The Industrial Revolution

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 1027928145

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-159926

Document type:: Monograph

Author:: Cunningham, William http://d-nb.info/gnd/128907487

Title:: The Industrial Revolution

Place of publication:: Cambridge

Publisher:: The University Press

Year of publication:: 1922

Scope:: xxii S., S. 404-886

Digitisation:: 2021

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

CONDITIONS OF CHILDREN'S WORK 785 else could interfere, it is clear that the blame lay with them AD: 1776 or with their agents?, It was much easier to report on the extent of the evil and to analyse its causes, than to devise a satisfactory remedy. Enthusiasts like Owen would have tried to introduce an ideal system for all those who worked in the mills. But the Z%e Com Government were forced to move more slowly, and to content A themselves with attempting to prohibit or limit the recognised isolate the evils. The overworking of boys and girls seemed to stand by Zon of itself; the mischief was most patent, and as the children were labour, obviously unprotected and unable to protect themselves in any way, there was a much stronger case for interference than there seemed to be in regard to adult labour of any kind. The operatives were naturally anxious to have the systematic reform, which Owen had initiated, carried through in its entirety by the State?; but this was a proposal which the Commissioners did not endorse; they tried to put forward a discriminating scheme, by which the question of child labour should be isolated and dealt with separately, while they thought the hours in which other workmen were employed should be a matter of agreement, so long as the very wide limit introduced in 1802° was not exceeded. The Commissioners did not feel that Owen’s principle of a Ten Hour Day was the right one, as it would not in itself afford sufficient relief to the children, while it appeared to be unnecessary, and possibly t The punishments which Lord Ashley proposed to inflict on employers in connection with accidents in their mills were very severe. Parliament appears to have supposed that they were so excessive that they would never have been enforced. 8 Hansard, xIx, 223. 2 The operatives believed that the shortening of their hours would lead to a rise of wages (Reports, etc, 1833, xx. 89, 51), and advocated it on this account; but their wages were good when compared with the payments in other callings (Reports, etc., 1833, xx. 307, 1008, and xx1. 31, and especially 65), and the Com- missioners would have deprecated any change that would seriously interfere with market conditions. 8 Hutchins and Harrison, op. ¢it. 17. This was hardly a new limitation, as it closely resembles the recognised day labour of the sixteenth centary. Vol. 1. 535. ¢ The following instances of excessive work on the part of the young were specially referred to by the Commissioners. ‘Am twelve years old. Have been in the mill twelve months. Begin at six o'clock, and stop at half past seven. Generally have about twelve hours and a half of it. Have worked over-hours for two or three weeks together. Worked breakfast-time and tea-time, and did not go away till eight. Do you work over-hours or not, just as you like 7—No; them as AN ~

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: The Industrial Revolution

Monograph

Table of contents

Download

Monograph

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation