Chapter XLVIII: Section III (1)

GOVERNMENT REGULATION OF WAGES, CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT, AND PUBLIC HEALTH

1. An Act against Truck, 1701--2. A Wages Assessment at a
Warwickshire Quarter Sessions, 1738--3. Spitalfields Weavers Act,
1773--4. A Middlesex Wages Assessment under the Spitalfields Act,
1773--5. Agricultural Labourers' Proposals for a Sliding Scale of
Wages, 1795--6. Debates on Whitbread's Minimum Wage Bill, 1795-6--7.
Arbitration Act for the Cotton Industry, 1800--8. Amendment of the
Arbitration Act, 1804--9. The First Factory Act, 1802--9A. Minutes of
Committee on Children in Factories--10. Calico Printers' Petition for
Regulation, 1804--11. Report on Calico Printers' Petition, 1806--12.
Cotton Weavers' Petition against the Repeal of 5 Elizabeth c. 4,
1813--13. Debates on the Regulation of Apprentices, 1813-1814--14.
Resolutions of the Watchmakers on Apprenticeship, 1817--15. Report of
Committee on the Ribbon Weavers, 1818--16. The Cotton Factory Act of
1819--17. Oastler's First Letter on Yorkshire Slavery, 1830--18.
Factory Act, 1833--19. Proposals for a Wages Board for Hand-loom
Weavers, 1834--20. Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1842--21. Debate on
Factory Legislation, 1844--22. Factory Act, 1844--23. Recommendations
of the Commission on the Health of Towns, 1845.

The eighteenth century was nearly a blank period in the history of direct regulation of industrial conditions by the State. There was no systematic intervention on the scale of Tudor or Victorian times; and political opinion hardened against the principle and destroyed the machinery which had been inherited from the sixteenth century. Such machinery, for the regulation of wages, was still occasionally used in the early part of the eighteenth century, as is shown by occasional examples of wages assessments at Quarter Sessions (No. 2). Acts were passed for individual trades forbidding the practice of paying wages in truck (No. 1). Local pressure even obtained a special Act providing for the regulation of London silk-weavers' wages (No. 3, No. 4). This Spitalfields Act was used as a precedent for the proposals to extend the policy of regulation, which began to fill the Journals of the House of Commons during the period when the new machinery and methods and the French wars dislocated employment and wages. Examples are given of petitions asking that wages should be regulated and that the limitation of apprentices should be enforced under the statute 5 Elizabeth c. 4, to which attention had been called (Nos. 10, 11, 12 and 14). Independent attempts were made to set up a minimum wage, directly and through wages-boards (Nos. 5, 6 and 19). All these applications ended in complete failure. Parliament provided a system of arbitration for the cotton industry (Nos. 7 and 8), but repealed both the wages and apprenticeship clauses of the Elizabethan Act. Contemporary opinion in Parliament relied on the working of free bargaining and economic forces (Debates on Whitbread's Bill and on Apprenticeship, Nos. 6 and 13).

The history of Factory legislation (Nos. 9, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22) shows how the policy of non-interference was abandoned in another field. The employment of children in the new factories was one result of the eighteenth century system of Poor relief. It produced horrors which the first Factory Act was designed to remedy (No. 9). But the use of steam-power and the growth of big industrial districts led to the wholesale employment of children not under the Poor Law. Public opinion was at last aroused by the campaigns of Oastler and others, who pointed to the contrast between the Anti-Slavery agitation and the conditions of the English mills (No. 17). The successive Acts of 1819, 1833, 1842 and 1844 (Nos. 16, 18, 20, 22) show how legislators were forced to extend the principle of regulation from children to young persons and women, and from cotton mills to other textile factories and to mines. In the debate on the Act of 1844 the respective points of view of the Tory philanthropist, the political economist, and the manufacturer, were dramatically contrasted (No. 21). The last extract is from one of a series of reports on the condition of great industrial towns (No. 23), by which Chadwick, a disciple of Bentham and a champion of the new Poor-law, forced Parliament to interfere in the economic control of town life.

AUTHORITIES

For modern writers on general conditions, see Authorities for Section
I. The history of agitation for Factory legislation is to be found in
Hutchins and Harrison, _History of Factory Legislation_; Von Plener
_Die Englische Fabrikgesetzgebung_; Alfred (S. Kydd), _The Factory
Movement_; Cooke Taylor, _The Factory System and the Factory Acts_;
Keeling, _Child Labour in the United Kingdom_, Part I. Details of the
agitation are given in Hodder, _Life of Shaftesbury_; Podmore, _Life
of Owen_; Hutchins, _The Public Health Agitation_; Greenwood, Richard
Oastler. A general view is given in Dicey, _Law and Opinion in
England_; Kirkman Gray, _Philanthropy and the State_; Held, _Zwei
Bücher zur Sozialen Geschichte Englands_.

Bibliographies are in Hutchins and Harrison, _op. cit._; Cunningham,
_op. cit._; and Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII.

_Contemporary._--See Authorities for Section I. In addition, for
Wages Assessments under the Spitalfields Act in 1784 and 1795, see
collection in British Museum, 1029, p. 4. The Reports of Factory
Inspectors are valuable sources after 1833. See also Hansard
Parliamentary Debates on Wages, and Factory Legislation, 1795,
1813-14, 1816, 1832-3, 1844, 1846.

The chief contemporary literary sources for general conditions are
given under Section I. The Factory legislation movement is described
by some of the actors: Owen, Observations on the Manufacturing
System; Oastler, Yorkshire Slavery, Life and Opinions, Letters from
the Fleet, etc.; Memoir of the Life and Writings of Michael Sadler;
Nassau Senior, Letters on the Factory Act; L. Horner, On the
Employment of Children in Factories.

1. AN ACT AGAINST TRUCK [_Statutes_, 1 _Anne_ 2, 18], 1701.

An act for the more effectual preventing the abuses and frauds of persons imployed in the working up the woollen, linen, fustian, cotton, and iron manufactures of this kingdom.

* * * * *

III. And to prevent the oppression of the labourers and workmen imployed in the woollen, linen, fustian, cotton and iron manufacture, be it enacted by the authority aforesaid, That all payments and satisfactions hereafter to be made to any of the same labourers and workmen, for any work by them done in the same manufacture, shall be by the lawful coin of this realm, and not by any cloth, victuals, or commodities, in lieu thereof: and all wool delivered out to be wrought up, shall be so delivered, with declaration of the true weight thereof, on pain that every offender, in either of the said cases, shall forfeit and pay to such labourer or worker, double the value of what shall be due for such work by him, her, or them done; and if any such labourer or worker shall be guilty of any such fraud or default in the work by him, her, or them done, then such labourer or worker shall allow and answer to the owner of such work double the damages thereby sustained.

[_Cf._ 12 Geo. I. c. 34, sec. iii.--"every clothier, sergemaker or woollen or worsted stuffmaker, or person concerned in making any woollen cloths, serges or stuffs, or any wise concerned in employing woolcombers weavers or other labourers in the woollen manufactory, shall ... pay unto all persons by them employed ... the full wages or other price agreed on in good and lawful money of this kingdom; and shall not pay the said wages ... or any part thereof, in goods or by way of truck."]

2. A WAGES ASSESSMENT AT WARWICKSHIRE QUARTER SESSIONS [_Ashby_, _The Poor Law in a Warwickshire Village_ (_Oxford Studies in Social and Legal History_, _Vol. III_, _p._ 175)], 1738.

The particular rate of wages of all manner of artificers, labourers, and servants, as well by the day with meat and drink as without, as also by the whole year in gross or by task, made and provided, having a special regard and consideration to the prices of provisions and all other circumstances necessary to be considered at this time. April, 1738.

£ s. d.
Every servant in husbandry by the year 5 10 0
Second servant 4 0 0
Servant boy from 14 to 18 years of age 2 10 0
Servant boy from 11 to 14 1 0 0
Every head servant maid by the year 3 0 0
Second maid servant 2 10 0
Labourers from Martinmas to March 25 by the day 0 0 8
From March 25 to harvest and after harvest to
Martinmas 0 0 9
Every mower of grass by the day, with drink 0 1 0
" without drink 0 1 2
Every woman in haymaking, with drink 0 0 5
" without drink 0 0 6
Every woman in corn harvest, with drink 0 0 6
" without drink 0 0 7
Every carpenter by the day, March 25 to St
Michael's, with drink 0 1 0
" without drink 0 1 2
From Michaelmas to Lady Day, with drink 0 0 10
" without drink 0 1 0
Every mason by the day in summer, with drink 0 0 10
" without drink 0 1 0
Every mason by the day in winter, with drink 0 0 10
" without drink 0 1 0
Thatcher by day, summer and winter 0 1 0
Weeders of corn by the day 0 0 4

[This was still in force in 1773.]

3. SPITALFIELDS WEAVERS ACT [_Statutes_, 13 _Geo. III_, 68], 1773.

An Act to impower the magistrates therein mentioned to settle and regulate the wages of persons employed in the Silk Manufacture within their respective jurisdictions.

Whereas it would be for the benefit of persons employed in the Silk Manufacture, if the magistrates were impowered to settle, between the master weavers and their journeymen, the price of labour in the several branches of the said manufacture; be it therefore enacted by the King's most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords spiritual and temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament, assembled and by the authority of the same, that from and after the first day of July, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-three, the wages and prices for work of the journeymen weavers within the city of London shall be settled, regulated, and declared, by the Lord Mayor, Recorder and Aldermen, of the said city; and in all places in the county of Middlesex, by the Justices of the Peace for the said county; and in all places within the city and liberty of Westminster, at the General Quarter Sessions of the peace holden in and for the said city and liberty; and in all places within the liberty of the Tower of London, at the General Quarter Sessions of the Peace holden in and for the said liberty, at their General Quarter Sessions of the Peace respectively; and the Lord Mayor, Recorder and Aldermen of the city of London, and the said Justices of the Peace, are hereby respectively authorised and impowered, from time to time, upon application being made to them for that purpose, to settle, regulate, order, and declare the wages and prices of work of the journeymen weavers working within their respective jurisdictions as aforesaid; and shall and may, within the space of fourteen days next after the making every such order, cause the same to be printed and published, at the reasonable expense of the person or persons applying for the same, three times, in any two daily newspapers published in London or Westminster; which publication shall be deemed and allowed to be sufficient notice and publication thereof; and from and after publication thereof, all weavers, and their journeymen, are hereby strictly required to observe the same.

And be it further enacted, that if after the said first day of July, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-three, any master weaver, within either of the aforesaid districts, shall give more or less wages, or pay larger or less prices, to any of the journeymen weavers aforesaid, for their work, than shall be settled or allowed as aforesaid, and shall be convicted of the said offences before any two of His Majesty's Justices of the Peace, within either of the districts or jurisdictions aforesaid where the said offence shall be committed, on the oath or oaths of one or more credible witness or witnesses, he shall forfeit the sum of fifty pounds; to be levied by distress and sale of the offender's goods; and the said penalty, when recovered, shall be paid into the hands of the Master of the Weavers' Company, first deducting the expense of such prosecution, to be distributed by him, in conjunction with the Wardens of the said company, to any distressed journeymen weavers or their families, who shall have been last employed in either of the aforesaid jurisdictions, at their discretion.

And be it further enacted, that if any journeyman weaver or weavers within the districts aforesaid, shall ask, receive, or take more or less wages, or larger or less prices for their work than shall be settled by the respective quarter-sessions, as aforesaid; or shall enter into any combination to raise the wages or prices of the said work, or for this purpose shall decoy, solicit, or intimidate, any journeyman or journeymen weavers within the districts aforesaid, so that he or they quit their masters, for whom they shall then be employed; or shall assemble themselves in any numbers exceeding the number of ten, in order to frame or deliver petitions or other representations, touching their wages or prices of work, except to the said Justices of the Peace, or to the Lord Mayor, Recorder, and Aldermen of the city of London, at their respective Quarter Sessions, and shall be convicted of any of the said offences, on the oath or oaths of one or more credible witness or witnesses, before any two or more of His Majesty's Justices of the Peace, within either of the districts or jurisdictions aforesaid where the offence shall be committed, [he or they] shall forfeit a sum not exceeding forty shillings: And if the said forfeiture be not immediately paid, it shall and may be lawful for the said Justices to commit the said offender to the House of Correction, to hard labour, for any time not exceeding three months; the said forfeiture, when recovered, to be applied in the same manner as the forfeiture of fifty pounds afore-mentioned.

And be it further enacted, that it shall and may be lawful for any two Justices of the Peace, within the limits and jurisdictions aforesaid, on information upon oath made before them by any person or persons whatsoever, that there is reason to suspect that any master or journeyman weaver, within the districts or jurisdictions aforesaid, hath been guilty of any of the offences aforesaid, at request of such informant, to issue their summons, in writing, signed by any such two Justices, requiring any clerk, foreman, apprentice, servant, or other person or persons employed or retained by such person so suspected to have offended, or any other person or persons whatsoever, whose attendance shall appear necessary for the purpose of giving evidence in the premises, to attend and testify concerning the premises: And if any person so summoned shall not attend, and proof shall be made of the service of such summons either personally or by leaving the same at the last or usual place of abode of such person, it shall be lawful for such two Justices, or any other two Justices of the Peace acting for such county or place, and they are hereby required (unless a reasonable excuse be made for such non-attendance to the satisfaction of such justices) to issue their warrant, under their hands and seals, for the apprehending and bringing him or her before them, or some other two or more Justices of the Peace acting for such county or place, to be examined touching the premises; and if any such person so attending or being brought before such Justices, shall refuse to be examined or give their testimony touching the premises, such person shall by the said justices be committed to the House of Correction for one month, there to remain, unless he or she shall sooner submit to be examined and give testimony as the law requires.

And be it further enacted, that if any master weaver residing within the limits aforesaid, shall, directly or indirectly, in any manner whatsoever, retain or employ any journeyman weaver out of or beyond the limits aforesaid, with intent or design to elude or evade this act, or shall give, allow, or pay, or cause to be given, allowed, or paid, to such journeyman, any more or less wages than shall be settled, as aforesaid, every such person shall, for every such offence, forfeit fifty pounds; to be sued for by action of debt, in any of His Majesty's Courts of Record at Westminster, wherein no essoin, protection, or wager of law, or more than one imparlance, shall be allowed, and wherein the ordinary costs of the suit shall be paid; one moiety of which said forfeiture, when recovered, shall belong and be paid to His Majesty and His successors, and the other moiety to the person who shall sue for the same.

Provided always, and be it further enacted, that nothing in this act contained shall extend, or be construed to extend, to fix, control, or regulate, the wages or allowances to be paid to servants in the said business of a weaver, _bona fide_ retained and employed as foreman.

And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that from and after the passing of this act, no person or persons, being silk weavers, residing within the districts aforesaid, shall have in his or their service at any one time more than two apprentices, upon pain of forfeiting for every offence the sum of twenty pounds; to be levied by distress and sale of the offender's goods and chattels, upon conviction, on the oath or oaths of one or more credible witness or witnesses, before two Justices of the Peace within either of the jurisdictions aforesaid where the said offence shall be committed, and the said penalty, when recovered, shall be paid into the hands of the Master of the Weavers' Company, to be applied by him, as aforesaid, and the said Justices are hereby authorised and required to discharge every such apprentice or apprentices exceeding the number of two.

4. A MIDDLESEX WAGES ASSESSMENT UNDER THE SPITALFIELDS ACT [_Public Record Office_, _H.O._ 86, 26], 1773.

Sir John Fielding presents his respects to the Earl of Suffolk and acquaints him that he had the pleasure yesterday of assisting at the general Quarter Sessions for the county of Middlesex to carry into execution the late Act of Parliament for the regulating of the wages of journeymen weavers in Spitalfields, etc., and the wages were then settled by a numerous and unanimous bench to the entire satisfaction of those masters and journeymen weavers who appeared there in behalf of their respective bodies, and I sincerely hope that this step will prove a radical cure for all tumultuous assemblies from that quarter so disrespectful to the King and so disagreeable to Government, as it will amply reward your Lordship's judicious attention to a matter so conducive to peace and good order, for by this statute your Lordship has conveyed contentment to the minds of thousands of his Majesty's subjects. The Act for the appointment of clergymen with proper salaries agreeable to my proposals was also carried into execution to attend the gaols, and this preventive step will, I am persuaded, be attended with very salutary effects; and as the important business of the sessions is over, I hope your Lordship will take the advantage of my Lord North's leisure to settle the affair regarding my general prevention plan which now lies before him for his Majesty's approbation.

I am, with unfeigned truth, my Lord,
Your Lordship's respectful and the public's faithful Servant.

Sir John Fielding,
9th July, 1773.

5. AGRICULTURAL LABOURERS' PROPOSALS FOR A SLIDING SCALE OF WAGES [_Annals of Agriculture, Vol. XXV, p. 503_[350]], 1795.

At a numerous meeting of the day labourers of the little parishes of Heacham, Snettisham, and Sedgford, this day, 5th November, in the parish church of Heacham, in the county of Norfolk, in order to take into consideration the best and most peaceable mode of obtaining a redress of all the severe and peculiar hardships under which they have for many years so patiently suffered, the following resolutions were unanimously agreed to:--1st, That _the labourer is worthy of his hire_, and that the mode of lessening his distresses, as hath been lately the fashion, by selling him flour under the market price, and thereby rendering him an object of a parish rate, is not only an indecent insult on his lowly and humble situation (in itself sufficiently mortifying from his degrading dependence on the caprice of his employer) but a fallacious mode of relief, and every way inadequate to a radical redress of the manifold distresses of his calamitous state. 2nd, That the price of labour should, at all times, be proportioned to the price of wheat, which should invariably be regulated by the average price of that necessary article of life; and that the price of labour, as specified in the annexed plan, is not only well calculated to make the labourer happy without being injurious to the farmer, but it appears to us the only rational means of securing the permanent happiness of this valuable and useful class of men, and, if adopted in its full extent, will have an immediate and powerful effect in reducing, if it does not entirely annihilate, that disgraceful and enormous tax on the public--the Poor Rate.

_Plan of the Prices of Labour Proportionate to the Price of Wheat._

per last. per day
When wheat shall be 14l. the price of labour shall be 1s. 2d.
" " " 16 " " " 1s. 4d.
" " " 18 " " " 1s. 6d.
" " " 20 " " " 1s. 8d.
" " " 22 " " " 1s. 10d.
" " " 24 " " " 2s. 0d.
" " " 26 " " " 2s. 2d.
When wheat shall be 28l. the price of labour shall be 2s. 4d.
" " " 30 " " " 2s. 6d.
" " " 32 " " " 2s. 8d.
" " " 34 " " " 2s. 10d.
" " " 36 " " " 3s. 0d.

And so on, according to this proportion.

3rd. That a petition to parliament to regulate the price of labour, conformable to the above plan, be immediately adopted; and that the day labourers throughout the county be invited to associate and co-operate in this necessary application to parliament, as a peaceable, legal, and probable mode of obtaining relief; and, in doing this, no time should be lost, as the petition must be presented before the 29th January, 1796.

4th. That one shilling shall be paid into the hands of the treasurer by every labourer, in order to defray the expenses of advertising, attending on meetings, and paying counsel to support their petition in parliament.

5th. That as soon as the sense of the day labourers of this county, or a majority of them, shall be made known to the clerk of the meeting, a general meeting shall be appointed, in some central town, in order to agree upon the best and easiest mode of getting the petition signed: when it will be requested that one labourer, properly instructed, may be deputed to represent two or three contiguous parishes, and to attend the above intended meeting with a list of all the labourers in the parishes he shall represent, and pay their respective subscriptions; and that the labourer, so deputed, shall be allowed two shillings and sixpence a day for his time, and two shillings and sixpence a day for his expenses.

6th. That Adam Moore, clerk of the meeting, be directed to have the above resolutions, with the names of the farmers and labourers who have subscribed to and approved them, advertised in one Norwich and one London paper; when it is hoped that the above plan of a petition to parliament will not only be approved and immediately adopted by the day labourer of this county, but by the labourers of every county in the kingdom.

7th. That all letters, _post paid_, addressed to Adam Moore, labourer, at Heacham, near Lynn, Norfolk, will be duly noticed.

[Footnote 350: Quoted Hammond, _The Village Labourer_, pp. 137-9.]

6. DEBATES ON WHITBREAD'S MINIMUM WAGE BILL [_Parliamentary History, Vol. XXXIII, cols. 700-15_], 1795-6.

_Debate in the Commons on Mr. Whitbread's Bill to regulate the wages of Labourers in Husbandry. December 9._ Mr. Whitbread presented to the House a bill "to explain and amend so much of the act of the 5th of Elizabeth, intituled: 'An act containing divers orders for artificers, labourers, servants of husbandry and apprentices,'" as empowers justices of the peace, at, or within six weeks after, every general quarter sessions held at Easter, to regulate the wages of labourers in husbandry. The bill was read a first time. On the motion for the second reading, Mr. Whitbread said, that he had brought forward this bill under the idea that it was possible, by adopting its regulations, to give great relief to a very numerous and useful class of the community. The act of Elizabeth empowered justices of the peace to fix the maximum of labour. This bill went only to empower them to fix the minimum. However the House might decide with respect to his bill, he trusted at least that the act of Elizabeth would be repealed.

_Mr. Fox_ said, that the bill was undoubtedly a bill of great delicacy and importance, and with respect to which, he admitted that, to a considerable extent, there might exist a rational difference of opinion. The act of Elizabeth, as his hon. friend had truly stated, empowered the justices to fix the highest price of labour, but it gave them no power to fix the lowest. It secured the master from a risk that could but seldom occur, of being charged exorbitantly for the quantity of service; but it did not authorise the magistrate to protect the poor from the injustice of a griping and avaricious employer, who might be disposed to take advantage of their necessities, and undervalue the rate of their service. If the price of labour was adequate to the support of the poor at ordinary times, though not equal to the accidental high price of provisions at the present moment, it might be contended that there was less necessity for any new legislative regulation. But, taking the average price of labour for some years past, including that period during which the scarcity had operated, no man could deny that the price of labour was greatly disproportionate to the rate of provisions. That the general price of labour should be adequate to the support of the general mass of the community was indisputably a right principle. They all knew that a very extensive tax was exacted from the country, under the denomination of poor-rates, and that such a tax must be continued. It was understood that to this fund none could apply, but those few to whom, from particular circumstances, their labour might not be sufficiently productive to secure an adequate support. But he feared that the reverse was the case; that the exception was with respect to the few who derived sufficient means of subsistence from their labour, and that the great mass of the labouring part of the community were under the necessity of applying to this fund for relief. If the House, as was proposed, were to form an association, in order to pledge themselves to use only a particular sort of bread, with a view to diminish the pressure of the scarcity, ought they not at the same time to form an association in order to raise the price of labour to a rate proportionate to the price of articles of subsistence? With this view, he called upon the House to consider the principle of the bill, and its provisions. He would call upon them also to attend to the subject, in a constitutional view, though he could not hope, from the complexion of recent transactions, that this was a view of the subject which would have great weight. It was not fitting in a free country that the great body of the people should depend upon the charity of the rich. In the election of members of Parliament, all those were strictly excluded from exercising any franchise, with a very few exceptions, who had at any time received relief from the parish. Was it becoming in a country like this, that the general mass of the labouring part of the community, excepting those who derived relief from the bounty and generosity of individuals, should be excluded from the exercise of their most important privilege as freemen! He admitted many of the rich to be humane and charitable; but he could not allow that those who were the most useful and industrious members of society should depend upon a fund so precarious and degrading, as the occasional supplies derived from their bounty. If the price of provisions had for two years been such as to put every poor man under the necessity of applying for the aid of parochial charity, and if that circumstance constituted a positive disqualification with respect to the exercise of a constitutional right, what, he asked, was the state of a country which first compelled every poor man to dependence, and then reduced him to servitude? If they were to go into associations, pledging themselves to use a particular sort of bread, with a view to alleviate the scarcity, it was surely of more importance that they should associate in order to redress the more material grievance, and strike at the fundamental source of the evil. With this view he should be glad to see an association in order to put the price of labour upon a footing adequate to the rate of provisions. If the regulations of the present bill should not be adopted, he should be happy that any other legislative enactments should be brought forward in order to afford relief and protection to the poor.

The bill was ordered to be read a second time on the 3rd of February, and to be printed.

_February 12th, 1796._ The order of the day being read for the second reading of the bill,

_Mr. Whitbread_ said, that ample time had been given for members to consider maturely its object and regulations, and to collect from their constituents such information as they might require. For his own part, every inquiry he had instigated, convinced him of the necessity of remedying the grievances of the industrious poor by some legislative provisions. Whether those which he had suggested were the most proper to be adopted, was a question for the decision of the House? Having bestowed considerable pains in drawing up the bill, he might have left it for their consideration upon its merits alone, did not the novelty of the measure demand a few words in explanation. He felt as much as any man how greatly it was to be desired that there should be no legislative interference in matters of this nature, and that the price of labour, like every other commodity, should be left to find its own level. From reasonings upon the subject, the result was, that it always would find its level. But the deductions of reason were confuted by experience; for he appealed to the sense of the House, whether the situation of the labouring poor in this country was such as any feeling or liberal mind would wish? He did not mean that the wages of the labourer were inadequate for his subsistence and comfort in times of temporary scarcity, and unusual hardship; but even at the period preceding such distress, the evil had prevailed. In most parts of the country, the labourer had long been struggling with increasing misery, till the pressure had become almost too grievous to be endured, while the patience of the sufferers under their accumulated distresses had been conspicuous and exemplary. And did not such distress, supported with so much fortitude, merit relief from the legislature? Were it necessary to refer to any authority, he would quote the writings of Dr. Price, in which he showed that in the course of two centuries, the price of labour had not increased more than three or at most fourfold; whereas the price of meat had increased in the proportion of six or seven; and that of clothing, no less than fourteen or fifteen-fold in the same period. The poor-rates, too, had increased since the beginning of the century from £600,000, at which they were then estimated, to upwards of three millions. Nor was this prodigious increase in the poor rates to be ascribed to the advance of population; for it was doubtful whether any such increase had taken place. At the present period the contrary seemed to be the case. By the pressure of the times, marriage was discouraged; and among the laborious classes of the community, the birth of a child, instead of being hailed as a blessing, was considered as a curse. For this serious evil a remedy was required, and to this the bill was directed. It was his wish to rescue the labouring poor from a state of slavish dependence; to enable the husbandman, who dedicated his days to incessant toil, to feed, to clothe, and to lodge his family with some degree of comfort; to exempt the youth of the country from the necessity of entering the army or the navy, and from flocking to great towns for subsistence; and to put it in the power of him who ploughed and sowed and threshed the corn, to taste of the fruits of his industry, by giving him a right to a part of the produce of his labour. Such were the grounds upon which the bill in question was built. To those who dreaded everything that wore the aspect of innovation, and reprobated every measure that was new, he would say that here there was no departure from established precedents, no introduction of unknown principles. The statute of the 5th of Elizabeth was enacted expressly for the purpose of regulating the price of labour. This statute was acted upon for forty years, when it was afterwards amended by a subsequent one in the reign of James the 1st, bearing a similar title. He would not be understood as commending the principle of these statutes: on the contrary, he was of opinion that they operated as a clog to industry, by permitting justices to fix the maximum of labour. But so late as the 8th of his majesty, justices were empowered to regulate the wages of tailors, and even now the lord mayor and council of London control those of the silk weavers. To those who were afraid of entrusting justices with power, he should only say, that he left the power where he found it. At present they were possessed of the power to oppress the labourer; and this bill only invested them with the additional power to redress his grievances. By fixing the minimum of the wages of labour, a comfortable subsistence was secured to industry, and at the same time greater exertions were prompted by the hope of greater reward. To some, perhaps, the time of bringing this subject forward might appear exceptional. There were those who would say, if the labourers were not distressed, why agitate a question for which no necessity calls, and awaken desires which are not felt? Others would maintain, that it was unseasonable to direct the public attention to such a subject, while the pressure of distress might excite discontents, or raise improper expectations. To these he could only answer, that he was not one who could see wise and salutary measures sacrificed to the pretended inconvenience of the times; and that he was of opinion that what was proper to be done could scarcely be done out of season. He then moved, "that the bill be now read a second time."

_Mr. Pitt_ said, that in the interval which had taken place since the first reading of the bill, he had paid considerable attention to the subject, and endeavoured to collect information from the best sources to which he had access. The evil was certainly of such a nature as to render it of importance to find out a proper remedy, but the nature of the remedy involved discussions of such a delicate and intricate nature, that none should be adopted without being maturely weighed. The present situation of the labouring poor in this country was certainly not such as could be wished, upon any principle, either of humanity, or policy. That class had of late been exposed to hardships which they all concurred in lamenting, and were equally actuated by a desire to remove. He would not argue how far the comparison of the state of the labourer, relieved as it had been by a display of beneficence never surpassed at any period, with the state of this class of the community in former times, was just, though he was convinced that the representations were exaggerated. At any rate, the comparisons were not accurate, because they did not embrace a comprehensive view of the relative situations. He gave the hon. gentleman ample credit for his good intentions in bringing the present bill into parliament, though he was afraid that its provisions were such as it would be impolitic, upon the whole, to adopt; and such as, if adopted, would be found to be inadequate to the purposes proposed. The authority of Dr. Price had been adduced to show the great advance that had taken place on every article of subsistence, compared with the slow increase of the wages of labour. But the statement of Dr. Price was erroneous, as he compared the earnings of the labourer at the period when the comparison is instituted, with the price of provisions, and the earnings of the labourer at the present day, with the price of the same articles, without adverting to the change of circumstances, and to the difference of provisions. Corn, which was then almost the only food of the labourer, was now supplied by cheaper substitutions, and it was unfair to conclude that the wages of labour were so far from keeping pace with the price of provisions, because they could no longer purchase the same quantity of an article for which the labourer had no longer the same demand. The simple question now to be considered was, whether the remedy for the evil, which was admitted to a certain extent to exist, was to be obtained by giving to the justices the power to regulate the price of labour, and by endeavouring to establish by authority, what would be much better accomplished by the unassisted operation of principles? It was unnecessary to argue the general expediency of any legislative interference, as the principles had been perfectly recognised by the hon. gentleman himself. The most celebrated writers upon political economy, and the experience of those states where arts had flourished the most, bore ample testimony of their truth. They had only to enquire, therefore, whether the present case was strong enough for the exception, and whether the means proposed were suited to the object intended? The hon. gentleman imagined that he had on his side of the question the support of experience in this country, and appealed to certain laws upon the statute-book, in confirmation of his proposition. He did not find himself called upon to defend the principle of these statutes, but they were certainly introduced for purposes widely different from the object of the present bill. They were enacted to guard the industry of the country from being checked by a general combination among labourers; and the bill now under consideration was introduced solely for the purpose of remedying the inconveniences which labourers sustain from the disproportion existing between the price of labour and the price of living. He had the satisfaction to hear the hon. gentleman acknowledge, that if the price of labour could be made to find its own level, it would be much more desirable than to assess it by arbitrary statute, which in the execution was liable to abuse on the one hand, and inefficacy on the other. If the remedy succeeded according to the most sanguine expectations, it only established what would have been better effected by principle; and if it failed, on the one hand it might produce the severest oppression, and on the other hand encourage the most profligate idleness and extravagance. Was it not better for the House, then, to consider the operation of general principles, and rely upon the effects of their unconfined exercise? Was it not wiser to reflect what remedy might be adopted, at once more general in its principles, and more comprehensive in its object, less exceptional in its example, and less dangerous in its application? They should look to the instances where interference had shackled industry, and where the best intentions have often produced the most pernicious effects. It was indeed the most absurd bigotry, in asserting the general principle, to exclude the exception; but trade, industry and barter would always find their own level, and be impeded by regulations which violated their natural operation, and deranged their proper effect. This being granted, he appealed to the judgment of the House, whether it was better to refer the matter entirely to the discretion of a magistrate, or to endeavour to find out the causes of the evil, and by removing the causes, to apply a remedy more justifiable in its principle, more easy in the execution, more effectual in its operations, in fine, more consonant to every sound and rational policy. The evil, in his opinion, originated in a great measure in the abuses which had crept into the poor-laws of this country, and the complicated mode of executing them. The poor-laws of this country, however wise in their original institution, had contributed to fetter the circulation of labour, and to substitute a system of abuses, in room of the evils which they humanely meant to redress, and by engrafting upon a defective plan defective remedies produced nothing but confusion and disorder. The laws of settlements prevented the workman from going to that market where he could dispose of his industry to the greatest advantage, and the capitalist from employing the person who was qualified to procure him the best returns for his advances. These laws had at once increased the burthens of the poor, and taken from the collective resources of the state to supply wants which their operation had occasioned, and to alleviate a poverty which they tended to perpetuate. Such were the institutions which misguided benevolence had introduced, and, with such warnings to deter, it would be wise to distrust a similar mode of conduct, and to endeavour to discover remedies of a different nature. The country had not yet experienced the full benefit of the laws that had already been passed to correct the errors which he had explained. From the attention he had bestowed upon the subject, and from the enquiries he had been able to make of others, he was disposed to think we had not yet gone far enough, and to entertain an opinion that many advantages might be derived, and much of the evil now complained of removed, by an extension of those reformations in the poor-laws which had been begun. The encouragement of friendly societies would contribute to alleviate that immense charge with which the public was loaded in the support of the poor, and provide by savings of industry for the comfort of distress. Now the parish officer could not remove the workman, merely because he apprehended he might be burthensome, but it was necessary that he should be actually chargeable. But from the pressure of a temporary distress might the industrious mechanic be transported from the place where his exertions could be useful to himself and his family, to a quarter where he would become a burthen without the capacity of even being able to provide for himself. To remedy such a great striking grievance, the laws of settlement ought to undergo a radical amendment. He conceived, that to promote the free circulation of labour, to remove the obstacles by which industry is prohibited from availing itself of its resources, would go far to remedy the evils, and diminish the necessity of applying for relief to the poor-rates. In the course of a few years, this freedom from the vexatious restraint which the laws imposed would supersede the object of their institutions. The advantages would be widely diffused, the wealth of the nation would be increased, the poor man rendered not only more comfortable, but more virtuous, and the weight of poor-rates, with which the landed interest is loaded, greatly diminished. He should wish, therefore, that an opportunity were given of restoring the original purity of the poor laws, and of removing those corruptions by which they had been obscured. He was convinced, that the evils which they had occasioned did not arise out of their original constitution, but coincided with the opinion of Blackstone, that, in proportion as the wise regulations that were established in the long and glorious reign of Queen Elizabeth, have been superseded by subsequent enactments, the utility of the institution has been impaired, and the benevolence of the plan rendered fruitless. While he thus had expressed those sentiments which the discussion naturally prompted, it might not, perhaps, be improper, on such an occasion, to lay before the House the ideas floating in his mind, though not digested with sufficient accuracy, nor arranged with a proper degree of clearness. Neither what the hon. gentleman proposed, nor what he himself had suggested, were remedies adequate to the evil it was intended to remove. Supposing, however, the two modes of remedying the evil were on a par in effect, the preference in principle was clearly due to that which was least arbitrary in its nature; but it was not difficult to perceive that the remedy proposed by the hon. gentleman would either be completely ineffectual, or such as far to over-reach its mark. As there was a difference in the numbers which compose the families of the labouring poor, it must necessarily require less to support a small family. Now by the regulations proposed, either the man with a small family would have too much wages, or the man with a large family, who had done most service to his country, would have too little. So that were the minimum fixed upon the standard of a large family, it might operate as encouragement to idleness on one part of the community; and if it were fixed on the standard of a small family, those would not enjoy the benefit of it for whose relief it was intended. What measure then could be found to supply the defect? Let us, said he, make relief in cases where there are a number of children, a matter of right and an honour, instead of a ground for opprobrium and contempt. This will make a large family a blessing, and not a curse; and this will draw a proper line of distinction between those who are able to provide for themselves by their labour, and those who, after having enriched their country with a number of children, have a claim upon its assistance for their support. All this, however, he would confess, was not enough, if they did not engraft upon it resolutions to discourage relief where it was not wanted. If such means could be practised as that of supplying the necessities of those who required assistance by giving it in labour or affording employment, which is the principle of the act of Elizabeth, the most important advantages would be gained. They would thus benefit those to whom they afforded relief, not only by the assistance bestowed, but by giving habits of industry and frugality, and, in furnishing a temporary bounty, enable them to make permanent provision for themselves. By giving effect to the operation of friendly societies, individuals would be rescued from becoming a burthen upon the public, and, if necessary, be enabled to subsist upon a fund which their own industry contributed to raise. These great points of granting relief according to the number of children, preventing removals at the caprice of the parish officer, and making them subscribe to friendly societies, would tend, in a very great degree, to remove every complaint to which the present partial remedy could be applied. Experience had already shown how much could be done by the industry of children and the advantages of early employing them in such branches of manufacture as they are capable to execute. The extension of schools of industry was also an object of material importance. If any one would take the trouble to compute the amount of all the earnings of the children who are already educated in this manner, he would be surprised, when he came to consider the weight which their support by their own labours took off the country, and the addition which, by the fruits of their toil, and the habits to which they were formed, was made to its internal opulence. The suggestion of these schools was originally drawn from Lord Hale and Mr. Locke, and upon such authority he had no difficulty in recommending the plan to the encouragement of the legislature. Much might be effected by a plan of this nature susceptible of constant improvement. Such a plan would convert the relief granted to the poor into an encouragement to industry, instead of being, as it is by the present poor laws, a premium to idleness and a school for sloth. There were also a number of subordinate circumstances to which it was necessary to attend. The law which prohibits giving relief where any visible property remains should be abolished. That degrading condition should be withdrawn. No temporary occasion should force a British subject to part with the last shilling of his little capital, and compel him to descend to a state of wretchedness from which he could never recover, merely that he might be entitled to a casual supply. Another mode also of materially assisting the industrious poor was, the advancing of small capitals, which might be repaid in two or three years, while the person who repaid it would probably have made an addition to his income. This might put him who received them in the way of acquiring what might place him in a situation to make permanent provision for himself. These were the general ideas which had occurred to him upon the subject; if they should be approved of by any gentleman in the House, they might perhaps appear at a future time in a more accurate shape than he could pretend to give them. He could not, however, let this opportunity slip without throwing them out. He was aware that they would require to be very maturely considered. He was aware also of a fundamental difficulty, that of insuring the diligent execution of any law that should be enacted. This could only be done by presenting to those who should be entrusted with the execution motives to emulation, and by a frequent inspection of their conduct as to diligence and fidelity. Were he to suggest an outline, it would be this. To provide some new mode of inspection by parishes, or by hundreds--to report to the magistrates at the petty sessions, with a liberty of appeal from them to the general quarter sessions, where the justice should be empowered to take cognizance of the conduct of the different commissioners, and to remedy whatever defects should be found to exist. That an annual report should be made to parliament, and that parliament should impose upon itself the duty of tracing the effect of its system from year to year, till it should be fully matured. That there should be a standing order of the House for this purpose, and in a word, that there should be an annual budget opened, containing the details of the whole system of poor-laws, by which the legislature would show that they had a constant and a watchful eye upon the interests of the poorest and most neglected part of the community. He was not vain enough to imagine that these ideas were the result of his own investigations, but he was happy to say that they arose from a careful examination of the subject, and an extensive survey of the opinions of others. He would only add that it was a subject of the utmost importance, and that he would do everything in his power to bring forward or promote such measures as would conduce to the interest of the country. He gave the hon. gentleman every possible credit for his humane and laudable motives, yet seeing the subject in the light in which he did, he was compelled to give his negative to the motion.