Report by

January 1839.

interpretation of the law, that the inspector is bound to prosecute for every offence Ja. Stuart, Esq. against the Act, whether wilful or not, the great facilities which I and the superintendents of my district have universally enjoyed of enforcing the most important provisions of the Act relative to certificates of age, by annulling them on all occasions when we were perfectly satisfied that they were erroneous, and also by the permission given to the superintendents to go all over the factories, would not have been accorded to us. But notwithstanding I have on all occasions insisted on the strict enforcement of the provisions of the Act; and the following specification, of a few of the cases generally alluded to in my quarterly reports, and of the manner in which they were disposed of, will, I hope, satisfactorily show, that at Glasgow, and in my district, offences are not allowed to remain unpunished, and that Lord Ashley's reported interpretation of my return of "no prosecutions," as a statement of "no offences," is altogether erroneous, being in opposition to positive assertions contained in my reports.

Letter to Mr. Buchanan.

Letter from Mr. Buchanan.

The very last case noticed in first report, my "that of one large factory in a country district in Scotland" (see my report 31st December, 1836), appears to me to furnish a good example of the bad consequences likely to result from adherence to the rule which Lord Ashley seems to consider to be absolute, to treat offenders against the Factory Act with as much rigour as midnight robbers or murderers. The case related to a magnificent cotton-factory, that of Stanley, in the neighbourhood of Perth, in Scotland. On the 5th December, 1836, I, for the first time, visited that factory, at which about 1000 workers are generally employed, of whom 150 are under 13 years of age, and above 400 between 13 and 18 years of age. Messrs. Dennistoun, Buchanan, and Co., the owners of this splendid Establishment, have recently brought together a population of two or three thousand persons in a fine healthy rural district, in which there were previously no manufactures, have built a large village of handsome, clean, and comfortable cottages, have erected a church at an expense of above 30007., which has recently been declared by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland to be the parish church. They have permanently endowed the clergyman, and have also built a school and school-house, and given the teacher a salary; but notwithstanding, I found on my first inspection one of the most important provisions of the Factory Act entirely disregarded. Mr. Buchanan, the acting partner, was not at home when I inspected the factory, and had an opportunity of witnessing the healthy appearance of those employed, the cleanness of the apartments, and the very great attention paid to their comforts by ventilation and in other respects. After my inspection I returned to Perth, and immediately wrote a letter in the following terms to Mr. Buchanan.

"Perth, 5th December, 1836.

"SIR,-I was greatly disappointed and surprised, to find this morning, on my inspection of the cotton factory at Stanley, that the children from 11 to 13 years of age, are employed for 12 hours in the day. This is the most flagrant violation of the statute and of its most important provisions which I have met with during my circuit of inspection in England, Ireland, or this country. Your overseer attempted to justify it, by a reference to an indulgence which he said Mr. Horner had granted, but the Act had not come into operation as to children under 13 years of age at the period of Mr. Horner's last inspection; and whatever may have passed between Mr. Horner and you, my communication to you of 4th October, and the regulations sent to you signed by Mr. Horner and all the Inspectors, including myself, which are on the walls of your factory, afforded you ample information, that the law was to be enforced. At any rate you were quite aware, that Mr. Horner had ceased to be Inspector of this district, and that I was on a circuit of Inspection. I am therefore afraid that I have no alternative in a case of such open resistance to the law, but to direct a prosecution for the statutory penalties."

Mr. Buchanan's answer, addressed to me, is in these terms

"Stanley, 8th December, 1836. "SIR, I received yesterday your letter of the 5th, and I regret that our arrangements have been such as to call for your disapprobation.

"The Factory Act was from the first put in strict operation here as regarded all children under 11 years. About the time when the provisions of that Act became applicable to those under 12, we were visited as usual by Mr. Horner, when I fully and candidly represented to him the situation in which we were likely to be placed. I satisfied him that every exertion had been made to obtain additional hands, but without success, that we had substituted grownup persons for children wherever it was possible to do so, that our wages for the younger hands were generally as high as in the country districts around Glasgow, beyond which we could not go. In consideration of these circumstances, and after making a rigid examination into the correctness of my statements, Mr. Horner gave his sanction to working children above 11 for 12 hours daily, on condition of our enforcing their regular attendance at school.

He afterwards visited the works when this system had been about nine months in operation, and all the arrangements connected with it were again brought under their notice.

"With regard to your circular of 4th October, it was in consequence of the intimation which it contained that you were speedily to visit the factories in this district, that I delayed putting your instructions in force. Our case had hitherto been considered a peculiar one, that of a very large work recently established in a remote part of the country, where the manufacture was previously I may say unknown, and I wished on this ground to ask of you any indulgence in carrying out the provisions of the Act which you might feel it consistent with your duty to grant.

"I now beg leave to say, that I consider myself by no means chargeable with open resistance to the law. After a full explanation, I obtained from your predecessor, being then the only competent authority, an indulgent interpretation of the law, and I feel myself perfectly justified in having acted on it hitherto. I of course understand that this indulgence is withdrawn by you, and shall endeavour to make the new arrangements which are necessary as soon as possible.

"It only remains to say, that there is every wish on the part of the proprietors of Stanley, to comply, not only with the spirit, but with the letter of the Factory Act, as far as may be practicable. We have incurred an immense expense, with a view to promote the moral improvement and physical comfort of the people in our employment, far greater, I can safely assert, than any other factory proprietors in this country. Of this you may easily satisfy yourself, and it is surely a natural conclusion, that we would not willingly oppress them by excessive labour. But a new establishment in a country district has difficulties almost insuperable to contend with, and the Factory Act confers powers which, if rigidly exercised, may render the abandonment of such an establishment as this the least of two evils in a pecuniary point of view, independent of the sacrifice of feeling which must certainly be incurred in conducting it. "I am, &c."

I wrote to Mr. Buchanan, on the following day, 9th December, from Edinburgh, in these terms:

Report by
Ja. Stuart, Esq.

January 1839.

"SIR,-I am favoured with your letter of yesterday, from which I understand that you Letter to Mr. Buare even now employing the children between 11 and 13 years of age, for twelve hours in the chanan. day. I beg you to write me in course, whether the fact be that you are continuing to employ them for that period, or only for 48 hours per week, or nine hours in the day. If you are continuing to work them for any time above nine hours in the day, it will be my indispensable duty immediately to return to Perth, and to institute a prosecution for the whole penalties."

Mr. Buchanan, on the 11th of December, sent me the following satisfactory letter:

"Sir, I have to acknowledge your letter of the 9th, which reached me only this morn- Letter from Mr. Buing. On returning to Stanley at a late hour on Tuesday last I learned what had passed chanan. between you and the manager on the previous day. On Wednesday I commenced making the necessary arrangements for limiting the employment of all children under 13 years of age to 48 hours per week, and 9 hours per day. Although every exertion was used, these arrangements could not be completed sooner than Friday, being the day after I last wrote you. Yesterday being Saturday, none of the people work more than nine hours. To-morrow morning all the children under 13 will begin to work by relays, agreeably to your printed instructions and the provisions of the Act. I trust that this statement will be considered satisfactory. I am, &c."

Since the period of this correspondence the greatest attention has been paid at the factory of Stanley to the observance of all the provisions of the Act. Neither I nor the superintendent has ever discovered any instance of deviation from the law on the part of the factory occupiers. Two or three cases have occurred of children having obtained certificates of being 13 years of age, to which we saw reasons to make objections, which were immediately sustained. Instead of the good understanding which has uniformly prevailed from the period of this correspondence down to the present time, I am inclined to think that had I, in this case, brought a prosecution for what certainly was a violation of a most important provision of the Act, such an estrangement would, in all probability, have taken place between the factory-occupiers and those employed to enforce the Act, as would have led to the inspector and superintendent's being deprived of the great facilities in the discharge of their duties, which the factory-occupiers. universally allow to them. I have followed the same course on several occasions, and am thoroughly persuaded that by doing so I have better promoted the substantial enforcement of the provisions of the Act than by having recourse to prosecutions. Even on my first inspection, no objection was, throughout my district, made to my cancelling certificates of age wherever I thought them erroneous. This happened in several cases, especially at the cotton-factory of Messrs. John Orr, jun. and Co., at Paisley, on 31st October, 1836, and at Mr. Boyack's flax-factory, at Dundee, on the 25th of November, 1836. Above 30 young persons were dismissed, at my instance, in the year 1837. Since that period no instance has

Report by

-

January 1839.

occurred of any factory-occupier not giving effect to objections made, on every Ja. Stuart, Esq. circuit of the inspector or superintendents, to children or young persons remaining at work in factories, who had obtained certificates of age, but who seemed to us to be palpably under the ages certified. Children in these circumstances were dismissed at Mr. William Campbell's cotton-factory, at Glasgow, on the 13th of March, 1837, and at Messrs. Wood and Co.'s cotton-factory, at Glasgow, on the same day.

In Glasgow especially, where by far the greatest number of workers in my district are employed, effect has uniformly been given to objections, decidedly made by the inspector or superintendents, to certificates of age.

In the factory of Messrs. James Dunlop and Son, at Glasgow, which I inspected on the 16th of March, 1838, I objected to four young persons, certified to be 13 years of age, whose names are Margaret Johnstone, Catharine Neilson, Mary Rich, and Thomas Watson. They did not seem to me to have attained the age certified, and were all dismissed before I left the factory. Perhaps they were afterwards employed, but only for 8 hours a-day. And on the 27th of March, 1838, Mary Dougall was, on the same ground, dismissed from the Blantyre cotton-factory, belonging to Messrs. Henry Monteith and Co. Two cases of improper certificates, granted at Glasgow, by the medical practitioner appointed to give certificates, at the factory of Messrs. F. Wood and Co., were of such a description, that, on my inspection on the 15th of August, 1838, I was obliged to intimate that I would not in future pay any attention to his certificates. No objection was made to my exercise of this power on this and other occasions, and to my recommendations of other medical gentlemen to fill their places.

On my last inspection, several cases of certificates granted before the young persons attained the age of 13 occurred, and in none of them were the factory occupiers to blame, but frequently the spinners, who were aware of the real age.

The spinner who is to employ the piecer or young person is, as already mentioned, bound to see that the piecer obtains a certificate of age before being employed; and he is liable in terms of the Act, and his agreement with his employer, in case he, being aware of the age of the piecer, obtains from the surgeon a certificate stating that the piecer is older than he knows to be true. When I found it possible to ascertain that any spinner had been guilty of this offence, I have therefore uniformly notified to the factory-occupier my intention to prosecute the factory-occupier in the first instance, provided he did not immediately dismiss the spinner from his employment. The dismissal of a spinner is generally a far more efficacious-it is always a more prompt-punishment than the infliction of a fine or pecuniary penalty; which, too, in most cases, could not be recovered without imprisonment. My applications for the dismission of spinners have in every case but one-that of Messrs. Stewart and Niven, specified in my Report of the 31st of March, 1837, been acceded to; and no instance has occurred of a repetition of the offence in any factory where it has occasioned dismission, nor in country situations in the neighbourhood of any factory, where it was attended with consequences so greatly dreaded.

Very soon after my appointment I became convinced of the necessity of proceeding against the spinners in this way. The following specific instances of dismissions of spinners have occurred on my first and last inspections. On the 14th of March, 1837, Messrs. Jackson and M'Laurin, at my instance, dismissed one of their spinning-masters from their cotton-factory at Glasgow, for allowing three girls to be employed whom he knew to be under 13, and who were at the same time dismissed.

On the 15th of March, 1837, James Maclauchlane, a spinner, was dismissed by Messrs. Houstoun and Co. from their factory at Johnstone, near Glasgow, for employing Isabella Maclauchlane, whom he knew to be under the age certified. And, on the following day, 16th March, 1837, Alexander Moonie, a spinner in the Hag Factory, near Johnstone, also belonging to Messrs. Houstoun and Co., who had undertaken to be responsible that his piecer, under 13 years old, should regularly attend school, and produce certificates of the statutory attendance, was dismissed for having employed that piecer whom he knew not to have attended school, as agreed to. This happened on the 16th of March, as already mentioned; and, on the 21st of June following, when on my circuit at Westport, in the west of Ireland, I received from Moonie the following letter:

Johnstone, 7th June, 1837. "SIR,-You will recollect that when you visited the factories here, I, Alexander Moonie, was dismissed from Messrs. George Houstoun and Company's mill at Hag, because my

Report by Ja. Stuart, Esq.

January 1839.

piecer had been allowed by me to continue at work, although she had not attended the school regularly. I have now been out of employment for about three months, and have a wife and three little children, who are almost starving for want. Having applied to Messrs. Houstoun, to take me back, they are sorry for me, and would do so, providing I got liberty from you to be employed again by them. If you grant this request, I will be ever thankful for you, and Letter from Alex. will endeavour, as far as possible, to give no reason for either you or my employers to find Moonie. fault in future. Your most obedient servant,

66

"ALEXANDER MOONIE."

"We, the undersigned, beg to assure Mr. Stuart that Alexander Moonie is in very poor circumstances. We understand also that he is a sober, steady man, which makes us feel the more for him. The present depression in trade makes it impossible for him to find employment elsewhere.

(Signed) "H. MACDOWALL, J.P. R. MONTGOMERY, J.P."

My answer to this letter was in the following terms:

66

66

Westport, 21st June, 1838.

SIR,-Your letter of the 7th inst. has been forwarded to me here, on my circuit of the Letter to Alexander factories in Ireland. I am glad that I can now comply with your request by no longer Moonie. withholding my consent to your being again employed in the factory of Messrs. Houstoun. It was absolutely necessary for me to take seme step in consequence of the failure to attend to the factory regulations in question; and it was much more fair that Messrs. Houstoun should punish you, who were really to blame, than be themselves fined on account of your fault. Had I authorised you to be restored on your first application, immediately after your dismissal, you must be very sensible that the punishment inflicted on you would not have operated as an example to the other workers, or persons intrusted with a charge; but I hope, after the interval of three months, that my object will be attained without subjecting you to further inconvenience. I therefore hope that Messrs. Houston and Co. will again employ you. "I am, &c.'

Not many days after Moonie's dismissal, Thomas Ellis and Robert Mortimer, spinners in Mr. Gilchrist's factory, at Denny, near Stirling, were, on my inspecting it, on the 25th March, 1837, dismissed for employing piecers contrary to the pro

visions of the Act.

Several dismissals of spinners took place on my last inspection, and more recently on reports made to me by Mr. Walker, the superintendent at Glasgow, from the factories of Messrs. Bartholomew and Co. and Messrs. Bogle and Co., at Glasgow, and of Mr. Dunn, at Duntocher, in Dumbartonshire, &c. James Stevenson, one of the spinners dismissed from the factory of Messrs. Bartholomew and Co., who had employed, for 12 hours a-day, a piecer knowing him to be younger than 13, was at my instance restored, on its being represented to me that, owing to particular circumstances, he was subjected to great privations, from being out of work for above five weeks after the 7th of August last.

On this inspection, I found among the new workers at the woollen factory of Mr. John Paton, at Alloa, two girls waiting for certificates of age, and working twelve hours a day, who admitted that although between 12 and 13 years of age, they had not yet completed their thirteenth year. I had on previous occasions every reason to believe, that at this factory the provisions of the act were duly observed; and therefore, instead of adopting legal measures against Mr. Paton, who was from home, I left a written communication for him, stating that it would be necessary for me to institute a prosecution, unless he could satisfactorily explain how the obvious irregularity of employing the two girls alluded to for twelve hours a day had happened; and that I was then on my way to Comrie, about nine miles from Alloa, where I intended to remain until the following morning. Mr. Paton followed me to Comrie early next day, and having declared, that it was his belief that the two girls had attained their thirteenth year, and that it had been so reported to him, he gave me the following memorandum, which I considered to be perfectly satisfactory: Comrie, 21 August, 1838.-Euphemia Miller and Helen Snaddon shall not again be employed, until they are thirteen by their own account, and until they have medical certificates of age.

(Signed)

JOHN PATON.

In such cases as this, my impression is, that had I followed a different course and prosecuted, I should have been converting the act into an instrument for the unnecessary oppression or annoyance of the manufacturer. Mr. Paton had the trouble and expense of a journey of eighteen miles, which was, in my opinion, quite as likely to operate as a warning to prevent his again being guilty of inattention to any provision of the Act, as if he had been publicly exhibited before a court of justice as the violator of an Act of Parliament.

The last case which has occurred is that of John Watson, a spinner at the cottonfactory of Duntocher, belonging to Mr. Dunn, of Duntocher, the proprietor of four cotton-factories in the neighbourhood of each other in Dumbartonshire. Watson

Report by Ja. Stuart, Esq.

January 1839.

Letter from Mr.

was, on the 23rd of November last, found by Mr. Walker, the superintendent of factories at Glasgow, to be employing his son as a piecer, contrary to the provisions of the Act. Mr. Dunn on the following day, 24th of November, wrote Mr. Walker a letter in the following terms, which Mr. Walker immediately forwarded

to me :

"DEAR SIR,-I regret to learn that, on visiting one of my factories at Duntocher Dunn to Mr.Walker yesterday (the Duntocher Mill), you ascertained that a spinner of the name of John Watson has for some days past been employing his son as a piecer (a boy under 13 years of age), for 12 hours a-day, and without enforcing his attendance at school. I have in consequence dismissed Watson, not only because the charges proved against him are contrary to the provisions of the Factory Act and my own positive instructions, but also with the view of deterring the other spinners in my service from attempting any similar evasion of the Factory Act for the time to come. "I remain, &c."

Letter to Mr. Dunn.

Letter from Mr.

In reply to Mr. Dunn's letter to Mr. Walker, I wrote to Mr. Dunn in these terms:

"London, Nov. 26th, 1838. "DEAR SIR,-Mr. Walker, superintendent of factories at Glasgow, has sent me your letter of the 24th inst. to him, and has informed me of what has passed after he saw you. I, of course, approve, understanding not only that John Watson has been permanently dismissed from your factories, but that his son has been dismissed; or, having procured a certificate of being nine years old, is employed now only for 48 hours in the week, regularly producing satisfactory certificates of school attendance. I am not sure whether in such a case as this my conduct will be approved of in not ordering a prosecution for the penalty incurred; but I intend after the notice which was last Session taken in the House of Commons of there being no prosecutions in my district, to state, in my Report, my mode of proceeding in my district more in detail than formerly, that I may get definitive instructions fom the highest authority, whether I am to consider myself bound to prosecute in every case of violation of the Act, or to exercise a sound discretion in enforcing the Act in the way which appears to me the best calculated to attain the end.

"I know well your anxiety to have the provisions of the Act fairly put in execution, but I have told you, as well as your overseers at the factories more than once, that they were not sufficiently vigilant in looking after the spinners, and I am not therefore surprised at what has happened. I have now instructed Mr. Walker to visit your factories frequently, and to make me acquainted with the first case of inattention to the provisions of the Act which he may discover. I hope you will let your overseers know this, and my determination, should such a case occur, to try whether its repetition is likely to be more effectually preserved in future, by having recourse to a public prosecution, than by the adoption of the step now resorted to. "I am, &c."

Having received no answer to that part of this letter which required that John Dunn to Mr.Walker. Watson should be dismissed permanently, I wrote to Mr. Walker to remind Mr. Dunn of it, and that a prosecution must take place unless the dismission was to be permanent; and I subsequently, on the 7th of December, received from Mr. Walker, a letter from Mr. Dunn to him in these terms:

"Glasgow, 5th December, 1838.

“ DEAR SIR.—I am in receipt of your note of this morning, and had previously a very polite and friendly letter from Mr. Stuart, dated the 26th ult. to the same effect, which I regret that important business, requiring my absence from Glasgow, prevented me from answering.

"In reference to these communications I now beg to say, that immediately after your recent visit, John Watson and his son were both discharged from my employment; and that he made application on Monday last to be again taken in, when he was distinctly and peremp torily told, that both he and his son were permanently discharged, and could on no account be employed by me in any of my factories after what had taken place.

"I feel much indebted to Mr. Stuart for the very handsome manner in which he has acted in reference to this unpleasant matter, and beg to assure you, that nothing shall be wanting on my part to enforce the regulations of the Act amongst my people, and to prevent any further occasion of trouble to you in your future visits.

"I remain, &c."

I have now by reference to all my reports, and by specifying a sufficient number of cases, shown, I hope, that, in point of fact, there were no grounds for the assertion which Lord Ashley is reported to have founded on my return. It is possible that his lordship may have been misled by James M'Nish, for that witness, notwithstanding the existence of the cases now referred to, at Glasgow and Report of Commit- in all parts of my district, has not only thought fit to affirm that the "masters have tee, p. 67, question not ventured to attempt to dismiss a spinner for employing children under age,' Report of Commit- but that "he has not known a child having obtained a certificate, or having been in tee, p. 66, question the employment of a spinner to be discharged by the master in consequence of its

1366.

1330.

being too young." Now, the remarkable fact is, that the only spinners as to whom I possess distinct and positive information of their having employed, or having