen.
§ Lord Althorpsaid, the question then for the decision of the Committee was, whether that number of hours, and the age of young persons as it stood in the clause were proper. The first point to which he should call the attention of the Committee was, whether it was desirable to consider young persons of eighteen years of age in the light of children, and requiring legal protection. He did not propose in any way to interfere with the protection given to young persons by Sir John Hobhouse's Bill. So far from that being his object, he would at once consent to its provisions being extended to other mills than cotton mills. He confessed he did look at the Bill then in Committee with very considerable apprehension. It might be attended with extreme danger to the manufacturing interests of the country, and of course, if it had any tendency to hurt that interest, it would take away the very bread of the people for whose benefit the Bill was intended, by depriving them of the demand for their labour. Now, it was clear, that if such an event were to happen, the consequences would be most alarming, for the effect must be, that great masses of people would suffer from famine; and who could contemplate such a state of things without great apprehension? If the masses of population who were congregated in our large towns were thrown out of employment, and threatened with starvation, dangers the most alarming and most fatal would arise to the whole community. The question, then, was, whether the limitations of hours proposed in the Bill would not have such an effect, or have a tendency to produce such a calamity. He thought it was quite clear, that if they prevented all persons under eighteen years of age from working longer than ten hours a day, the effect would be to prevent the manufacturers from working their mills longer than that 886 period. Then what would be the effect of diminishing the manufacturing labour of the country to ten hours a-day, when all other nations who were rivalling us in manufactures were unlimited and unfettered in their mode of conducting their business? It might be, and it had before been said, that the only effect of it would be to make the manufacturers embark a larger capital, and build more mills, so that the only loss would be the interest upon the extra capital. But, at the present moment, improvements were every day taking place in machinery, so that what was in use, a few years ago, was thrown aside. Suppose those improvements were to take place at such a rate that new machinery were required every five years, the differnce in the manufacturer's profits would be so large, if his labours were cut down from twelve to ten hours, that his ruin would be certain. The effect might be, to drive the manufacturer out of the market, as he would not then be able to compete the manufacturers of other countries. The House had been told, and he believed it to be the case, that at the present time, though in full work, the manufacturers were working at the lowest possible profit; if, threfore by considerable reduction of that profit took place, the effect would be that the manufacturers would be working at a loss, and would be unable to continue their business. The consequence, therefore, of any arrangement that would diminish materially the operations of the mills, would be, that a great reduction would be made in the wages of the workmen. Those wages, it was well known, were at the present time very moderate; and he thought, that the advantage to the workmen of only working for ten hours a day, accompanied with a diminution of their wages would not confer any benefit. The House had heard a great deal of the effect the work in these manufactories had upon the health of the persons employed. It had been stated before the Committee, that the general appearance of the young persons was pallid; but, in the evidence before the Commissioners it had been stated, that though that was generally the case in the boys, the girls were as healthy as they possibly could be. With respect to the deformity of the person, it was in evidence, that most cases of deformity had occurred when the machinery was differently constructed from that at present 887 in use, and at a time when the operation of the machinery so constructed had a tendency to produce deformity, which was not the case with the machinery now employed. Having these views, he must confess, that he did not look to the alterations proposed in the present system with any degree of confidence, but with fear and trembling. However, he was inclined—and he thought that was going as far as the Legislature could safely proceed—to protect those who were totally unable to protect themselves; and, in his opinion, that protection ought to be extended to children not having entered their fourteenth year; that is, to children thirteen years old; and that they should not work more than eight hours. The recommendation of the Commissioners was, that they should not work more than eight hours a day, and, in that recommendation, he was inclined to acquiesce; because he did not think the effect of adopting that course was likely to be destructive of the interests of the manufacturers of the country. He apprehended, that the following of that recommendation would not have the effect of compelling the mills generally to be stopped more than at present was provided for by Sir John Hobhouse's Act. To extend that Act, and to limit the hours of labour for children under thirteen to eight hours, was in his opinion all the House could at present safely do; and if it was afterwards proved that further protection was required for the children, he could see no reason why the Legislature should not again interfere. He trusted, that the Committee would be cautious how it proceeded; for if they were now to take one false step, and curtail the profits of the manufacturer, and lessen his power to compete with foreign rivals, the consequences might not be immediately apparent, but the mischief would be irremediable. He therefore entreated the Committee to pause, and recollect what immense mischief they might effect. He should move, that the age of thirteen be substituted for the age of eighteen in the clause. He would afterwards propose an Amendment limiting the labour of children to eight hours. He would also propose to extend Sir John Hobhouse's Act to all other mills. He was aware, that there was a difficulty as to silk, but that might be a subject for after investigation. Perhaps it would make no great difference if they said fourteen years instead of 888 thirteen, but he would take the latter as the recommendation of the Commissioners. If the Committee adopted the noble Lord's views, he should probably have no other Amendments to propose—if the Committee adopted his Amendment, he should have other Amendments to propose.
§ Lord AshleyIf the noble Lord was unwilling to take upon himself the responsibility of the measure, he (Lord Ashley) was quite willing to take all responsibility on himself to the extent of his proposition; and should always rejoice at having brought forward this Bill. He was much astonished to hear the evidence referred to as not affording allegations of the evils arising from the present mode of employing the children. Had the noble Lord read the evidence of Dr. Loudon? [Lord Althorp: Look at the others.] Well, he would do so; he would turn also to that of Dr. Hawkins. But, first, of Dr. Loudon. That Gentleman stated, and the noble Lord quoted his evidence, that the present prolongation of labour was an act of the utmost cruelty. He says, that the employment of children for ten hours was, in fact, an occupation of their time for thirteen hours, as the remaining three were consumed in going to and from, and taking their meals. It would be remembered by the Committee, that Dr. Loudon had been to the woollen districts, and he declared, as a physician, that ten hours a-day were all that should be occupied by children both in labour and meal times. Dr. Hawkins, who had been to a cotton district—in fact the principal manufacturing district of the kingdom—declared, that no child of less than ten years of age, should be allowed to work, and that ten hours a-day were the utmost that any should be occupied who were under eighteen years of age. He would call on the hon. Gentleman who proposed the Commission to be guided by the opinion of his own Commissioners. He would request him to attach sufficient importance to that of Dr. Hawkins, who said he was supported by the opinion of the majority of the medical men who practised in that district. The noble Lord had said, that the children working in factories did not evince more unhealthiness than those children who were engaged in other employments. But what said the evidence of Dr. Hawkins? Why, that he had taken 350 factory children, and 350 other children, and the result of his investigation into 889 the state of their health was, that the proportion of sickness among the factory children was double that of others. Dr. Hawkins declared, that in the manufacturing districts, as compared with others, there was an alarming extent of intemperance, improvidence, and dissipation; and that this arose from the many hours in which they were employed, and which drove them to drinking spirits as a means of momentary excitement. He (Lord Ashley) would say, take the two evils—the one represented by the noble Lord, as consequent upon foreign competition, which, however, were only problematical, if the number of labour hours were reduced; and the more enormous evil which did and would continue to arise out of a daily exhaustion, which brought about intemperance and dissipation—and he should prefer the danger of foreign competition to the moral degradation of the people. Dr. Hawkins had distinctly stated, that the excessive labour to which the people were subject was the cause of their dissipation; and he would rather suffer any loss than that such immorality should continue. He then referred the right hon. Gentleman opposite to one of his own Commissioners, whose opinion she declared to be borne out by that of so many eminent medical practitioners; and he cheerfully referred the noble Lord, also, to the same authorities. The noble Lord had seriously inquired if it was his (Lord Ashley's) object to limit the hours of labour for adults? He would not say, that it was directly his object to do so; but he should heartily rejoice if his present Bill indirectly produced that result, if it were only to promote a return of the working classes—of those in factories he meant—to domestic habits and domestic comforts. He conceived the complete disruption which now took place, of all domestic ties in our manufacturing districts to be a most tremendous evil, and it ought to be, if possible, counteracted. The views which he had taken upon this question were precisely those of Dr. Hawkins. The noble Lord (Althorp) must perceive, that his own Commission told very strongly against him. Dr. Hawkins stated, that the present factory system had the very worst infiuence upon the female's health and comfort; she had no time to acquire a knowledge of domestic duties; she was generally twelve hours at a time from home, and obliged to leave her infant con- 890 fined while she was absent; and, indeed, it appeared that in some instances mothers gave their infants opium, &c. to compose them to sleep, and to keep them quiet. That Gentleman said, that to a factory labourer his home was, in fact, no home to him, and all this he traced to the present system of excessive labour. As to the limitation of the labour of adults, the noble Lord (Ashley) admitted, that he felt his Bill would have that indirect effect, but the noble Lord opposite, was wrong in arguing that it would have the effect of throwing many persons out of employment; that was the same argument that was raised against Sir Robert Peel's Bill, but the prophecy was never fulfilled. In proposing a limitation to eight hours, the noble Lord (Althorp) must have acted on the Report of the Commissioners, but there was no evidence in the body of the Report that justified such a limitation. A Mr. Sutherland, it was true, had given his opinion, that it was practicable to get two sets of hands, but in that he was contradicted by other evidence. The evidence went to show that it was impracticable to obtain two sets of hands in any immediate neighbourhood, but it was said, that the poor-houses and other places should be ransacked to obtain children from all parts of the kingdom. Was the House prepared to say, that a master manufacturer might send his waggon to any part of the country for a load of children, like so many hogs, and bring them away from their natural protectors, to place them, unprotected, among strangers? In 1815, Mr. Horner, who spoke upon Sir Robert Peel's Bill, condemned such an exportation of children as most repugnant to the best feelings of our nature, and instanced an atrocious case that occurred before the Court of King's Bench, in which a number of children had been apprenticed by a London workhouse to a manufacturer in the country, and by him assigned over to some other person. It then appeared that the manufacturer agreed with a parish in London, that for every twenty healthy children sent to him he would receive one idiot. Surely the noble Lord could not desire to renew those scenes. The noble Lord mentioned a number of persons who had given evidence against the practicability of obtaining two sets of children, according to the plan of the noble Lord opposite; among whom were Mr. Gregg, Mr. G. Walker, of Leeds, Mr. Worsley, 891 Mr Clarke, Mr. Ashley, Mr. Thomas Ogden, Mr. Strutt, Mr. H. Houldsworth, Mr. Marshall, &c. When Mr. Poole, who bad stated that two sets would be practicable, was asked whether he made that suggestion for the benefit of the children, he replied that he made it as a mode of meeting the outcries for legislation [Hear, hear.] He supposed from that cheer that his opponents admitted their plan to be injurious ["No, no," from Lord Althorp], He thought that was the proper inference ["No, no," and a cry of "It is only a choice of evils"]. Then, if both were evils, he supposed that his opponents meant to contend that his was the greatest evil. If they thought so, then let them boldly come forward and throw out the Bill. What security, he would ask, could they have that the same children should not work at two mills? All the medical evidence proved, that twelve hours' labour for females was too much, and it was monstrous to throw, by legislative enactment, such a degree of labour on any woman. If the noble Lord proposed three gradations of labour, there would be, he supposed, three relays or videttes, and that was a system strongly condemned by the noble Lord's own Commissioners. He admitted, that the noble Lord's proposition was in accordance with the Report of the Commissioners; but it was contrary to the evidence on which that Report was founded. He declared himself to be strongly opposed to the plan of employing two sets of children, which the proposition of the noble Lord would cause. He took his stand upon the medical evidence; upon that he relied still, and on that he contended, that more than ten hours' labour was wholly unwarranted.
§ Sir George Phillipshad been engaged in the manufacturing business; he had lived all his life in a manufacturing district; and he frankly confessed he could not speak on the subject with all the confidence of the noble Lord (Ashley). It was generally known, that confidence was in proportion to want of knowledge; and if the noble Lord were aware of the danger, he would be the last man to propose such a Bill. He saw, from certain Returns laid on the Table of the House, that the declared value of one of our exports was 36,000,000l. The cotton manufacture alone exceeded upwards of 17,000,000l. The oilier manufactures exported, to which the Bill applied, amounted to upwards of 7,000,000l. More, therefore, 892 than two-thirds of our exports consisted of manufactures which would be subject to the regulations of this Bill. To refer to another criterion—the official value of our exports was 64,582,000l. The cotton manufactures exported (including twist) alone amounted to 43,000,000l. and upwards; the other manufactures exported, to which the Bill applied, brought the amount up to 53,000,000l. and upwards. Thus the exports to which the noble Lord's Bill applied extended to three-fourths of the exports of the country. This Bill applied to a multitude of men profitably employed, and generally speaking living in comparative comfort. His fears of the probable results were quite as great as the noble Lord's confidence, and his fear would be extreme if he could suppose that the House shared the confidence possessed by the noble Lord. If the noble Lord's Bill were to pass, the manufacturers said, that they must reduce the wages of labour 25 per cent. The hon. Baronet referred to a paper supplied him by a manufacturer, to show that the reduction of wages in the spinning factories alone, by reducing the hours of labour from twelve to ten, would be not less than 600,000l. per year. He, therefore, could not consider anything more dangerous than to meddle with the matter. It would endanger the tranquillity of the country. When any necessity had arisen for reducing hours of labour, the greatest anxiety and uneasiness had always been felt in the manufacturing districts by all classes, particularly the labourers themselves, who were glad to have a return of the increased hours, in order to have increased wages. There had been a great delusion on this subject. The hon. Baronet referred to the evidence of a Gentleman, who had believed that great distress existed in the manufacturing districts, and who had recently been at Manchester, who declared, that he had never met with people more contented or better fed than in the factories at Manchester. One of the workmen told that Gentleman, that he would be glad to have a reduction of labour, if there were to be no reduction of wages, but if wages were to be reduced, he dreaded the consequences, and that great misery would ensue. This labourer, therefore, was apprehensive, though the noble Lord (Ashley) was not, of the probable result of his Bill. The noble Lord had no apprehension of the foreign manufacturers—but the manufac- 893 turers had apprehensions. In America, wages were as low as in England, and in South America, and the islands of the Mediterranean, the English manufacturers were met by the American manufacturers, and had to contend against them. In America, improvements were continually made in machinery, and some of those improvements had actually been introduced into this country. As to the medical evidence, those who looked only on one side, might come to any conclusion they wished. The factories were very differently managed; some were healthy, and others unhealthy and unwholesome. Were they to legislate for the whole because some were bad? Before they proceeded to make new laws, they ought to take care to make their past legislation effective. In the present state of the country, and of public opinion, however, he admitted that some legislation, was necessary, and that the labour of children ought to be reduced. He did not believe that employing relays of children was so impracticable as the noble Lord supposed. The hon. Baronet then read some Resolutions adopted by the master cotton-manufacturers, approving of the plan of the Ministers, and declaring that Lord Ashley's Bill would be their ruin. The hon. Baronet also referred to the authority of Sir David Barry, to show that the work of the factories was not so injurious to children as had been asserted. That gentleman had not seen a single case of deformity but what had been caused by machinery no longer in use. The hon. Baronet also quoted the evidence of persons as to particular mills, to show that in some the happiness of the people was very great. He also referred to the report of Mr. Stewart, to show that the workers were in good condition and contented. The hon. Baronet also referred lo the evidence to show that many of the questions asked were leading, and the answers given were rather given by the examiners themselves than by the people, who only acquiesced in what they were asked. He admitted the humanity of the call made upon the House by that Bill, and by the public; but he warned the House that much of the agitation on the subject arose from paid and hired agitators, who lived in idleness, upon the contributions of others. Great difficulties were caused by those people ["Name!"] He would refer hon. Members to the Report, and it was not 894 necessary that he should name these agitators. The hon. Baronet quoted the Report to show, that hostility had been manifested by those called Delegates of the Working Classes, to the inquiries instituted in a most unexampled manner. This was a subject on which the House should be on its guard. The hon. Baronet declared that, though there were mismanaged mills, yet, in the well managed mills the condition of the people was better than that of people engaged in any other manufacture. The condition of the people, also, in those districts, and throughout the factory districts, was much superior now to what it was when he was born. Before the factories' people were collected in factories, they spun or wove in damp cellars, and were liable to all the diseases arising from such an abode. In Lancashire, it was well known, that delicate people were sent into the factories, because they were delicate, and in the factories they were well clothed and kept warm. Sir Gilbert Blaine said, that the people of Buckingham were amongst the most stunted in their growth of all the people of England; and he attributed that to the want of manufactures amongst them. It was well known that the average duration of life in England had increased considerably within the last century, and he would put it to the Committee if that could have taken place, unless the health of the manufacturing districts had increased, in which there had been the enormous increase of the population?
§ Mr. Brothertonwished such a measure to be adopted as would benefit all parties. He was not one of those who wished secretly to impose restrictions on adult labour; he had openly avowed his desire to limit the labour of all persons below the age of twenty-fine. He had never joined in the cry against the masters; he had attack-ed the system, desiring to benefit all parties. He must say, that ten hours were sufficient; but there were many considerations which affected him, and he wished to extend the hours to eleven, in the hope of embracing a larger class by the restriction. There were other considerations, as he before said; he, for example, had always voted for the abolition of the Corn-laws, and for the reduction of the burthens of the conutry, because they were connected with the necessity for severe labour. It was not a question of pounds, shillings, and pence, but a question of morality, of 895 humanity, and of Christianity. It was a question of high principles. If the competition were carried on as at present, might they not be obliged to work seven days instead of six? If the noble Lord's Bill were negatived, he would propose to limit the hours of labour to seven, on the other noble Lord's (Lord Althorp's) Amendment being adopted. He believed, if two sets of children were employed, it would give rise to much fraud and evasion. He thought that the employment of two sets of children would be injurious, particularly in the silk trade. They would require at least 10,000 additional children in that trade alone in Manchester. The great apprehension was ruin by foreign competition. He would oppose everything which would endanger our manufactures; but he wished to relieve all classes. The people expected from the Reform Bill either less labour or more wages. He remembered, however, that the same cry of coming ruin was raised in 1816, but then we exported to the extent of 19,000,000l; and last year the exports amounted to 64,000,000l. It was also said that we should banish the spinning by that Bill to other countries; but then we employed 24,000 spinners in Manchester, and now there were 56,000. Let them, therefore, do right, and fear not. Again, it was said that Liverpool would be destroyed, if the slave trade were done away; but that town had flourished amazingly since that trade was abolished. It It was, however, the duty of legislators to look to all classes; and he believed that they ought to do right, and trust in that Providence who ruled over nations as well as over individuals. He would, in the first instance, vote for the ten hours' Bill; and if that were lost, he would then move as an Amendment the eleven hours' Bill.
§ Mr. George Woodthought it was necessary to look to the general welfare, and not to be guided by any popular cry. It was necessary, however, to be quite sure that they should be able to make their legislation effective, before they made laws. They had proved that the present law was not effective, and he would have the House be quite sure that it could reduce all labour to twelve hours, as his hon. friend wished to have a Bill limiting the labour to eleven hours. He agreed with the noble Lord (Lord Ashley) that it was a measure to be considered only in its details; there fore all its details should be examined. The 896 noble Lord, however, had relied altogether on the details given by Dr. Hawkins. Dr. Southwood Smith was opposed to Dr. Hawkins; but if they referred to individual opinion on both sides, they would never come to any such general conclusion as ought to guide them. Mr. Houldsworth had been referred to as opposed to two sets of hands; but he knew that Mr. Houldsworth was now favourable to the recommendation of the Commissioners. Mr. Ashton also was, in February last, in favour of two sets of hands.
§ Lord Ashleyinterrupted the hon. Member, and read Mr. Ashton's evidence to show, that he declared that two sets of hands would be a more mischievous plan; for it would expose the adults to work eighteen hours.
§ Mr. George Woodconcurred in the opinion of the evil; but what was the remedy? Why, the existing law. If the law prohibited mills from working more than twelve hours, how could adults be worked in them sixteen hours? The hon. Member also quoted Mr. Ashton's opinion to show, that he saw no objection to employing two sets of hands. The hon. Member advocated the proposed plan of two sets of children, employing them eight hours a day. That would make a reduction of fifty per cent only in their wages, not 100 per cent. Dr. Hawkins, whose evidence had been relied on, proved too much. He said that ten hours were enough for all classes to work; but it was proved that, unless some of the population worked more hours than that, the deterioration of the whole must be the result. If the noble Lord could see the consequences of his measure, he would not urge it forward. Either the Bill would be inoperative, or it would cut down wages and the produce of our factories. With respect to cotton alone—with which he was best acquainted—if the production were cut down one-sixth part, the wages of the labourer would be lessened one-sixth. The sum sunk in building and machinery for the cotton manufacture, was equal to the whole amount of wages. The reduction of production would add the sixth, then, to the charge of the capitalist, on account of his machinery; and he saw not how that could be met, except by a further reduction of wages, and, therefore, he believed that the reducing the hours of labour one-sixth, would, in fact, reduce the wages of the labourer one-third. It was impossible, 897 too, that the reduction could be made good from any other source than from profit or wages. During the last seven years, however, the masters had barely been able to carry on their works; and if a further reduction was made in their profit, they would be ruined, or they would make the whole of the charge fall on wages. He was sure the whole would fall on wages, and they would be reduced to two-thirds of their present amount. The hon. Member quoted a statement to show that the effect of the measure would be equivalent to throwing one-sixth part of the land of this country out of cultivation.
It being three o'clock, the House resumed. The Committee to sit again.