Motion in House of Commons for leave to communicate that Report, withdrawn Report, notwithstanding, circulated and sold. Examination by Committee of Mr. Todd and of three cotton-spinners, and Mr. Alison 1. Mr. Todd 2. Angus Campbell 3. James M'Nish 4. John M'Caffer 5. Mr. Alison Proof taken by the Inspector of Factories, showing universal observance of the Act, 1. Depositions of two of the witnesses examined by Combination Committee, but not as to the Factory Act, viz:— 2. Of witnesses examined by Combination Committee as to Factory Act, and re-examined in the factories where they were employed, and of other persons working in the same factories, or connected with them 5. Factories in country situations, or in small towns, in the south of Scotland Evidence of James M'Nish, a witness examined by Combination Committee, and re-examined 30 ib. 31 ib. ib. ib. 32 ib. ib. ib. 33 34 ib. 36 41 42 43 46 50 51 53 55 ib. 56 57 58 D Cases of cancelling certificates of age Cases of dismissals of spinners Alexander Moonie John Watson Case of James M'Nish, jun., as to certificates of age Correspondence with James M'Nish, sen. His complaints groundless. Statements of Mr. Alison:-1. as to ten hours bill 2. As to decrease of chances of life at Glasgow.-Health of workers in factories Conclusion General result of inspection Statements relative to the factories of Catrine and Deanston Cause of accident to a boy who lost a leg at a factory at Montrose 27 REPORT by James Stuart, Esq. for the Half Year, ending MY LORD, London, January, 1839. Having been prevented by indisposition, as mentioned in my letter of 12th October last, from making out a Report of my Inspection of Factories for the quarter ending the 30th September, I now have the honour to submit my report for the half-year, from 1st July to 31st December, 1838. Circumstances, which will be explained in my Report, render it necessary for me to submit for your Lordship's perusal a longer and more particular account of the state of the factories in Scotland, and especially at Glasgow, and generally of the result of my inspection of the factories in my district on this than on former occasions. 66 Your Lordship is aware that on 13th February, 1838, the House of Commons appointed a Select Committee to inquire into the operation of the Act 6 George IV. c. 129, and generally into the constitution, proceedings, and extent of any Trades Unions, or combinations of workmen, or employers of workmen, in the United Kingdom; and to report their observations thereon to the House." Mr. Daniel O'Connell, the Honourable Member for Dublin, was one of the original members of this committee. Lord Ashley was on the 20th of March added to their number. A statement having reached me that evidence on the non-observance of the Factory Act had been elicited by that committee, and that Lord Ashley was aware of it, I applied to the Right Honourable Sir Henry Parnell, Bart., their chairman, who, on the 7th of May last, wrote to me that he had spoken on the subject to Lord Ashley, and that his Lordship agreed with him that no such evidence had been given. On the 20th of July I was enabled accidentally to obtain possession of the first Report of this Committee; I found, on perusing it, that the committee had extended their inquiry to the operation of the Factory Regulation Act in Scotland, and especially at Glasgow, and that they had procured from four witnesses residing in that city, in answer to interrogatories put to them, a great deal of information, establishing, according to the statements or evidence of these witnesses, that the provisions of the Factory Act neither were nor could be enforced at Glasgow nor anywhere in Scotland. Report by January 1839. ment, p. 5709. On the 21st of July, the day after I got the Report, Mr. Labouchere, who, in consequence, I believe, of Sir Henry Parnell's illness, had been appointed chairman of that committee, and who had made a motion in the House of Commons for leave to communicate the report to such persons as he might deem necessary, withdrew Mirror of Parliathat motion on the ground suggested by the Right Honourable the Speaker, in which the Right Honourable Sir Robert Peel, Bart., expressed his concurrence, that the publication of ex parte evidence is a proceeding which requires the utmost caution before it is resorted to. Notwithstanding this circumstance, the Report in question has not only been distributed in the usual way among the members of the House of Commons, and in all other quarters to which papers or documents, printed by order of the House, are usually sent, but has also been exposed to sale, at the price of three shillings and fourpence, from the 20th of July to the present day, at the Parliamentary Paper Office in Abingdon-street. Your Lordship will find, on referring to this report, that, of the fifteen witnesses whose examinations it contains, seven of them (exclusive of Mr. Gemmill, a lawagent) reside at or in the immediate neighbourhood of Glasgow, the chief seat of manufactures, and almost altogether of the cotton-manufacture, in my district: viz., Messrs. John Houldsworth, Charles Todd, and Patrick M'Naught, master cotton-spinners at Glasgow; Angus Campbell, James M'Nish, and John M'Caffer, all described in the report cotton-spinners in Glasgow; and Archibald Alison, Esq., sheriff-depute of Lanarkshire. The three master cotton-spinners were the first witnesses examined by the committee. No question whatever, relative to the operation of the Factory Act, was E Report by January 1839. put to Mr. Houldsworth, nor to Mr. M'Naught. Two questions, and two only, were put to Mr. Todd. He stated, in answer to the first, that he did not take any children into his Factory below the highest ages allowed by the Act, thirteen years, and to the second question to him, which was put by Lord Ashley, Do you take none under thirteen?" he answered, "None." Not another question was asked of him. The four witnesses afterwards examined, viz., Angus Campbell, James M‘Nish, John M'Caffer, and Mr. Alison, concurred in stating that the provisions of the Factory Act were violated at Glasgow, by the employment, for more than nine hours a-day, of young persons as piecers under the legal age of thirteen; and James M'Nish declared that children above that age are too large, and the machinery not adapted to them; that the masters do not interfere as to the age of the children employed; and that the masters protect themselves from penalties by placing the operatives as a screen between them and the law. The committee having elicited this evidence, Lord Ashley and Mr. O'Connell are reported to have referred to it as authentic and worthy of credit in the debate on the Factory Question in the House of Commons on the 20th of July; and the Mirror of Parlia- Honourable Member for Dublin is said to have observed, that the witnesses ment, p. 5674. Campbell and M'Nish were "remarkably well educated, clear, and distinct-minded On the 2nd of August Sir Henry Parnell took the trouble to let me know by letter, that from a more recent conversation with Lord Ashley, he found that he had, on the 7th of May, conveyed to me an erroneous interpretation of Lord Ashley's opinion, whether evidence, such as I had referred to in my application to Sir Henry, had been given before the Committee; and that he also found, that in order to have avoided any mistake, he should have looked over all the answers to the questions that had been put, which he expressed his regret at not having done. Under these circumstances I conceived it indispensable to do a great deal more in the next Report I was to have the honour to submit to your Lordship than merely, as usual, to specify the factories I had visited, and the result of my inspection. The accuracy of the seven Quarterly Reports, which, as Inspector of Factories, I had, in terms of the Act and of your instructions, made to your Lordship, had been called in question, and apparently not on light grounds, on the authority of evidence obtained by a Committee of the House of Commons, and referred to in the House. It is stated in my reports that the provisions of the Factory Act are really and substantially observed in the factories at Glasgow and throughout Scotland; but the evidence obtained by the Committee, if it be correct, establishes that the provisions of that Act, so far as respects the employment of children under thirteen years of age, neither are nor can be observed. It therefore appeared to be due to myself, and far more to the factory occupiers of Glasgow and of Scotland generally, to adopt, without delay, efficient measures for testing the accuracy of my previous reports to your Lordship, and for ascertaining whether the evidence obtained by the Committee might be relied upon, or was, in its most important parts, unfounded and false. I have, with this view, during the half-year ending the 31st December, 1838, examined on oath, which the Act authorizes me to do, individuals concerned or employed in the factories all over Scotland, as occupiers, overseers, spinningmasters, clerks, spinners, medical practitioners granting certificates of age, or teachers. At Glasgow I examined witnesses in every one of the factories belonging to different occupiers in that city, with a single trifling and altogether unimportant exception. The depositions were all read over by the witnesses, and subsequently subscribed by them in every instance excepting two or three, where they could not write. I completed the proof at Glasgow, on the 8th of October last; having examined in all twenty-seven occupiers of factories, 110 overseers or managers, eleven spinning-masters, ten clerks, seven spinners or slubbers, one piecer, twelve of the medical practitioners, and eight of the teachers of schools for the factories. The whole proof consists of 186 depositions, and, with the exception of a considerable part of it, hereafter inserted in this Report, will be found in the Appendix, No. 1. I proceed in the first place to submit for your Lordship's perusal so much of the declarations of the witnesses examined in respect to violations of the Factory Act by the Committee for inquiring into combinations of workmen, as may suffice, to show that I have given a fair representation of their import. 1.-Declarations before the Committee on Combinations. [The whole of Mr. Todd's evidence before the Committee has already been inserted.] Report by January 1839. Angus Campbell, cotton-spinner, was the second of those witnesses examined Angus Campbell, by the Committee. Report of Committee, p. 50. “Mr. O'Connell.-Is it your opinion that the law is honestly worked out by not taking in children uner nine; or do you think there is any fraud?-I must say distinctly that the operative cotton-spinner is necessitated to overlook the law, in order to keep his machine moving, by taking young children in below thirteen, for twelve hours a-day, and below nine for eight hours a-day." "Lord Ashley.-To your knowledge, the law is set at defiance ?-It was a matter of necessity the mills would stand still if such were not the practice." "Mr. O'Connell.-Do you mean to say that it is impracticable to adhere to the law in that respect?—As far as my personal experience goes, I mean to say, and I have a good deal of experience in the matter, having taken a very warm interest in that very question, that it is altogether impracticable to carry out the spirit of the present law as it now stands." James M‘Nish, formerly cotton-spinner, now umbrella-repairer in Glasgow. “Mr. O'Connell.-Were you rightly understood to have said that the law is violated with respect to the age of the piecers, and that they are brought in younger than the law allows? -Yes, the law is violated. "And generally violated?—Yes, and our employers are throwing all the responsibility of that violation of the law upon the operative. The operative is obliged to violate it, or allow his machinery to stand." "Mr. Wakley.-In what way is that object accomplished by the masters?—I cannot tell. They have put up placards through the factories that they will not be accountable for the spinners employing piecers under a certain age; and we have instances of spinners having been summoned before the justices of the peace, and fined for employing children under the age-not the employer of the factory, but the spinner." "Lord Ashley-What rule do they lay down to the spinners for the employment of children? Do they not tell them that they must have children in at all hazards?—Yes, or drop their work." "And yet those spinners are accountable before the magistrates for employing children under the proper age?—Yes." "Mr. O'Connell.-In the factories you are acquainted with, it is the spinner that engages the piecers?—Yes, to a great extent it is." "Is it that they have not a sufficient number of children of the legal age?-Just so, they have not a sufficient number." "And therefore they are obliged to take them under the age prescribed by law?-Yes, and at the age prescribed by law they are too large for that department of the work." "Are the committee to understand that, if no children were employed but children of the legal age, the work would stand still?-To a great extent it would undoubtedly. 66 By the legal age' in the last question, is meant the legal age of admission, the age of nine?—I was not aware that nine was the legal age of admission.' 66 'Are children taken under the age of nine?—No, I cannot say that there are any under the age of nine." "Then the violation of the law is this, that you work them more than eight hours between the ages of nine and thirteen ?—Yes." James M'Nish. Report of Committee, pp. 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69. "Lord Granville Somerset.-You have stated that the masters force you to employ those Report of Commitchildren; in what way do they force you ?-They will not allow us to proceed in our labour tee, p. 65. without our full complement of piecers." "Could you proceed, if they would allow you, without your full complement of piecers?— No, I believe it would not be beneficial to ourselves to proceed without our full complement of piecers." "Then where is the compulsion on the part of the masters?—They do not allow the spinner to work without his full complement of piecers." "But you say the spinner would not work without his full complement of piecers, supposing the master did not interfere?-If the master would not interfere, I have no doubt that there are avaricious spinners, that would endeavour to make the best work they could without some of the piecers. "Because by that means they would have less to pay?—Yes. "Could he go on with his work with a less number of piecers, and produce good twist?— In my opinion he could not." 66 Mr. O'Connell.-So that there are no more piecers employed than are, in the ordinary sense, necessary for the business?—No more than are necessary.' 66 Have you children old enough to be piecers?—I have one a piecer." "The operatives employ their own children as piecers ?-Yes." "Do you know at what age the parents of the piecers bring them into the mill?—I can I have seen them below the age in the factory." only speak in general terms as to that. I have seen them below the |