a I E) RARY OF THE U N I VLRS ITY Of ILLI NOIS ^jJliwip-: L^ SPEECHES OF PROFESSOR FAWCETT, M.P., AND SIR THOMAS BAZLEY, M.P., ON THE ADJOURNED DEBATE, ON WEDNESDAY, JULY 30, 1873. MACMILLAN AND CO. 1873. FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. HOUSE OF COMMOXS, JULY 30, 1873. MPw Fawcett, in moving tlie following resolution in oppo- sition to Mr. Mundella's Factory Acts Amendment Bill — " That in the opinion of this House it is undesirable to sanction a measure which would discourage the employment of women, by subjecting their labour to a new legislative restriction to w^hich it is not proposed to subject the labour of men " — spoke as follows : — Mr. Speaker, — It will be in the recollection of the House that at the close of the long speech with which my honour- able friend the member for Sheffield (Mr. Mundella) ^ intro- duced the second reading of this Bill, not more than about five minutes remained before the debate, by the rules of the House, had to be suspended. It was only possible for me, during these few brief minutes, to protest against some aspersions which had, I thought, been unjustly cast upon the character of those employers who are opposed to this measure, and to indicate in very general terms the reasons which have induced me to meet the second reading of the Bill with the amendment of which I have given notice. ^ In referring to honourable members, I shall in future, for the sake of brevity, mention them simply by their names. A 4 SPEECHES ON THE In order to present as clear an issue as possible to the House, I am desirous at the outset to state that the Bill may be divided into two entirely distinct portions. One part of the Bill asks us to legislate for children ; by another part of the Bill it is intended both directly and indirectly to subject the labour of adults to certain new legislative restrictions. So far as the Bill affects the employment of children, I have not a single word to say in opposition to it. On the contrary, no one would more cordially welcome proposals to raise the age at which children should be permitted to commence working, to extend the period of half-time, and to provide additional securities for the more efficient education of children when employed as half-timers. So far as we are able to judge from the opinions which have been expressed by employers in reference to the employment and education of children, it would appear that the portion of the Bill which refers to children might be passed with the general approval of the House. It is im- portant to bear this in mind, in order to obtain a distinct idea of the real points at issue between the supporters and the opponents of the Bill. It has been attempted to make the country believe that many of the employers are anxious to have children overworked, and are perfectly indifferent to their education. Probably there is no one in this House who is pecuniarily less interested in industrial undertakings than I am. I have not a shilling embarked in any one of the trades which would be affected by this Bill. This has been one reason which has induced me to assume the responsibility of opposing the BilL If the amendment of which I have given notice had been moved by some employer, interested motives would not improbably have been attributed to him, and perhaps he ^UfUC r FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. 5 would have been accused of being more solicitous for his own gains than for the welfare of his workpeople. As it may be difficult for many of the employers to defend them- selves without being charged with self-laudation, I feel bound in common fairness to say that many of those w^ho are most prominent in opposing this Bill are acknowledged to be among tlie best employers in the country. It has been admitted that there is no one in Lancashire who is more respected by those whom he employs for his great generosity and his judicious kindness than Mr. Hugh Mason, and there is no one who has written and spoken with greater ability and force against the proposals in this Bill to subject the labour of adults to legislative restrictions. Many members of this House, who hold opinions similar to those of Mr. Hugh Mason, are as much esteemed as employers as he is. Having made these few remarks in defence of those who, in the course of the agitation which this measure is likely to excite, will doulvless be subjected to many unjust insinua- tions, I will at once ask the House to consider the vitally important issues which are raised by this Bill so far as it will affect the labour of adults. It can, I think, be proved beyond dispute that this measure must operate in one of two ways. It will either be a Nine -hours Bill for men as well as for women, or it will place the labour of women under such serious disadvantages as greatly to restrict their employment. If the Bill is in- tended to be a general Nine-hours Bill, then the House has not been fairly dealt with ; for why do not the promoters of the measure boldly come forward and tell us what they want ? If they want this House to decide how long the artisans of this country shall be permitted to work, let them at least have the courage to tell us at what they are aiming. Do not 6 SFEEGHES ON THE let tliem cloak their intentions in the garb of a generous zeal for the welfare of women. I am perfectly ready to admit that Mr. Mundella has emphatically denied that this is a general Nine-hours Bill. He has told us that nothing would induce him to have any- thing to do with a Bill which would impose legislative restrictions upon the labour of men. But there may be the widest possible difference between what the promoter of an Act of Parliament wishes to be its consequences, and what its ultimate consequences may actually be. Mr. Mundella may not intend this to be a general Nine-hours Bill, but it may become one in spite of anything that he may say or wish to the contrary. But if it is not, as he asserts, a general -Nine-hours Bill, then it can at once be proved that the Bill must most seriously interfere with the employment of women. The labour of men and women is so inextricably intertwined in the various manufacturing processes, that it seems nothing can be more absurd than to suppose that the women, after working nine hours, should be compelled by law to leave the factory, and then the men should go on for another hour working without them. It is therefore absolutely certain that if women are not permitted to work more than nine hours a day, one of two things will occur : either the manu- facturers will be unable to employ their men for more than nine hours a day ; or, if they wished to keep their machinery working for a longer period than this, they would only be able to do so by dispensing with the labour of women altogether, or by employing them in double shifts, like half- time children. It can only be proved by experience which of these results will ensue. In those branches of industry in which the labour of women is indispensable — and I believe this is the case with FAOTOHY ACTf^ AMENDMENT BILL. 7 the great majority of industries affected by this Bill — it is evident that if we impose certain legislative restrictions upoii the labour of women, we virtually impose the same restric- tions upon the labour of men. In some branches of industry, however, in which women form a very small minority of the entire number who are employed, this Bill would pro- bably have the effect of causing the labour of women to be altogether dispensed with, or of reducing them to the position of half-timers. The question, therefore, which the House has to determine is this : Are we, in the first place, prepared for some of the most important trades in the country to enact a general nine-hours law ? Or are we prepared, with regard to other trades, to discourage and prohibit the employment of women ? We probably have never been asked to give a decision upon issues of greater importance. Let me begin with the first. I am perfectly well aware of the prejudice which will be industriously excited against those who oppose such legisla- tion as is now contemplated. It therefore becomes of greater consequence that we should make the grounds of our oppo- sition as intelligible as possible. I therefore desire, in the first instance, to affirm that this House has no right to inter- fere with the labour of adults ; and, secondly, if it had the right, it would be singularly impolitic to exercise it at the present time. If we once accept the principle that grown-up persons cannot determine for themselves the number of hours which they shall work, we virtually treat them as if they were helpless children, who find it so impossible to get on without our control and guidance, that we shall soon have to regulate their wages. And when are we asked to start on this career of paternal legislation ? When are we asked to "^raj) the artisan population of this_ country in the swaddling 8 SPEECHES ON THE clothes of babyhood ? Why, — at the very time when our work- ing classes are proving, in a thousand hard-fought industrial contests between themselves and their employers, that they have not only the will but the power to protect their own interests. But even if the State had the rigjht to decide how many hours a day a grown-up person should work, I confi- dently appeal to the House, whether it would not be impolitic to exercise this right. My chief contention is this : that the working classes can settle such a question as this far better for themselves than the State can settle it for them. No one now would think of invoking the aid of Parliament to deter- mine the amount of remuneration which our artisans should receive for their labour, and if they can regulate the amount of their wages, why, in the name of common sense, cannot they also arrange the number of hours which they shall work ? E"ot only have they the power to decide for themselves what shall be the length of the day's work, but I believe they will decide it far better without than with the interference of this House. Employers and employed know the peculiar circumstances of each branch of industry infinitely better than they can be known by this House. Employers and employed^ if left to themselves, can make such arrangements as are most fitted for each special trade. Occasionally it may happen that it may be desirable to work somewhat longer than the ordinary time. The employed recognise the truth of this just as much as do the employers, for it is particularly to be noted that in those trades where the employed have been most successful in shortening the hours of labour, they have always suggested certain arrangements for occasionally working overtime. Arrangements for controlling trade, which are voluntarily made between employers and employed, have not the rigidity and unchangeableness of a legislative enactment. They FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. 9 possess sufficient elasticity to be adapted to the peculiar circumstances of each special case ; but this Bill, on the con- trary, proposes to lay down one uniform rule for a great variety of industrial processes which often differ widely in the character and quality of the work they require. If we pass this Bill, it will be decreed by an inflexible rule, that in the most important trades in the country no women shall, under any circumstances whatever, work for more than a prescribed number of hours. It has been said, and it will no doubt be often repeated, that it is now too late to raise objections to Parliamentary interference with the labour of adults ; such interference was sanctioned by the Factory Acts, and no one would now think of repealing them. As I have before remarked, so far as these Acts refer to the labour of those who are not adults, not only do I not wish to repeal them, but I should be perfectly willing to strengthen them, and to attempt to render them more efficient. But legislative interference with the employment of adults cannot, at the present time, be regarded in precisely the same light as it was when the Factory Acts were passed, a quarter of a century since. The trade of the country has now to contend with many difficulties which were then scarcely foreseen. I shall presently refer to the serious effects which may be produced upon the industrial future of our country by the rise in the price of coal. Again, if the existing Factory Acts are to be quoted as a conclusive argument in favour of this Bill, the same kind of reasoning would justify an eight — nay, even a seven hours bill. Lastly, it may be asked, — What becomes of the great progress in the people's condition which was quoted as an unanswerable argument in favour of their political 10 SPEECHES ON THE enfranchisement, if they require the protection of the State just as much now as they did twenty-five years since? Those, I think, do a very serious injury to the working- classes, who are perpetually encouraging them to ask the State to do what they could far more effectually do for themselves. It has lately been shown how much more promptly and properly a matter is dealt with when the people take it into their own hands, than when they rely upon Acts of Parliament. It will be in the recollection of the House that last year the Home Secretary introduced a Bill with the view of putting down truck. Something like sixty Acts had already been passed with the same object, and we were told that, in spite of all this legislation, truck was flourishing as vigorously as ever. Directly I read the Bill of the Home Secretary, I determined to oppose it with an amendment which asserted the principle that all questions as to the time when, and the manner in which, wages should be paid, had better be settled by the employers and the employed rather than by Parliament. Many came to me then, as they have come to me now, and said : " We wonder that you are insensible to the evils of truck, and that you wish to see them perpetuated." I simply replied : ''If I held such opinions as you attribute to me, I would do aU in my power to promote the passing of the Home Secretary's Bill, because experience has shown that innumerable Truck Acts may be passed, and truck will continue to exist, until those who are interested in its discontinuance take the subject into their own hands." It could scarcely have been foreseen that the truth of what has just been stated would be so soon proved. The Bill happily not having passed, the Home Secretary was lately asked whether he intended to re-iukp^ FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. ll duce it during the present session. What was his reply? It was so significant that I earnestly commend it to the particular attention of this House. After having stated that he did not intend to re-introduce the Bill this year, he went on to confess that one of the chief reasons which had induced him to come to this decision was, that since his failure to legislate last year the working classes had to a great extent taken the matter into their own hands, and had by their own voluntary efforts abolished truck. If Parliament would only once declare that it would never have another Truck Bill introduced into this House, I believe that in five years all that is mischievous in connection with truck would have ceased to exist. Just in the same way do I believe that if we would once declare that it was entirely beyond the province of this House to decide how many hours an adult should work, we should do far more to cause the day's work to be adjusted to such a length as would be most advantageous both for employers and employed, than will ever be done by such a Bill as we are now asked to approve. This is not simply a theoretical opinion ; for it is to be particularly remarked that those trades in which the hours are at the present time the shortest are exactly those to which it has never been proposed to apply any legislative interference. In the nine-hours struggle which commenced in Newcastle, and has been so successfully continued in other parts of the country, the aid of Parliament was never invoked. But Mr. Mundella will probably rejoin : " It is very well to leave men to take care of themselves. They are independent, they are free, they have the power to do what they think is best for themselves. But when we come to consider the case of women, Avhat are they ? " Mr. Mundella has told us tliat the J are servants up to the age of sixteen or seven- 12 SPEECHES ON THE teen ; they then enjoy a year or two of independence ; they then marry, and are henceforward the slaves of their masters.^ In the former debate, some who are opposing this Bill were taunted with being "cold-blooded economists." But we have never been so cold-blooded as to bring such an accusation against our fellow-countrymen. If this assertion were as correct as I believe it to be incorrect, instead of sending an expedition to Zanzibar to put down the slave trade, we ought to send an expedition to Lancashire and Yorkshire to emancipate our countrywomen from the fetters in which warm-blooded philanthropists are content to see them bound. But Mr. MundeUa was shrewd enough to see that the principles of his Bill forced him into the position of saying that the women for whom he proposes to legislate are slaves. There is only one justification for limiting the hours of labour of women, unless it is proposed to subject the labour of men to similar legislation, and that is, that women are not free agents. This is in fact the justification for legislating on behalf of children : they are not free agents ; and this suggests at once the fundamental distinction between State intervention on behalf of children and on behalf of adults. 1 Mr. Mundella, in a speech he subsequently made on the withdrawal of his Bill, endeavoured to show that in using the expression "the slaves of their masters," he wished to imply that women were slaves of the employers, not of their husbands. But if we are to accept this interpretation, why did he say that women enjoyed a year or two of independence between the period of childhood and marriage ? An employer would not be less a slave-master to an unmarried than to a married woman. Again, it may be asked, How does Mr. Mundella reconcile the statement that the manufacturers are slave- masters to the women whom they employ, with his indignant denial, in the same speech, that he cast any aspersions upon the character of the em- ployers ? Is it possible to say a more terribly severe thing against any man, than that he treats a woman, over whom he can exercise influence, as a slave? FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL, 13 But we now have to consider what may possibly be the second effect of this legislation : viz., that it may in some instances discourage the employment of women. Anyone who considers the social condition of this country, anyone who knows how many women there are who have a severe struggle to maintain themselves by toil, anyone who reflects that if a woman is driven from honest labour she may be forced by dire necessity into a life of misery and degradation, will hesitate to sanction legislation which may possibly have the effect of throwing impediments in the way of women earning their own maintenance. I know that the workmen who are demanding this Bill indignantly repudiate the idea that they are jealous of women's labour. No one would more regret than I should to bring against them any unjust accusations. We are bound at once to accept their assurance that they are no longer influenced by any jealousy of women's labour, and we may indeed rejoice that that is not to happen in the future which has undoubtedly sometimes occurred in the past. For fairness compels me to say that our workmen have not always been uninfluenced by this jealousy of women's labour. We cannot forget that some years ago certain trades-unionists in the Potteries impera- tively insisted that a certain rest for the arm, which they found almost essential to their work, should not be used by women when engaged in the same employment. Not long since, the London tailors, when on strike, having never admitted a woman to their union, attempted to coerce women from availing themselves of the remunerative employment which was offered to them in consequence of the strike. But this jealousy of women's labour has not been entirely confined to workmen. The same feeling has extended itself through every class of society. Last autumn some of the Post 14 SPEECHES ON THE Office clerks objected to the emiDloyment of women in tlie Post Office, which had been so wisely decided upon by Mi*. Scudamore : and we have lately had abundant oj^portunities of judging of the extent to which the medical profession is jealous of the competition of women practitioners. I think it necessary to make these remarks, as we should at any rate be very cautious and very watchful when we are asked to interfere with the employment of women. But we have been told that one of the great arguments in favour of this Bill is, that it is demanded by the fathers and husbands of the women affected by it. But in pressing this argument, does Mr. Mundella forget that upon his own authority we have been assured that these very women are in servitude and slavery to these fathers and husbands, and therefore he asks us to place ourselves in the ridiculous position of letting those whom he has himself described as slave-masters decide what is best for their slaves? But enough has now pro- bably been said on the general principles involved in this Bill. I will therefore proceed to deal with the specific facts and statements on which Mr. Mundella supports his case. The Government, through the Home Secretary, having stated that, "greatly as our knowledge has been supplemented by the Eeport of the Commissioners recently appointed to investigate the condition of the women and children employed in factories, it is not large enough to justify the great economic changes proposed by this Bill," Mr. Mundella naturally came to the conclusion that this asser- tion of the Home Secretary must be controverted. Anyone who reads Mr. Mundella's remarks in the previous debate, and at the same time remembers with how much ability and ingenuity he can speak, will at once see how extremely weak FA GTOR Y A CTS A MENDMENT BILL. 15 is his case. Instead of directly meeting the assertion of the Home Secretary, he endeavoured to disprove it by introducing a great mass of matter entirely irrelevant to the measure we are now considering. We remember, for instance, the piteous picture he drew of women coming to work in all weathers, bedrabbled in mud and wet up to their middles. He surely does not think that his Bill will regulate the elements, and convert a wet day into a fine one. It really might be thought that there was a clause in the Bill to supply women with waticrproof cloaks and umbrellas. He also gave a harrowing description of the evils resulting from working in bad smells and in ill-ventilated rooms ; but we look in vain in the Bill for a single sanitary regulation. Again, we had a frightful account of the increasing number of accidents. The fallacies involved in these statistics of accidents will be referred to by subsequent speakers. But it is sufficient here to say that even if it is admitted that accidents have increased, this Bill can exert no influence whatever in diminishing their number. There is not one word in it which would either cause machinery to be better fenced, or which would enable those who may be injured more easily to obtain compensation from their employers. We next listened to an eloquent descrip- tion of the terrible consequences which ensue from a woman returning to work too soon after her confinement. On the authority of the Commissioners we were told that when a woman thus returned to work, it was virtually a sentence of death to the child. But if this Bill became law to-morrow, a woman would be able to return to work within a week, nay, even a day, of her confinement. It was next attempted to shame this House into accepting this Bill, because we were asked to believe that in factory legislation we were behind almost every other European 16 SPEECHES ON THE country. In one respect this is no doubt true. In those countries, such as Prussia, where there is a general system of compulsory education, greater security is taken for the education of factory children than is the case in our own country; but, as I have before said, this is not the part of the Bill which we are opposing. We are as anxious as Mr. Mundella can be to provide additional guarantees for the education of factory children. The point of difference between him and us is, that we object to the new restrictions which he wishes to impose upon the labour of adults ; and with regard to this kind of legislative interference, instead of being behind other European countries, we have already imposed restrictions far more stringent than those which have been imposed in Germany, Austria, Baden, Holland, Belgium, Italy, Switzerland, Sweden, Eussia, or France. The Beehive newspaper, the leading organ of the trades-unionists in this country, which has not only warmly supported Mr. Miindella's Bill, but which has with the utmost asperity attacked those who venture to oppose it, has recently said : " England is, without doubt^ far in advance of every country in this matter, whether we consider the law itself or the strictness of its execution." Again, Mr. Mundella endeavoured to make it appear that the employment of women in the textile manufactures pro- duced great mortality, and was particularly destructive of infant life. He seemed to think that he had proved his case when he showed that there was a much greater mortality among women in the manufacturing districts than there is in four towns in the Black Country. These four towns were alluded to as if they were so unhealthy that the sanitary condition of a district must be most deplorable if it had a higher rate of mortality than prevails in these towns. But FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL, 17 •on referring to the returns of the Eegistrar-General, what do we discover ? These towns in the Black Country, so far as the mortality of married women is concerned — and Mr. Mun- della was careful to confine his comparison to this point — take rank, not among the most unhealthy, but amongst the very healthiest districts in the kingdom. As an instance of the caution which ought to be exercised in drawing conclu- sions from incomplete statistics, it may be remarked that the rate of infant mortality is not greater in the textile towns than it is in these four towns where the rate of mortality of women is so low. But now I come to certain statements which Mr. Mundella made, when he was not anxious to prove the unhealthiness of the manufacturing districts, but when he was pleading for their healthiness. I should be the last to accuse any man of inconsistency. We all, probably, in some period of our lives, have changed our opinions, f ' Hear, hear," from Mr. Mundella.) Oh, I quite understand that cheer. When I came into this House, when I was younger and perhaps more enthusiastic than I am now, I was more in favour of legislative interference. But is it to be supposed that anyone coming into this House when still young is to learn nothing from experience ? But the inconsistency which I am referring to with regard to Mr. Mundella is not a >change of opinion which has gradually come over him as facts have dawned upon him or as years have rolled by. I wish to direct the particular attention of the House to certain statements he made in reference to the Eeport of the Factory Commissioners, when a few weeks since he was speaking in favour of the repeal of the Contagious Diseases Acts, and to compare what he then said with the statements he made in reference to the same Report when moving the second reading B 18 SPEECHES ON THE of this Bill. On the former occasion we were reminded that two Commissioners had lately been down to the manu- facturing districts ; they had examined 10,000 children entirely at haphazard, and had found them healthy and entirely free from diathetic disease. But this is not the strangest part of the story. Mr. Mundella was anxious to make a point against Sir J. Pakington, who had spoken in the debate on the Contagious Diseases Acts. He there- fore said : " Let the right honourable gentleman (Sir J, Pakingtou) see the width and weight of the men of Sheffield, and then he will cease to deplore a sickly population." AVell, if Sir J. Pakington will give a similar invitation to Mr. Mundella, and ask him to visit the textile towns, he, in his turn, will cease to deplore a sickly population ; for he will discover that in the health of their population, whether estimated by the death-rate of women between 15 and 45, or between 45 and 55, or the death-rate of children under 10, the fifteen principal textile towns are from 15 to 20 per cent, healthier than the sanitary paradise Mr. Mundella has the happiness to represent. I have now gone through most of the statements of Mr. Mundella, and I will refer again to the remark of the Home Secretary, that although the knowledge of the Government has been extended by the inquiries of the Commissioners, the facts do not justify such a great economic change as is proposed by this Bill. I hope the Home Secretary is of the same opinion still ; I hope this sensible remark of his will not be repudiated by the Government, and that upon this question he represents not only himself but the Government. I shall be able to show from the Eeport of the Commissioners, who were specially sent down to ascertain the facts of the case, that the Home Secretary did not speak half strongly FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. 19 enough, and that he ought to have said not only that the facts did not justify the Bill, but that they absolutely dis- proved the necessity for this legislation. All the facts that I am about to mention are taken from this Eeport, and their significance is greatly increased when it is remembered that the Commissioners evidently have a bias in favour of this legislation. In the first place, there is this most remarkable fact : they asked 163 medical men whether the present hours of labour were injurious to women. If a great majority of these medical men had answered this question in the affirmative, I could understand this Bill being introduced ; but far from a majority being of the opinion that the present hours of labour are too long, only 32 out of the 163 are of this opinion, the remaining 131 distinctly affirming that the present hours are not too long. But this is not all: 171 medical men were asked whether factory labour was especially injurious t© women ; 99 gave a direct negative to the quesij^ion, 12 re- turned answers which were irrelevant, and the remaining 57 chiefly confined their remarks to defective sanitary arrange- ments, which are injurious to men and women alike, and which are not in the slightest degree touched by this Bill. Medical testimony, therefore, entirely fails to provide a justifi- cation for this Bill. I will now refer to another very remarkable admission contained in the Eeport of these Commissioners. Anyone who is practically acquainted with cotton manufacturing- processes knows perfectly well that the great majority of the women who are employed are engaged in the five processes of reeling, doubling, winding, warping, and weaving. The Com- missioners themselves admit that three-fourths of the women employed in factories are engaged in one or other of these B 2 20 SPEECHES ON THE occupations, and they further admit that these occupations have no debilitating tendency. It is particularly worthy of remark that in almost every instance the complaints of the Commissioners refer to evils resulting either from defective sanitary arrangements or from the employment of married women. Thus, with regard to defective sanitary arrange- ments, they speak of cesspools. It surely cannot be sup- posed that a Mne-hours Bill will empty or purify a cesspool. Once more let me say, that there is not a single sanitary clause in the Bill. Then again, with regard to the employ- ment of married women, it is to be observed that the Bill makes no distinction whatever between married and un- married women. It has been calculated that only a small minority of the women at work are married. The proportion is said to be about one- tenth. Me. Mundella : One-third of the women employed are married. Mr. Fawcett : I believe such an estimate is far too high ; but even if we assume it to, be correct, we must remember that perhaps not more than one-third of the married women have young children. Now, the evils upon which the Com- missioners lay the greatest stress are to be attributed to women going to work too soon after their confinement, and to their neglecting their young children. Now, it appears from the figures just quoted, that these evils can only happen in the case of a small minority of the entire number of women who are at work. I will now ask the House for a moment to consider some of the absurdities into which we shall be led if we are pre- pared to legislate upon the Eeport of these Commissioners. In mentioning various disadvantages associated with the em- ployment of women and children in factories, there is one FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. 21 subject on which they lay particular stress. They bring for- ward medical evidence to show that the diseases of the digestive organs prevalent in the factory districts are in- duced by the excessive use of tea. Well, I suppose, if this mania for legislative interference continues, we shall soon have introduced into this House a Permissive Prohibitory Tea BiU. Having studied the Eeport of the Commissioners with the greatest care, I believe I am justified in saying that it does not contain one single argument to justify legislative restriction upon the labour of adults. They adduce some facts with the object of showing that certain restrictions should be imposed upon the employment of married women, and they mention many facts to prove that the sanitary condition of the mills, although improving, is still in a state which leaves much to be desired. Now, as I have occupied so much of the time of the House, I will refer very briefly to the vexed question of foreign com- petition. Others are far more competent to deal with it. I confess I have no special knowledge of the subject, but this I am bound to say, that considering the serious and gratify- ing rise of wages — serious in one aspect, and gratifying in another — considering, I say, the marked rise of wages in this country, the great increase in the price of coal, the rapid de- velopment of manufacturing industry in countries in which formerly there were few manufactures — considering all these facts, we must come to the conclusion that foreign competi- tion presents itself in a very different light from what it did some years since. I can speak with impartiality upon this subject, because I have no personal interest in the matter. But it is a subject which I have examined with the greatest possible care, and I believe this to be the case : that at 22 SPEECHES ON THE the present time, in many most important branches of in- dustry in this country, tlie competition between us and foreigners is so keen and so close, that if you place the slightest legislative impediment in the way of industrial development, the balance may be turned against us, and our trade may greatly suffer. There cannot be a greater delusion than to suppose that with regard to foreign competition employers are chiefly concerned. They have accumulated capital. If trade declines, they can retire from business and live upon their means. But the decline of trade means loss of employment to the labourer, and upon him will fall with maxi- mum intensity the bitter consequences of industrial depression. There is one other consideration which, if the House will allow me, I will present to them for a moment. Now that the artisans of this country have happily been enfran- chised, if you once concede their demand for a ISTine-hours Bill, where is this legislation to stop ? High pledges and great expectations will be held out to them, and at the coming election we shall see with what eagerness and avidity candidates will rush in and pledge themselves in favour of a Nine-hours Bill. Can there be any security that we shall stop there ? Why, what security can we have that we shall not next have an Eight-hours Bill? Some operatives came to me the other day and said : " If you don't give up your opposition, we will demand an Eight-hours Bill." " Well," I said, '' you will not stop there ; of course you will demand a Seven-hours Bill.'' Encourage these demands, and what shall we see? We shall see the industry of this country, we shall see the self-reliance and independence of its people, put up to a demoralizing Dutch auction of degrading promises and delusive pledges. I have opposed this Bill in the interests of the working FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. 23 classes. I ask the House to reject this measure as far as it applies to the labour of adalts, because I believe that at the present moment we can render no greater service to the working classes of this country than firmly to check the growing tendency they show to rely upon State inter- vention. If we encourage this tendency, step by step we shall so enervate them, that at length they will come to us like helpless children and ask us to be their guardians, to say what wages they shall receive, what time they shall go to bed, and to prevent them doing a hundred things which they know they ought not to do. I entreat the House to remember this : that it is not by the act of the despot alone that liberty is destroyed. That vigour of national life which is the only guarantee for freedom must inevitably decline if the Government is permitted to envelop the people in a great network of ofi&cialism. I believe the day is not far distant when, if we are not very careful, the labouring classes of this country will find, from bitter experience, that their worst enemy is not the so-called cold-blooded economist, but that they have infi.nitely more to fear from a misguided benevo- lence and a mistaken and meddlesome philanthropy. Colonel E. Akroyd briefly seconded the resolution. Sir Thomas Bazley : In supporting the amendment of my honourable friend, I beg to congratulate him and the House upon the splendid address he has made in advocacy of sound principles of economy and the true interests of philan- thropy. I think he has approached the question from a right and plain point of view. I do not think, sir, that we can establish benevolence by Act of Parliament. We have too many things on our hands to engage in works that are intended, directly or indirectly, to raise the wages, or, as is 24 SPEECHES ON THE said, to improve the condition very exceptional!}^ of labourers- in mills and manufactures. And I can state a little circum- stance which will prove that the object of the promoters of this Bill is not merely for the purpose of relieving the .con- dition of women and children who are said to be very much abused in the employment of the mills. My honourable frien the member for Sheffield stated distinctly, when he addressed the House upon this subject, that he appealed on behalf of the helpless women and children employed in our manu- factures. Well, sir, great strife has arisen between capitalists- on the one hand and the advocates of short time on the other. Last evening my honourable friend the member for Burnley conceived the possibility of some terms or some adjustment taking place, of private arrangements between the opponents of this Bill and its supporters. Negotia- tions were entered into. I have friends in the City of London at the present time who represent the employers' interest, and there are very experienced and respectable workmen in the City of London who represent at this moment what they deem to be the interests of factory ope- ratives. Well, sir, we met to discuss the subject, and found the views entertained by the respective parties to be as wide as the poles asunder. Mr. Mundella : For one hour. (" Order.") Sir Thomas Bazley: It is quite true, sir, that in the controversy of the Short Time Bill the interests of women and children were very strongly urged ; but I have this remarkable fact to state to the .House, that my friends the employers of labour were perfectly willing to concede every reasonable demand, every demand made on behalf of the women and children, that was advanced by the repre- sentatives of the cotton operatives. But the advocates of FAOTOBY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. 25 this Short Time Bill, sir, would not accept that condition : there was something beyond ; and the object beyond was, that adult labour should be regulated under the Short Time Bill which is apparently for women and children. My honourable friend the member for Sheffield states that, generally, short time was adopted — about nine hours — in trades in the country. Me. Mundella : Mainly engineers. SiE Thomas Bazley : Mainly engineers and others. Now, I have made some inquiries into the conduct of business connected with the great iron-works of the country, and I find that by the terms of contracts they have nominally arrived at a nine-hours' system. But, sir, at a price they are willing to work beyond nine hours, or beyond ten hours ; but as the day advances, and time advances beyond nine hours, they require an extra rate of wages, and not unfrequently spend time at the commencement of the week in order that they may obtain by pressure of time the higher wages con- sequent on working later in the evening. If*that is not conclusive proof of the tendency of the times to combina- tion to raise prices of labour, I know not what is. But time is advancing, and I have some additional statements to make ; and I wish to refer particularly to what I think the inaccurate statement made by my honourable friend the member for Sheffield with respect to accidents in our textile manufactures. He stated that there were in the year 1870, 373 deaths in the manufacture of the textile fabrics. Mk. Mundella : All factories. Sir Thomas Bazley : I only understand factories as applied to textile manufactures. We find that statement is singularly inaccurate. In the Times paper it is duly reported in my 26 SPEECHES ON THE honourable friend's speech that there were 373 fatal accidents, and about 18,000 other accidents connected with mills. Mr. Mundella.: I am sure the honourable baronet does not wish to misrepresent me. The paper I read from was of miscellaneous statistics, where all are mixed up together, and I said to the Home Secretary I did not know how to account for them. Sir Thomas Bazley : I can explain the amounts fully. The truth is, they included blast furnaces, engineering works, and every kind of production which is connected with minerals, and not, as my honourable friend said, connected with factories. Why, it is perfectly monstrous to suppose that any such labour requiring manual strength, as for blast furnaces and engineering work, should be mixed up in a debate purely connected with the factory districts of the country. What are the facts ? They are here, sir. In blast furnaces and in minor pursuits there were 13,860 accidents and 308 deaths, making 14,168 accidents in the gross included in that particular Government Eeturn. Well, have these acci- dents anything in the world to do with the employment of women and children? They have nothing to do with the production of such fabrics as occupy the great bulk of such labour in this country. But there is this very important fact connected with the subject. In blast furnaces in particular, so dangerous is the occupation, that the great owners of furnaces and iron-works regularly keep a staff establishment of skilful surgeons to be ready to apply their professional skill in averting the danger from the wounds received in these occupations. Well, then, when we look at the great mass of accidents continually occurring, those in the textile fabrics are nearly as nothing compared with the great bulk. Even in the army we have FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. 27 accidents continually occurring, from the use of arms and from events the men have no control over. I have been surprised to learn that in her Majesty's army in 1871, there were 15,869 accidents from circumstances the men had no control over. I dare say in some instances fingers were caught in the lock while pulling the trigger. There were 112 deaths in the army purely arising out of accidents, and 15,981 total accidents in the army. If we refer to the navy, we find that there were 12,150 accidents, and that the deaths were 603 ; accidents of course being more numerous at sea than on land, and I need not refer to that fact. The total number of accidents in the navy was 12,753. Now, as to our commercial navy, the Board of Trade have no accurate returns of the total number of accidents, but they have a return of 2,546 deaths at sea. I have reason to believe that that is greatly inaccurate, because on our coasts alone nearly 1,000 brave fellows lose their lives in the trade from north to south without getting out to sea at all ; and I believe the fatal accidents exceed 5,000 rather than the 2,546 mentioned in these returns issued by the Board of Trade. Well, that is a very great number, but it consists of fatal accidents alone. Common accidents at sea and among the commercial marine are not even alluded to. I now come to some very important evidence which my honourable friend entirely overlooked. Taking the inquests held by the coroners, I find that the total number of deaths which they had to investigate was 25,898. The accidents producing these deaths were 11,316, but as in all probability these accidents included occurrences in every sphere of life which have been placed on record, I deduct 2,364 as being accidents connected properly with mines, railroads, the streets of London, and what not, which leaves 8,952 acci- 28 . SPEECHES ON THE dents and 14,582 deaths. In mines and collieries the deaths were represented by 991, as reported to the Board of Trade. I am sorry that the accidents in mines, which must have been very numerous, are not all reported. They do not therefore enter into the calculation. On the railroads there were 1,261 accidents, and 404 in addition that were fatal, making a total of 1,665. Now, the streets of London are unfortunately notorious for being the scene of accidents. The common accidents in the streets of London were 2,964, and the deaths in the year which I refer to amounted to 213, making a total of 3,177. I have enumerated 46,104 accidents and 29,111 deaths, and the total under the name of accidents was 75,215. The accidents in connection with the manufacture of textile fabrics were 4,281, out of a general mass of accidents amounting to more than 76,000. The total number of deaths, however, was only 65 against 29,111. The total accidents and deaths in connection with the textile manufactures were 4,346, so that out of 50,000 accidents that were not fatal, 4,281 were connected with the textile manufactures, and out of 29,176 deaths, 65 only were connected with textile manufactures. The total number of accidents and deaths of which we have a record came to 79,561. Then why did not my honourable friend grapple with the great cause of death and injury to the mass of the people, instead of selecting the comparatively few which have taken place, and which I deeply regret, in connection with the textile manu- factures of the country ? So far from textile manufactures being more dangerous, I think I have proved beyond doubt that our extensive con- cerns for the manufacture of textile fabrics are more pro- tective of life than any other class of labour throughout the FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. 29 whole country. If, instead of informing the House, as he did, in the strongest possible terms, that life is unsafe in the great manufacturing concerns of the country, and that children and women require to be protected, my honourable friend had said, " Let us relieve, if possible, the distress of the many, and do not let us direct our attention exclusively to the miseries of the few," he would have done much better. I am sure that this House will not appreciate the distinction which he has drawn, nor do I think that it will tell well with his supporters out of doors. Let me go now for a moment to the domestic employments of this country. We have no return of the accidents which occur in every-day • life, but they are unquestionably very numerous. We have young people and women employed in the textile manufactures as well as in domestic service, but I firmly believe that the accidents and deaths among the persons employed in the textile manufactures are less than among the great mass of domestic servants. Let me call the special attention of the House to that unfortunate being called the maid of all work, or the servant of all work. She has to rise and commence her labours at five o'clock in the morning, and there is no comparison at all between the com- fort enjoyed by these people employed in domestic service, and that enjoyed by those who are engaged in our manufac- tures. These are facts which I think ought not to be over- looked, but they ought to be stated broadly, so that we may be able to see where the greatest social danger exists, and be able to take our stand upon that. Then, again, it is a singular fact that while the great body of artisans in all our large towns are claiming shorter hours of labour for themselves, they do not and will not yield to the solicitations of the small shopkeepers to enable them to 30 SPEECHES ON THE close earlier, so that they may enjoy something like a little rest after a fair day's toil. It is well known that in the large manufacturing towns the shopkeepers are compelled to keep open, especially on Saturday evenings, until ten or eleven o'clock at night. I have myself frequently been appealed to by some of the small shopkeepers, who have requested me to use what little influence I may possess, in order to get an amicable arrangement for closing their places of business within reasonable hours : and the persons who are now asking to have their own hours of labour curtailed are the very persons who insist upon the shopkeepers keeping open, for their convenience, till midnight, frequently trespassing upon the Sunday morning. These are, I think, important considerations, which ought to be urged in the discussion of a question affecting the labour of the country. But I believe that the great body of the people employed in our manufactories are, on the whole, examples to the other clasees of the community. Look at the workers in our mills and manufactories, and compare them with what the same classes of persons were half a century ago. They are singu- larly regular and correct in their conduct, and it is not in the nature of things that they should keep regular time in attend- ing to their business duties without being similarly regular and correct in their general conduct. But I have observed one indication of late among the labouring class, and that is, that influence is continually brought to bear upon them, to induce them to obtain what is called Parliamentary influence, which means increase in their wages. But this House is cer- tainly not the place for raising the wages of labour and regulating them by Act of Parliament, and whatever my honourable friend may say, that is the latent purpose of the Bill which he has introduced into the House. FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. 31 I have a great regard for the sobriety and steadiness of the labouring classes, but I am sorry to have to confess that the shortening of the hours of labour by Act of Parliament, and the increase of wages, have been too frequently rendered available for improper purposes. My honourable friend, in stating the comparative dangers in our manufacturing system to young people and women, did not allude to a lamentable occurrence which took place in Manchester a couple of years ago. After the toil of the day in that great city is commonly done, the working classes go to spend their even- ings in singing and dancing saloons, and indulge in social pleasures. At the time I refer to a cry of fire was raised in one of these places. On the alarm being raised there was a great rush to the doors, and I grieve to say that twenty young women, mere girls, were trampled to death. I beg to call my honourable friend's attention to this fact, and I will ask him why, when he found that after the toils of the day were over they placed themselves in a position of such great danger, he did not appeal to the Legislature in the 'same spirit on behalf of these imfortunate beings, for whose sake he is now introducing this Bill. The question of foreign competition has abeady been well stated by my honourable friend the member for Brighton, but I can venture to say for myself, that within my own recollection we have lost a very important part of our foreign trade. Take the case of Eussia. I recollect when there were very large mercantile houses in the cotton trade, which sent large shipments continually and regularly to Eussia. Eussia has now supplanted us, and the labouring classes there work regularly seventy-two hours a week. The manufactories also work regularly by night as well as by day. I do not desire that such a state of things should exist in this country, or that 32 SPEECHES ON THE women and cliilclren should be employed in that way ; but it is nevertheless a fact, that while in Eassia they work for seventy-two hours a week, our factory operatives are only employed for sixty hours a week. We know what a large portion of the expenditure of our manufactories consists in rent, taxes, interest of money, and other fixed charges. We are, consequently, at a much greater fixed expenditure than our foreign competitors, and at the same time they are com- peting with us on terms equal, if not superior, to our own with respect to mechanical arrangements. This competition on the continent of Europe has only been entered into with vigour during the last few years. Surely this is an impor- tant point which is not undeserving of attention. The manufacturing system of Great Britain has been matured and perfected at great cost, and our machinery is daily be- coming improved and rendered more complete, But our foreign competitors in Germany, Belgium, the United States of America, and France, are very large buyers indeed of our best machines ; commencing at the very point where we have matured our excellence. They will, indeed, be for- midable competitors, and I fear the time is coming when we shall have a competition which, at all events, will prevent the extension of our trade in these countries, and will be productive of great injury to our commercial relations with every part of the world. It is a well-known fact that at the present time the exten- sion of the eotton manufacture has been so large that there is a great lack of employment in America in connection with manufactories at this moment. We have labourers who emigrate from this country to America, and go into the gold- fields, and leave us, in the hope of becoming rapidly rich. But what is the fact connected with these persons ? They FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. 33 are simply going to certain disappointment. While they are leaving their homes and manufactories where the gross time of employment is only sixty hours a week, they go to work for our American rivals for seventy-two hours and more per week. There is very little consistency on the part of the labouring classes in connection with foreign manufactories. I have one word to say with respect to the origin of the trade of this country. The revocation of the Edict of Nantes sent crowds of industrious and intelligent men as emigrants to this country. They taught us the art of manufacture and of productive industry. From that time to the present we have been continually increasing and extending everything connected with manufacturing industry ; but it seems to me that the time is now coming when our artisans will not be permitted by Act of Parliament to get their living, and the wants of our commercial establishments will be inadequately supplied. This will come inevitably upon us by a system of protection which can only lead us on to ruin. AVe have a proposal now that we shall diminish the time of labour in our manufactories to the extent of one-tenth. Instead of working sixty hours a week, as now, it is proposed that the operatives should only work fifty-six hours, or one- tenth less. Let me just refer, for a moment, to the great fact that diminished time by Act of Parliament will inevitably lead to the diminished production of our manufacturing establishments. At the present time we use about 60,000 bags of cotton per week in the cotton trade. If we take one- tenth away, we shall diminish our consumption of cotton by about 6,000 bags a week, or 300,000 a year, the value of which is something like 5,000,000/. sterling. I contend that such a large diminution of consumption can have no other effect than to diminish our trade generally, and lead to very c 34 SPEECHES ON THE great loss to all classes of the community. I find that the value of the material used in the woollen trade is about 30,000,000/. sterling per annum. Would our agricultural friends like to have their custom very materially diminished by Act of Parliament, and be compelled to find, as the con- sequence of a Short Time Bill, that the dealers in wool will not in future require so much of that article as they do now, and that they will consequently receive a considerably less sum in the aggregate for it ? I believe that interference of this kind by Act of Parliament could not be otherwise than most ruinous in its practical effect and in its tendency. Then, again, perhaps I may be allowed to refer to another very important feature connected with the business of the country. The textile manufactures of the country now supply 50 per cent, of the value of our exports. We are exporting to foreign markets 240,000,000/. sterling in value, and this Bill would cut off 24,000,000/. Our exports buy our imports, and are we willing to diminish by 24,000,000/.; per annum our exports, and receive 24,000,000/. per annum less of imports? Are we to receive less corn, less oil, less wine, less sugar, and less of every comfort of life, besides those articles of indulgence in cigars, tobacco, and other things ? If we look to the aggregate value of our exports and imports, we shall find that at the present time they amount to 500,000,000/. sterling, and if we diminish that by one-tenth, it will be seen at a glance that we must lose a very large sum indeed. Then, again, if we look at all the matters connected immediately with the production of manufactured articles, and their effect upon the nation and upon the foreign trade, I am afraid that all who view impartially the state of things which exists at the present moment will see great reason for alarm. FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. 35 I do not think from all I bear that the niannfactures of the country are in a very prosperous state. I am informed, on the best authority, that in Lancashire at the present time some capitalists are paying wages out of capital. That is not a sound principle. It cannot be long continued. Our failures have been rather frequent of late, and it is evident that some- thing is required to stop such a state of circumstances. All this indicates the necessity of approaching very carefully and very cautiously this great question of labour. The question of raising the price of labour by Act of Parliament is a very delicate one, especially at a time when we are struggling hard to maintain our own against foreign competition in every part of the world. We depend upon foreign countries for half of the food which the people of Great Britain consume. If we diminish our means of paying for that foodj the people will be in a state of comparative deprivation. We do not live for ourselves alone, but we depend for our prosperity upon our intercourse with other nations, and if we do anything unnecessarily tcf raise the first or prime cost of labour, we may depend upon it that we shall be compelled to diminish our business to a very great extent indeed. I know the Advantages of freedom of inter- course, and I hope the Legislature will sanction that freedom of intercourse, not only with our own country, but with the whole world. Therefore in tlie interests of the freedom of intercourse throughout the world, in the interest of capital and labour, I trust the Legislature will do nothing which will in any way restrict the industry and commerce of the Empire. I beg, sir, to support the amendment which has been moved by my honourable friend the member for Brighton. 38 MRS. FAWGETT'S LETTER Letter to the Editor of The Times, from Mrs. Fawcett. Sir, Two Bills affecting the industrial position of women — the Mne-hours Bill and the Sliop-honrs' Regulation Bill — are now before the House of Commons. The first of these, which comes on for second reading on Wednesday next, among other provisions, restricts the labour of women in factories to fifty-four hours a week, and forbids the employ- ment of any woman in a factory for more than nine hours and a half in any one day. The second is the Bill intro- duced by Sir John Lubbock to forbid the employmerit of women in retail shops for more than ten hours in any day. Now, it seems to me that these Bills must have one of two effects — either to reduce the hours of labour of both men and women, or else to place a very serious obstacle in the way of the employment of women. If the first of these is the object sought by these Bills, it would have been more frank openly to have avowed it, and to have placed a legis- lative restriction on the labour of men similar to that pro- posed to be imposed upon women. But there can be little doubt that, however generous may be the motives of the promoters of these Bills, their actual operation will be to dis- courage the employment of women in factories and shops. If it is illegal to employ women in a factory more than nine ON THE EMPLOYMENT OF WOMEN. 37 hours a day, or in a shop more than ten hours a day, of course every employer will as far as possible avoid using female labour. In many manufactories it would be abso- lutely impossible to let the women operatives leave their work before the men ; unless, therefore, the hours of labour of both men and women were reduced, women would either not be employed at all, or they would be employed as half- timers on the double shift system. In either of the two latter of these cases women would find themselves placed at an exceptional disadvantage in the labour market. They now compete with men on equal terms in many branches of textile manufacture, and also in retail shops ; if these Bills pass, they will be placed at a cruel disadvantage. It is almost impossible to avoid the conviction that the strength at the back of these Bills in the country — I do not say in the House of Commons — is the old Trade Union spirit to drive women out of certain trades, where their competition is inconvenient. It is true that this cloven foot is dexterously hidden under the drapery of philanthropy and chivalry, but it peeps out from time to time in a manner that cannot be mistaken. In the Eeport by Dr. Bridges and Mr. T. Holmes to the Local Government Board on the health of women, children, and young persons engaged in textile manufactures, in which the most stringent restrictions on the labour of women are advocated, the following passage occurs. After remarking on the energy of the female operatives, the Eeport continues : — " It is well known that with many workmen, especially if they be members of Trades Unions, the consciousness that their fellow- workmen are present and are watching their work tends rather to modify than to intensify their zeal. Animated by the common object of selling their labour dear, 38 MES. FAWCETT'S LETTER tliey are apt to think an exceptionally zealous workman a traitor to the cause of labour. With women the reverse would seem to be the case. Less able to fix their eye upon a distant object, less apt to enroll themselves in a well-drilled organization for which sacrifices are to be made, the ultimate compensation for which themselves and those immediately connected with them may never or not for a long time touch, they are far more keenly sensitive to the motives of approba- tion and vanity, and also to those of immediate tangible reward. It would seem to be as easy to goad women as it would be difficult to goad men into doing the greatest amount of piece-work in a given time. The admiration of their companions and the approbation of the overlooker appear to be at least as powerful inducements as the increase of their wages. A woman who can mind four looms without an assistant has attained a certain position, and is an object of attention." The women here spoken of are evidently weak enough to take a pride in their work, and in their own proficiency and skill. No wonder that such conduct excites the disgust of their male competitors. If the women were a little lazier, they would not be half so objectionable. It is to be remarked that the Eeport already referred to admits that there is no demand on the part of women them- selves for the proposed interference with their hours of labour. In the opening page it is confessed that " among the women especially there is a considera,ble amount of apathy, and possibly in some cases of positive opposition, to the pro- posed changes." It is also to be noted that out of 163 medical men, well acquainted with the factory districts, who replied to the question whether • they considered the present hours of labour injurious to the health of the female opera- tives, 132 answered in the negative, and only 31 in the affirmative. The sanitary objections to factory labour most ON THE EMFLOYMENT OF WOMEN. 39 frctjuently mentioned by the medical witnesses and most con- stantly repeated throughout the Eeport are equally applicable to men and women. It is urged that the health of the operatives is injured by the dust, damp, and bad ventilation of the buildings in which the manufacture is carried on. " Sizing " and " gassing " are frequently referred to as un- healthy occupations, and a dismal list is given of the diseases which are particularly prevalent among the factory workers. Are we then to infer that phthisis, bronchitis, dyspepsia, rheumatism, &c., are injurious to women only, and that the male operatives thrive and are prosperous upon them ? Surely the right way to meet these sanitary objections to factory labour is to endeavour to remove their causes ; to ensure, as far as possible, that none of our workers, whether they be men or women, shall be killed by dust, damp, and foul air ; to make war, in short, on the preventible causes of death and disease. But even granting, for the sake of argument, that the women operatives suffer peculiarly from unhealthy conditions, it is far better for them* that they should so suffer and in the meantime earn an honest and inde- pendent living, than that they should be driven to the dismal alternative of starvation or prostitution. For this is what it really comes to. Every additional obstacle that is put in the way of the honest labour of women tends to swell the number of the thousands who are making a living that is not honest in the streets of our towns and cities. A great deal is said in the Eeport to wdiich I have so often referred about the infant mortality and the physical deterioration arising from the labour of married women ; but as the two Bills to which I wish to draw the attention of your readers make no distinction between the labour of married or unmarried women, I will abstain from all com- 40 MES. FAWCETT'S LETTER. ments on this part of the Keport, and will only say in conclusion that I hope both these measures will receive the strongest opposition in the House of Commons from all who wish for fair play between men and women. Thanking you for the space in the Tiines you have allowed these remarks to occupy, I am, Sir, yours, &c., MILLICENT GAREETT FAWCETT. June 7, LONDON: R. CLAV, SONP, AND TAVLOH, PRINTERS. w^ 'y^: .. mMrf ^ ^ 1 f^i ''■ » M li. ,■ 'lit* ^^'^■^T^ ^/^)S ^^V >- rN!*>-<. _^