COTTON FACTORIES. (Hansard, 25 February 1819)

Lord Kenyon
said, that in rising to propose the appointment of the committee which, en a former occasion, he had postponed, from a consideration of the thinness of the House, he was glad to see a greater num- 653 ber of noble lords present than had on that occasion attended. The question now to be considered was one of the greatest importance. No less than 50,000 individuals were interested in its decision in Manchester and its neighbourhood. One third of these persons were below sixteen years of age, and consequently were unable to do any thing for their own protections The noble lord said he had made inquiries, since this subject was last before the House, into the improvements which were then said to be taking place without legislative interference. It had then been stated, that the master spinners were willing to diminish the hours of labour of their own accord. This he had found was not correct generally. Some had indeed reduced the hours of labour at Stockport, as he had heard from the chairman of the meeting of masters in Lancashire; bin others not concurring, the former had been obliged to see their object defeated. At Bolton the hours had been shortened, but in Lancashire not a fourth of the factories had made any change, more than three-fourths of them working the children fourteen hours and a-half a-day. With respect to the heat to which these children were exposed, the House would judge of the injury which it must occasion to their health, when he told them, on the report of a magistrate who had particularly examined the factories, that it usually ran between 76 and 80 degrees of Fahrenheit, and sometimes reached to 85. It would be for noble lords to consider whether such a state of things did not call for inquiry and regulation. The children could not be considered as free labourers; for at the early age at which they entered the factories, they could not be their own masters, nor yet could they be protected by the principles of the common law, against the severity of their misters, on account of the similarity- between their situation and that of free labourers, in their not being bound for any definite period. Nothing but a legislative enactment could afford them any effectual protection. The noble lord denied that the agitation of the question, involved in the bill of last year, had any connexion with the disturbances at Manchester last autumn. He then went into a history of the act of 1802, and the bill of last session; and contended, that there were sufficient grounds for inquiry, if not for authorizing a measure of regulation. He moved, therefore, That a committee 654 be appointed to inquire into the state and condition of children employed in the, cotton factories, and report thereon to the House.

The Lord Chancellor
explained what he meant on a former occasion, by saying, that if the children were treated with the cruelty described by the petitioners, they might apply for the protection of the common law. He had not argued against the motion of the noble lord, but had merely, stated, that the evils complained of, if they existed to the extent described, came? under the provisions of the common law; and that those who inflicted them, ought to be informed that they were exposing themselves to the punishment Which it prescribed for such cases of Cruelty. He gave no opinion then on the necessity of inquiry, but merely that the offence of overworking children was one indictable at common law. He saw no reason Why the master cotton manufacturers and the' master chimney-sweepers should have different principles applied to them than were applied to other trades. A general law ought to be passed, if necessary, for the regulation of manufacturers of all' kinds; but it might happen that a particular law, applicable only to children in one trade, might expose them to greater evils than those from which it was intended to protect them. In a country paper he had seen a feeling description of the hardships to which climbing-boys were subjected; but there was no pity expressed for boys compelled to descend into coalpits at three or four o'clock in the morning.

The Earl of Rosslyn
entered into a detailed examination of the question, and argued with great force against the motion, expressing a hope that, though the proposition of the noble mover were adopted, the measure which he expected to ground upon it would be resisted. The prayer of the petitions now on the table was not limited to the regulation of the labour of children, but included that of adults. He asked, what would be the consequence of interfering with labour in other cases, so as to fix the rate of wages —which, in fact, a limitation of the hours of labour would amount to. The proposed inquiry, if it took place, should be general. He objected to the motion; but so far from considering himself an enemy of the children who were the objects of the proposed inquiry, he reckoned himself their friend; as they were improved in health, number, and comfort by the free disposal 655 of their labour. If their hours, of working were reduced, their wages must likewise be reduced, and then they might be exposed to the hardships of want. Two sets of, children would be employed to do the labour of one, and the half of their present wages could thus only be allowed them.

The Bishop of Chester
argued warmly and eloquently in support of the motion. Urged, he said, by a regard for the temporal as well as spiritual concerns of a great body of people in his diocese, he had, since the agitation of the question last year, made it a point to visit all the cotton factories within his reach, and be was satisfied that the length of time which the children were obliged to labour, was not only injurious to their health, but destructive to their lives. The right rev. prelate entered feelingly into a discussion, of the objections brought forward against the bill of last session.

Earl Grosvenor
said, that if their lordship agreed to the motion, they would do an act fatal to the best interests of the country. It would be an act of the greatest, inhumanity to those children whose interests they wished to protect. He was most anxious that they should not interfere with the great principle of free labour. If they consented to pass, this measure, declaring that the children should not work. beyond a certain time, it would be expected that the hours of labour should be reduced, and that the wages should not be diminished. Most of the persons employed in these factories were children. Two-thirds were children under, the age of 16; five-sixths were children under the age of 20, With regard to the law on this subject, the learned lord on the woolsack had said, that by the common law, no man could treat children with cruelty. The right rev. prelate declared, that this might be true, in theory. Now, he must say, that if the law did not reach the case it was the wish of the petitioners that it should be made to extend to it. They merely desired that their case should be fully understood. He was convinced that generally speaking, the limitation of hours might be effected without the interference of the legislature, and therefore it would be highly impolitic and, dangerous to legislate on the subject of free labour.

The Earl of Liverpool
said, that this was no question of free labour. It was preposterous to take of these poor children as free agents. If their lordships adopted 656 this measure, they would not introduce any new principle into their statute-book but would, merely make that effectual by provision, which was now ineffectual for the want of provisions They had hear those who objected to the measure; and they ought now to hear those who supported the principles on which it was founded.

The Earl of Lauderdale
said, that in every part of the country where cotton factories were established, parents were anxious to send their young children to them, under the idea that they were better taken care of than in any other situation. Sir Robert Peel had never thought of this measure till Mr. Owen had recommended it to him, and sir Robert was much better qualified to judge of its merits than any other person. Upon the whole, he war decidedly, hostile to the motion; and he should therefore move, by way of amendment that there be inserted the words, "silk, hardware, and other manufactures, and also to inquire into the laws respecting the same, and to report their opinion thereupon to the House."

Lord Holland
said, that their lordships had heard one party, and they should now hear the other. "Audi alteram partem" should be written in golden letters not only in every court of judicature but on the walls of every legislative body. In the last session their lordships had received a bill from the Commons, and by reading it a second time, they had admitted that there was primâ facie evidence to sanction the measure. It was admitted that the common law was not sufficient, in as much as it provided no redress for this parties. In, 1802, the law was not confined to apprentices 5 it appointed inspectors to inquire into the subject, and therefore the doctrine of non-interference must fall to the ground.