788 LAISSEZ FAIRE 
8-0. Ja The Act of 1833 had endeavoured to isolate the question 
of child labour, but as a matter of fact this could not be 
The over- done. The children assisted the work of adults, and the 
Caren  Inasters were inclined to evade the restrictions on the time 
sould not, when boys and girls were employed, as this was the way in 
"fectively which the customary hours for men could be most con- 
veniently maintained. The inspectors found that it was 
practically impossible to check the time during which any 
one boy or girl remained at work, as the machinery was 
kept running for longer hours than those in which children 
might be legally employed’. The intimate connection be- 
tween the various elements in the organisation of a factory 
had been asserted by the advocates of a Ten Hours Bill all 
along?, and the nature of the changes which were necessary, 
in order that the measure passed in 1833 might be rendered 
wilthe effective, was only gradually recognised. In 1844 another 
hours for step was taken, and the argument for State-interference on 
restricted; pohalf of children. was extended; a strong case had been 
made for legislative action to protect adult women, both as 
regards the mischief of physical injury, and their own in- 
ability to drive independent bargains, and it was enacted 
that women were to be treated as young persons’. In 
1847 the hours for young persons and women were still 
further reduced by the passing of the Ten Hours Bill, and it 
was generally expected that this new restriction would have 
the effect of limiting the hours during which the machinery 
was kept in motion. When trade revived in 1849, however, 
1 After 1833, though there was a twelve hour day, it might be worked between 
5.80 a.m, and 8.30 p.m. and meal times might be distributed as the employer 
-hose. Those who were working had to do double work, while others were having 
meals—thus demanding a greater intensity of effort from those at work. It was 
quite impossible to tell whether any particular persons had had meals, or whether 
they were working over-hours or not, since the employer could always plead that 
they began late. 
2 “The mistake of Parliament,” said Mr Hindley, the member for Ashton, 
“hag arisen from supposing that they could effectively legislate for children 
without including adults—they are not aware that labour in a mill is, strictly 
speaking, family labour, and that there is no longer the system of a parent main- 
laining his children by the operation of his own industry.” Hutchins and 
Harrison, op. cit. 47. 
87 and 8 Vict. c. 15, § 32. The hours of young persons were limited to 
12 honors bv the Act of 1833.