Upload
lila-williams
View
17
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Module 2582: Document Studies. Factory Reform. Need for Reform. Parliamentary enquiry of 1832 revealed terrible state of affairs Men, women and children working long hours in poor conditions Children were particularly badly treated. Evangelists. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Module 2582: Document Studies
Factory Reform
Need for Reform
Parliamentary enquiry of 1832 revealed terrible state of affairs
Men, women and children working long hours in poor conditions
Children were particularly badly treated
Pressures for Reform
Evangelists Politics
Medical groups
Men like Lord Ashley
Land owners feared loss of power to industrialists
Men like Dr James Kay
Legislation before 1833
1802 Robert Peel (senior) introduced Act for Preservation of Health and Morals of Apprentices
Limited working day for children to 12 hours Children to receive religious instruction &
other education JPs given power to appoint inspectors
Legislation before 1833
1802 Act was largely ignored – no means of enforcement
1815 Royal Commission reported on factory conditions
Peel senior introduced 1819 Act Act aimed at restricting hours worked by
young Again no inspectorate
Factory Act, 1831
Introduced by Sir John Hobhouse Extended work restrictions to 17 & 18 year
olds Difficult to enforce Failure spurred work of Michael Sadler Headed select committee in 1832 Foundation of 10 Hour movement
Factory Act, 1833
Sadler lost his seat after 1832 Replaced by Lord Ashley Whigs established Royal Commission –
supporters of reform feared it would be biased Hostile reception for Commissioners but
reported favourably Chadwick argued 14 year olds capable of
working long days
Terms of the Act
Largely based on the findings of the Royal Commission
Children 9-14 restricted to 8 hour day + 2 hours compulsory education
15-18 restricted to 12 hour day 4 Inspectors appointed Act failed to introduce maximum 10 hour day
for children despite strong level of support
Why had developments been opposed?
Main opponents were mill owners concerned about impact of any restrictions on output
Argued that reduction in working day would hit wages of most needy
Whig newspapers like the Leeds Mercury & Manchester Guardian opposed reform
Many Whigs were firm believers in laissez-faire
Factory legislation 1841-53
Peel succeeded to office against background of economic slump & social disorder
1843 Graham proposed factory bill Reduction for u-13s to 6½ hours per day Also proposed 3 hours a day compulsory
education – this opposed by Dissenters Following spring Ashley proposed 10 Hour
amendment- defeated
1844 Act
Laid down provisions for safety at work Injured workers to receive compensation Important as it marks beginning of govt
interference between bosses & workers Act widened the scope of govt intervention to
adult male workers 10 Hour working day NOT implemented
Peel & Factory Reform
Main reason for defeat of the 10 Hour amendment was opposition from Peel
Peel unwilling to alienate support from industrialists
Corn Law debate sidelined issue of fixed working day
Ashley replaced by John Fielden as leader
1847 Factory Act
On return to power Whigs passed the 10 hour Bill After May 1st 1848 working week for women &
children under 18 limited to 58 hours Many bosses ignored legislation or introduced shift
system to get round it 1850 Grey introduced bill banning relay system and
restricting work to 60 hours a week 1853 Factory Act – fixed hours for children
Why was development so slow?
Laissez-faire was major factor Manufacturers resentful of government
interference Practical problems of proving ages Parents worked with bosses to break law Not enough inspectors