Women -- Employment -- Great Britain; Women labor union members -- Great Britain; Working class women -- Great Britain
"The small particles of cotton and dust with which the air in most rooms
of factories is impregnated not infrequently lay the foundation of
distressing and fatal diseases. When inhaled, they are a source of great
pulmonary irritation, which, if it continues long, induces a species of
chronic bronchitis, which, not rarely, degenerates into tubercular
consumption....
"IV. The fourth cause of the ill-health which prevails among the
manufacturing population may be traced to the injurious influence which
the weakened and vitiated constitution of the women has upon their
children.[73] They are often employed in factories some years after their
marriage, and during this pregnancy, and up to the very period of their
confinement, which all who have attended to the physiology of the subject
know must send their offspring into the world with a debilitated and
unhealthy frame which the circumstances of their infancy are
ill-calculated to remove; and hence, when these children begin to work
themselves they are prepared at once to succumb to the evil influences by
which they are surrounded."
At page 27. "We hope we shall not greatly offend the prejudices either of
political economists or practical tradesmen when we state our firm
conviction, that a reduction in the hours of labour is _most important_ to
the health of the manufacturing population, _and absolutely necessary_ to
any general and material amelioration in their moral and intellectual
condition.... It will be urged in opposition that all legislative
interference in commercial concerns is, _prima facie_, objectionable, and
involves the admission of a dangerous and impolitic principle. That
legislative interference is in itself an evil we deeply feel and readily
admit; but it is an evil like many others which necessity and policy may
justify, and which humanity and justice may imperiously demand.
Legislative interference is objectionable only where it is injudicious or
uncalled for. It will also be objected, and with more sound reason, that a
reduction of the hours of labour would cause a corresponding reduction in
the quantity produced, and consequently in the wages of the workmen; and
would also diminish our power of competing with other manufacturing
nations in foreign market, and thus, by permanently injuring our trade,
would be productive of greater evils to the labouring classes than those
we are endeavouring to remove. This objection, though very reasonable, we
think is considerably overstated. That 'a reduction of the hours of labour
would cause a _corresponding_ reduction in the quantity produced' we
entirely deny. What _would_ be the actual loss consequent upon a reduction
of the hours it is impossible to state with any certainty, but it is
probable that if factories were to work ten hours instead of twelve the
loss in the quantity produced would not be one-sixth, but only about
one-twelfth, and in Mule Spinning perhaps scarcely even so much. We
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account