Such in the main is the attitude of employers towards legislation. Of 103 who expressed an opinion, twenty-six stated that legislation had not affected women's labour at all, sixty considered it to have been beneficial, and seventeen looked on all legislation as grandmotherly and ridiculous--one among these thinking that legislation was all very well, and much needed in the City, but that Southwark should be free from interference. The attitude of those employers who objected to interference was expressed generally in some such way as that it was "unnecessary" for their trade at least, even if desirable for others. Pressed to explain what "unnecessary" meant, they said that women could take care of themselves; that protection was all very well for young girls, but when women arrived at the age of forty or fifty they could do what they liked; that it was hard on women that they should not be allowed to work day and night as well; that women could stand overtime just as well as men; and, finally, that legislation pressed very severely on the employer, who had to use the more expensive medium for doing nightwork, viz., men. Such is the attitude of these employers, and it is fairly well expressed in the following quotation from _The Stationery Trades' Journal_, September, 1880:-- "We report in another column a case in which Messrs. Pardon & Co. were summoned for an offence under the Factory Acts. Four women were employed during the night to fold a periodical which is printed by Messrs. P. The youngest of the four women was a married woman of thirty-five, whose husband is unable to work, and she, like the rest, prized the job because it afforded the means of earning a little extra money for the support of her family. Under the pretence of protecting these women, the law steps in and says: 'Your families may starve or go to the workhouse, but you shall not work overtime or go beyond the limits prescribed by the Act. You cannot be trusted with the care of your own health. You may fast as much as you like; it will do you good and help your children to grow up stalwart men and women--but you shall not endanger your health by working too many hours at a time.' This in substance is what the law does for women. As regards the employment of children and young persons, the Act is no doubt beneficial, but surely women of thirty-five and forty do not need the same legislative protection as children. A great deal of sentimental nonsense is written and spoken by benevolent busybodies without practical knowledge of the subjects with which they meddle; and one of the results is the application of the Factory Acts to women who are old enough to judge for themselves. In the case alluded to there was more real benevolence in providing work for women than in limiting their hours of employment." As a contrast to these opinions, the views on overtime expressed in the Factory Inspector's Report for 1899 are worth noting:--