Misplaced Pages

Factory Acts

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

An act of parliament , as a form of primary legislation , is a text of law passed by the legislative body of a jurisdiction (often a parliament or council ). In most countries with a parliamentary system of government, acts of parliament begin as a bill , which the legislature votes on. Depending on the structure of government, this text may then be subject to assent or approval from the executive branch .

#739260

80-605: The Factory Acts were a series of acts passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom beginning in 1802 to regulate and improve the conditions of industrial employment. The early Acts concentrated on regulating the hours of work and moral welfare of young children employed in cotton mills but were effectively unenforced until the Act of 1833 established a professional Factory Inspectorate . The regulation of working hours

160-548: A Factories Regulation Act being passed before Parliament was dissolved. Sadler was made chairman of the Committee, which allowed him to make his case by hearing evidence from witnesses of Sadler's selection, on the understanding that opponents of the Bill (or of some feature of it) would then have their innings. Sadler attempted (31 July 1832) to progress his Bill without waiting for the committee's report; when this abnormal procedure

240-476: A Select Committee. (Lord Althorp, responding for the Government, noted that Sadler's speech made a strong case for considering legislation, but thought it did little to directly support the details of the Bill; the Government supported the Bill as leading to a Select Committee, but would not in advance pledge support for whatever legislation the Committee might recommend). This effectively removed any chance of

320-413: A bill to allow magistrates to act on their own initiative, and to compel witnesses to attend hearings; noting that so far there had been only two prosecutions under the 1819 act. Opposing the bill, a millowner MP agreed that the 1819 bill was widely evaded, but went on to remark that this put millowners at the mercy of millhands "The provisions of Sir Robert Peel's act had been evaded in many respects: and it

400-561: A day. This was followed by an agitation in the West Riding for relaxation or repeal of the 1833 Act; the short-time movement alleged that workers were being 'leant on' by their employers to sign petitions for repeal, and countered by holding meetings and raising petitions for a ten-hour act. Charles Hindley prepared a draft bill limiting the hours that could be worked by any mill employing people under twenty-one, with no child under ten to be employed, and no education clauses. Hindley's bill

480-646: A day; the act as passed, the Cotton Mills Regulation Act 1825 ( 6 Geo. 4 . c. 63), improved the arrangements for enforcement, but kept a twelve-hour day Monday-Friday with a shorter day of nine hours on Saturday. The 1819 act had specified that a meal break of an hour should be taken between 11 a.m. and 2 p.m.; a subsequent act, the Labour in Cotton Mills, etc. Act 1819 ( 60 Geo. 3 & 1 Geo. 4 . c. 5), allowing water-powered mills to exceed

560-477: A law this Session, and the necessity of legislating was so apparent, that he was unwilling to submit to the delay of a Committee, when he considered they could obtain no new evidence on the subject". In his long Second Reading speech, Sadler argued repeatedly that a Committee was unnecessary, but concluded by accepting that he had not convinced the House or the Government of this, and that the Bill would be referred to

640-466: A majority of only two (178–176) – a moral defeat for a government measure. Furthermore, although Poulett Thomson had opened the debate by saying that "at the present moment he was unwilling to re-open the whole factory question", Peel had said he would vote for the second reading, not because he supported the bill, but because its committee stage would allow the introduction of additional amendments to factory legislation. Poulett Thomson (eventually) abandoned

720-399: A mill-owner or occupier). Details of enforcement were altered; there was no longer any provision for inspectors to be magistrates ex officio , sub-inspectors were to have nearly the same enforcement powers as inspectors; unlike inspectors they could not examine witnesses on oath, but they now had the same right of entry into factory premises as inspectors. Declaring a schoolmaster incompetent

800-468: Is its chapter number. Acts passed before 1963 are cited using this number, preceded by the year(s) of the reign during which the relevant parliamentary session was held; thus the Union with Ireland Act 1800 is cited as "39 & 40 Geo. 3 c. 67", meaning the 67th act passed during the session that started in the 39th year of the reign of George III and which finished in the 40th year of that reign. Note that

880-452: Is known as a private member's bill . In territories with a multicameral parliament, most bills may be first introduced in any chamber. However, certain types of legislation are required, either by constitutional convention or by law, to be introduced into a specific chamber. For example, bills imposing a tax , or involving public expenditure , are introduced into the House of Commons in

SECTION 10

#1732772397740

960-448: Is passed by Parliament it becomes an act and part of statute law. There are two types of bill and act, public and private . Public acts apply to the whole of the UK or a number of its constituent countries – England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Private acts are local and personal in their effect, giving special powers to bodies such as local authorities or making exceptions to

1040-407: The Parliament of England did not originally have titles, and could only be formally cited by reference to the parliamentary session in which they were passed, with each individual act being identified by year and chapter number. Descriptive titles began to be added to the enrolled acts by the official clerks, as a reference aid; over time, titles came to be included within the text of each bill. Since

1120-646: The Parliament of India , every bill passes through following stages before it becomes an Act of Parliament of India : In the Irish Parliament, the Oireachtas , bills pass through the following stages. Bills may be initiated in either the Dáil or the Seanad, and must pass both houses. In New Zealand, the bill passes through the following stages: A draft piece of legislation is called a bill ; when this

1200-507: The head of state . In some countries, such as in France, Belgium, Luxembourg , Spain and Portugal, the term for a bill differs depending on whether it is initiated by the government (when it is known as a "draft"), or by the parliament (a "proposition", i.e., a private member's bill). In Australia, the bill passes through the following stages: In Canada, the bill passes through the following stages: The committee considers each clause of

1280-472: The "laissez-faire" political and economic orthodoxy of the age which held that to be ill-advised. Under the Act, regulations and rules came into force on 2 December 1802 and applied to all textile mills and factories employing three or more apprentices or twenty employees. The buildings must have sufficient windows and openings for ventilation, and should be cleaned at least twice yearly with quicklime and water; this included ceilings and walls. Each apprentice

1360-583: The 1833 education clauses. The second reading of the bill was scheduled for 22 June, but in early June Russell announced that the bill had been abandoned for the session. On 22 June, when the government intended to progress a bill on Irish tithes, Ashley forestalled them, moving the second reading of the factory bill. He complained of the evasive conduct of ministers and government apathy and complacency on factory reform. Peel (who normally, even in opposition, deprecated obstruction of government business by backbenchers) supported Ashley: he held very different views on

1440-429: The 1839 session, Fox Maule revived the 1838 Bill with alterations. The literacy tests were gone, and the education clauses restored. The only other significant changes in the scope of the legislation were that working extra hours to recover lost time was now only permitted for water-powered mills, and magistrates could not countersign surgeon's certificates if they were mill-owners or occupiers (or father, son, or brother of

1520-626: The 43rd act passed in 1980 would be 1980 chapter 43. The full reference includes the (short) title and would be the Magistrate's Court Act 1980 (c. 43). Until the 1980s, acts of the Australian state of Victoria were numbered in a continuous sequence from 1857; thus the Age of Majority Act 1977 was No. 9075 of 1977. 59 Geo. 3 This is a complete list of acts of the Parliament of

1600-626: The Act could soon be repealed (completely or in part). In 1835, the first report of the Factory Inspectors noted that the education clauses were totally impracticable, and relay working (with a double set of children, both sets working eight hours; the solution which allowed Althorp's Bill to outbid Ashley's in the apparent benefit to children) was difficult if not impracticable, there not being enough children.They also reported that they had been unable to discover any deformity produced by factory labour, nor any injury to health or shortening of

1680-411: The Act now in existence; but if they would do none of these things, if they continued idly indifferent, and obstinately shut their eyes to this great and growing evil, if they were careless of the growth of an immense population, plunged in ignorance and vice, which neither feared God, nor regarded man, then he warned them that they must be prepared for the very worst result that could befall a nation." In

SECTION 20

#1732772397740

1760-673: The Act; one was to be a clergyman and the other a Justice of the Peace , neither to have any connection with the mill or factory. The visitors had the power to impose fines for non-compliance and the authority to visit at any time of the day to inspect the premises. The Act was to be displayed in two places in the factory. Owners who refused to comply with any part of the Act could be fined between £2 and £5. The Cotton Mills and Factories Act 1819 ( 59 Geo. 3 . c. 66) stated that no children under 9 were to be employed and that children aged 9–16 years were limited to 12 hours' work per day. It applied to

1840-773: 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 passing of this Act it shall not be deemed necessary in any Information, Summons, or Warrant issued in pursuance of the said recited Act, to set forth the Name or Other Designation of each and every the Partners in any Cotton Mill or Factory, but that it shall be lawful to insert in such Information, Summons, or Warrant,

1920-399: The Bill originally covered all textile mills; the Act as passed again applied only to cotton mills. Dissatisfied with the outcome of Hobhouse's efforts, in 1832 Michael Thomas Sadler introduced a Bill extending the protection existing Factory Acts gave to children working in the cotton industry to those in other textile industries, and reducing to ten per day the working hours of children in

2000-487: The Commons; both Sir Robert Peel (not the originator of the 1802 bill, but his son, the future Prime Minister) and Sir George Strickland had warned that the Bill as it stood was too ambitious: more MPs had spoken for further factory legislation than against, but many supporters wanted the subject to be considered by a Select Committee. Sadler had resisted this: "if the present Bill was referred to one, it would not become

2080-511: The House of Commons, or S- if they originate in the Senate. For example, Bill C-250 was a private member's bill introduced in the House. Bills C-1 and S-1 are pro forma bills, and are introduced at the beginning of each session in order to assert the right of each Chamber to manage its own affairs. They are introduced and read a first time, and then are dropped from the Order Paper . In

2160-531: The Laws relating to Apprentices and other young Persons employed in Cotton Factories and in Cotton Mills, and to make further Provisions in lieu thereof. ( 1 & 2 Will. 4 . c. 39) In 1831 Hobhouse introduced a further bill with – he claimed to the Commons – the support of the leading manufacturers who felt that "unless the House should step forward and interfere so as to put an end to the night-work in

2240-420: The Laws relating to the employment of child in Cotton Mills & Manufactories" which relaxed formal requirements for the service of legal documents on millowners (documents no longer had to specify all partners in the concern owning or running the mill; it would be adequate to identify the mill by the name by which it was generally known). The bill passed the Commons but was subject to a minor textual amendment by

2320-518: The Lords (adding the words "to include") and then received royal assent without the Commons first being made aware of (or agreeing to) the Lords' amendment. To rectify this inadvertent breach of privilege, a further Act (making no other change to the Act already passed) was promptly passed on the last day of the parliamentary session. Be it therefore enacted by the King's most Excellent Majesty, by and with

2400-595: The Name of the ostensible Proprietor or Title of the Firm by which the Proprietor or Proprietors of any such Mill or Factory are usually designated and known. II. And be it further enacted, That the Service of such Summons or Warrant on any principal Manager, Conductor, or Clerk of any Cotton Mill or Factory, during the usual Hours of working such Cotton Mill or Factory, shall be good and lawful Service. An Act to repeal

2480-534: The New Testament were not to be employed more than nine hours a day; children who could not read an easy reader to be published by the Home Secretary could not be employed. His political opponents mocked the thought of Lord John Russell turning his undoubted talents to the production of a reading primer, and it was soon announced that once the Bill went into committee it would be amended to restore

Factory Acts - Misplaced Pages Continue

2560-585: The Parliament of Great Britain . See also the list of acts of the Parliament of Ireland . For acts of the devolved parliaments and assemblies in the United Kingdom, see the list of acts of the Scottish Parliament , the list of acts of the Northern Ireland Assembly , and the list of acts and measures of Senedd Cymru ; see also the list of acts of the Parliament of Northern Ireland . The number shown after each act's title

2640-497: The Ten Hour Movement attempting to organise a boycott of the commission's investigations: this was in sharp contrast with the commissioners' practice of dining with the leading manufacturers of the districts they visited. The commission's report did not support the more lurid details of Sadler's report – mills were not hotbeds of sexual immorality, and beating of children was much less common than Sadler had asserted (and

2720-405: The United Kingdom for the year 1819 . Note that the first parliament of the United Kingdom was held in 1801; parliaments between 1707 and 1800 were either parliaments of Great Britain or of Ireland ). For acts passed up until 1707, see the list of acts of the Parliament of England and the list of acts of the Parliament of Scotland . For acts passed from 1707 to 1800, see the list of acts of

2800-474: The United Kingdom, Canada's House of Commons , Lok Sabha of India and Ireland's Dáil as a matter of law. Conversely, bills proposed by the Law Commission and consolidation bills traditionally start in the House of Lords . Once introduced, a bill must go through a number of stages before it can become law. In theory, this allows the bill's provisions to be debated in detail, and for amendments to

2880-453: The bill, and may make amendments to it. Significant amendments may be made at the committee stage. In some cases, whole groups of clauses are inserted or removed. However, if the Government holds a majority, almost all the amendments which are agreed to in committee will have been tabled by the Government to correct deficiencies in the bill or to enact changes to policy made since the bill was introduced (or, in some cases, to import material which

2960-446: The bill. In 1837 Poulett Thomson announced his intention to bring in a factory bill; consequently Ashley, who had intended to introduce a ten-hour bill, dropped this, promising instead a ten-hour amendment to the government bill. No progress had been made with the government bill when the death of King William, and the consequent dissolution of parliament, brought the session to an end. In the 1838 session another government factory bill

3040-742: The clause stand part of the bill are made. In the Report stage, the debate is on the motions for specific amendments. Once a bill has passed both Houses in an identical form, it is presented to the Governor General , who gives it royal assent . Although the Governor General can refuse to assent a bill, this power has never been exercised. Bills being reviewed by Parliament are assigned numbers: 2 to 200 for government bills, 201 to 1000 for private member's bills , and 1001 up for private bills . They are preceded by C- if they originate in

3120-403: The commission recommended an eight-hour day for those under thirteen, hoping for a two-shift system for them which would allow mills to run 16 hours a day. The Factory Act 1833 ( 3 & 4 Will. 4 . c. 103) was an attempt to establish a regular working day in textile manufacture. The act had the following provisions: The Act failed to specify whether lunar or calendar months were intended where

3200-440: The conclusion, that the hardest labour in the worst-conducted factory is less hard, less cruel, and less demoralizing than the labour in the best of coal-mines". Nonetheless, the commission reportedthat mill children did work unduly long hours, leading to and that these ill-effects were so marked and significant that government intervention was justified but where Sadler's Bill was for a ten-hour day for all workers under eighteen,

3280-437: The cotton industry only, but covered all children, whether apprentices or not. It was seen through Parliament by Sir Robert Peel ; it had its origins in a draft prepared by Robert Owen in 1815 but the Act that emerged in 1819 was much watered-down from Owen's draft. It was also effectively unenforceable; enforcement was left to local magistrates, but they could only inspect a mill if two witnesses had given sworn statements that

Factory Acts - Misplaced Pages Continue

3360-532: The current Factory Act identified by the government's own Factory Inspectors: "After these representations .. by his own inspectors, how could the noble Lord opposite reconcile it with his conscience as an individual, and with his public duty as a Minister of the Crown, during the whole course of his administration, never to have brought forward any measure for the removal of so tremendous an evil?" "He wanted them to decide whether they would amend, or repeal, or enforce

3440-488: The factory, and every month the apprentices should visit a church. They should be prepared for confirmation in the Church of England between the ages of 14 and 18 and must be examined by a clergyman at least once a year. Male and female apprentices were to sleep separately and not more than two per bed. Local magistrates had to appoint two inspectors known as 'visitors' to ensure that factories and mills were complying with

3520-400: The first attempt to improve the lot of factory children, it is often seen as paving the way for future Factory Acts. At best, it only partially paved the way; its restriction to apprentices (where there was a long tradition of legislation) meant that it was left to later Factory Acts to establish the principle of intervention by Parliament on humanitarian grounds on worker welfare issues against

3600-481: The first four years of their apprenticeship. The Act specified that this should be done every working day within usual working hours but did not state how much time should be set aside for it. Educational classes should be held in a part of the mill or factory designed for the purpose. Every Sunday, for one hour, apprentices were to be taught the Christian religion; every other Sunday, divine service should be held in

3680-570: The industries legislated for. A network of "Short Time Committees" had grown up in the textile districts of Yorkshire and Lancashire, working for a "ten-hour day Act" for children, with many millhands in the Ten Hour Movement hoping that this would in practice also limit the adult working day. Witnesses to one of the Committees taking evidence on Peel's Bill had noted that there were few millworkers over forty, and that they themselves expected to have to stop mill work at that age because of "the pace of

3760-400: The issue from Ashley, but the issue was important, contentious, and should not be evaded : "so long as ineffectual attempts at legislation remained on the table of the house, the excitement of the manufacturing districts would continue to be kept up" Ashley's motion was lost narrowly 111 to 119. Ashley later attacked the government and its complacency and connivance at the shortcomings in

3840-619: The law in particular geographic areas. In the United Kingdom Parliament, each bill passes through the following stages: In the Scottish Parliament, bills pass through the following stages: There are special procedures for emergency bills, member's bills (similar to private member's bills in the UK Parliament), committee bills, and private bills. In Singapore, the bill passes through these certain stages before becoming into an Act of Parliament. Acts passed by

3920-486: The life of factory children caused by working a twelve-hour day. The inspectors appointed were also largely ineffective, simply because there were not enough of them to oversee all 4000 factories on the island. The idea of government-appointed inspectors would gain traction within the following decades, but for now, they were mostly figureheads. Three of the four inspectors had recommended in their first report that all children 12 or older should be allowed to work twelve hours

4000-570: The medical men of Manchester about the health and welfare of children employed in cotton mills , and first expressed by them in 1784 in a report on an outbreak of 'putrid fever' at a mill at Radcliffe owned by Peel. Although the Act included some hygiene requirements for all textile mills, it was largely concerned with the employment of apprentices; it left the employment of 'free' (non-indentured) children unregulated. It allowed (but did not require) local magistrates to enforce compliance with its requirements, and therefore went largely unenforced. As

4080-499: The mid-nineteenth century, it has also become common practice for acts to have a short title , as a convenient alternative to the sometimes lengthy main titles. The Short Titles Act 1892 , and its replacement the Short Titles Act 1896 , gave short titles to many acts which previously lacked them. The numerical citation of acts has also changed over time. The original method was based on the regnal year (or years) in which

SECTION 50

#1732772397740

4160-475: The mill was breaking the Act. An amending Act, the Labour in Cotton Mills, etc. Act 1819 ( 60 Geo. 3 & 1 Geo. 4 . c. 5) was passed in December 1819. When any accident disabled a factory (as had just happened at New Lanark), night working in the rest of the works by those who had previously worked in the affected factory was permitted until the accident was made good. In 1825 John Cam Hobhouse introduced

4240-574: The mill" unless working hours were reduced. Hobhouse advised Richard Oastler , an early and leading advocate of factory legislation for the woolen industry, that Hobhouse had got as much as he could, given the opposition of Scottish flax-spinners and "the state of public business": if Sadler put forward a Bill matching the aims of the Short Time Committees "he will not be allowed to proceed a single stage with any enactment, and ... he will only throw an air of ridicule and extravagance over

4320-525: The modern convention is to use Arabic numerals in citations (thus "41 Geo. 3" rather than "41 Geo. III"). Acts of the last session of the Parliament of Great Britain and the first session of the Parliament of the United Kingdom are both cited as "41 Geo. 3". Acts passed from 1963 onwards are simply cited by calendar year and chapter number. All modern acts have a short title , e.g. "the Local Government Act 2003". Some earlier acts also have

4400-422: The original bill to also be introduced, debated, and agreed to. In bicameral parliaments, a bill that has been approved by the chamber into which it was introduced then sends the bill to the other chamber. Broadly speaking, each chamber must separately agree to the same version of the bill. Finally, the approved bill receives assent; in most territories this is merely a formality and is often a function exercised by

4480-446: The parliament before it can become a law. In territories with a Westminster system , most bills that have any possibility of becoming law are introduced into parliament by the government. This will usually happen following the publication of a " white paper ", setting out the issues and the way in which the proposed new law is intended to deal with them. A bill may also be introduced into parliament without formal government backing; this

4560-415: The relevant parliamentary session met. This has been replaced in most territories by simple reference to the calendar year, with the first act passed being chapter 1, and so on. In the United Kingdom, legislation has referenced by year and chapter number since 1963 ( Acts of Parliament Numbering and Citation Act 1962 ). Each act is numbered consecutively based on the date it received royal assent, for example

4640-433: The report (since the only witnesses heard had been Sadler's, the report was unbalanced; since witnesses had not testified on oath, doubts were expressed about the accuracy/veracity of the more lurid accounts of factory life) and Sadler's conduct. 'An air of ridicule and extravagance' had been thrown not upon factory legislation, but upon the use of Select Committees for fact-finding on factory conditions. A Factory Commission

4720-406: The small factories where it was practised, it would be impossible for the large and respectable factories which conformed to the existing law to compete with them." The Act repealed the previous Acts, and consolidated their provisions in a single Act, which also introduced further restrictions. Night working was forbidden for anyone under 21 and if a mill had been working at night the onus of proof

4800-432: The specified hours in order to make up for lost time widened the limits to 11 a.m. to 4 p.m.; Hobhouse's Act of 1825 set the limits to 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. A parent's assertion of a child's age was sufficient, and relieved employers of any liability should the child in fact be younger. JPs who were millowners or the fathers or sons of millowners could not hear complaints under the act. In 1829, Parliament passed an "Act to Amend

4880-468: The ten-hour day proved to have none of the dire consequences predicted by its opponents, and its apparent success effectively ended theoretical objections to the principle of factory legislation; from the 1860s onwards more industries were brought within the Factory Act. The Health and Morals of Apprentices Act 1802 ( 42 Geo. 3 . c. 73) was introduced by Sir Robert Peel ; it addressed concerns felt by

SECTION 60

#1732772397740

4960-474: The textile districts and made extensive investigations. It wasted little time in doing so, and even less in considering its report; as with other Whig commissions of the period it was suspected to have had a good idea of its recommendations before it started work. During the course of the Factory Commission's inquiries, relationships between it and the Ten Hour Movement became thoroughly adversarial,

5040-504: The textile districts) had been powerfully affected by 'the report of Mr Sadler's Committee' . Extracts from this began to appear in newspapers in January 1833 and painted a picture of the life of a mill-child as one of systematic over-work and systematic brutality. The conclusion many papers drew was that Sadler's Bill should be revived and passed. However, when Ashley introduced a Bill essentially reproducing Sadler's, MPs criticised both

5120-464: The whole House and defeated Lord Althorp 's amendment to refer the Bill to a Select Committee. However at Committee stage the first point considered where the Bill differed from the Commission's was the age up to which hours of work should be limited Ashley lost (heavily) the vote on this, and left it to Althorp to pilot through a Factory Act based upon the Commission's recommendations. This toured

5200-400: The whole of this kind of legislation". Oastler responded that a failure with a Ten Hour Bill would "not dishearten its friends. It will only spur them on to greater exertions, and would undoubtedly lead to certain success ". Sadler's Bill when introduced indeed corresponded closely to the aims of the Short Time Committees. Hobhouse's ban on nightwork up to 21 was retained; no child under nine

5280-545: The word 'monthly' was used, and one clause limited hours of work per week where a daily limit had been intended. A short amending Act was therefore passed in February 1834 The 1833 Act had few admirers in the textile districts when it came into force. The short-time movement objected to its substitution for Ashley's Bill, and hoped to secure a Ten-Hour Bill. Millowners resented and political economists deplored legislators' interference in response to public opinion, and hoped that

5360-421: Was beaten into third place by Thomas Babington Macaulay a Whig politician of national standing and John Marshall , the son of one of Leeds's leading millowners. Casting around for a new parliamentary advocate for factory reform, the short-time movement eventually secured the services of Lord Ashley , eldest son of the 6th Earl of Shaftesbury. By the time the new parliament met, public opinion (especially outside

5440-464: Was dying out). Major millowners such as the Strutts did not tolerate it (and indeed were distinguished by their assiduous benevolence to their employees). Working conditions for mill-children were preferable to those in other industries: after a visit to the coal mine at Worsley one of the commission staff had written "as this was said to be the best mine in the place, I cannot much err in coming to

5520-485: Was introduced by Fox Maule Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department . Children in silk mills were not to work more than ten hours a day (but this was not backed up by any certification of age). Otherwise, the bill made no changes to age limits or hours of work, but repealed the education clauses of the 1833 Act, replacing them with literacy tests. After a transitional period, children who could not read

5600-494: Was much that required remedy. He doubted whether shortening the hours of work would be injurious even to the interests of the manufacturers; as the children would be able, while they were employed, to pursue their occupation with greater vigour and activity. At the same time, there was nothing to warrant a comparison with the condition of the negroes in the West Indies. Hobhouse's bill also sought to limit hours worked to eleven

5680-447: Was not ready when the bill was presented). The debate on each stage is actually debate on a specific motion. For the first reading, there is no debate. For the second reading, the motion is "That this bill be now read a second time and be referred to [name of committee]" and for third reading "That this bill be now read a third time and pass." In the Committee stage, each clause is called and motions for amendments to these clauses, or that

5760-429: Was now in the power of the workmen to ruin many individuals, by enforcing the penalties for children working beyond the hours limited by that act" and that this showed to him that the best course of action was to repeal the 1819 Act. On the other hand, another millowner MP supported Hobhouse's Bill saying that he agreed that, the bill was loudly called for, and, as the proprietor of a large manufactory, admitted that there

5840-422: Was now to invalidate certificates of education issued by him, and a clause in the bill aimed to make it easier to establish and run a school for factory children; children at schools formed under this clause were not to be educated in a creed objected to by their parents. Act of Parliament A draft act of parliament is known as a bill . In other words, a bill is a proposed law that needs to be discussed in

5920-451: Was objected to by other MPs, he withdrew the Bill. Sadler, as chairman of the committee, reported the minutes of evidence on 8 August 1832, when they were ordered to be printed. Parliament was prorogued shortly afterwards: Sadler gave notice of his intention to reintroduce a Ten-Hour Bill in the next session Sadler, however, was not an MP in the next session: in the first election for the newly enfranchised two member constituency of Leeds he

6000-402: Was on the millowner (to show nobody under-age had been employed). The limitation of working hours to twelve now applied up to age eighteen. Complaints could only be pursued if made within three weeks of the offence; on the other hand justices of the peace who were the brothers of millowners were now also debarred from hearing Factory Act cases. Hobhouse's claim of general support was optimistic;

6080-596: Was published at the end of the 1834-5 parliamentary session, but was not taken forward in the next session, being pre-empted by a government bill introduced by Charles Poulett Thomson , the President of the Board of Trade , allowing children twelve or over to work twelve hours a day. The second reading of Poulett Thomson's Bill was opposed by Ashley, who denounced the bill as a feeler towards total repeal of protection for factory children. The Bill passed its second reading by

6160-472: Was set up to investigate and report. Sadler and the Short Time Committees objected to any further fact-finding and attempted to obstruct the work of the Commissioners. Ashley's Bill proceeded to a Second Reading in early July 1833 (when the likely main recommendations of the Commission were known, but its report was not yet available to MPs); Ashley wanted the Bill to then be considered by a Committee of

6240-514: Was then extended to women by an Act of 1844. The Factories Act 1847 (known as the Ten Hour Act), together with Acts in 1850 and 1853 remedying defects in the 1847 Act, met a long-standing (and by 1847 well-organised) demand by the millworkers for a ten-hour day. The Factory Acts also included regulations for ventilation, hygienic practices, and machinery guarding in an effort to improve the working circumstances for mill children. Introduction of

6320-466: Was to be employed; and the working day for under-eighteens was to be no more than ten hours (eight on Saturday). These restrictions were to apply across all textile industries. The Second Reading debate on Sadler's bill did not take place until 16 March 1832, the Reform Bill having taken precedence over all other legislation. Meanwhile, petitions both for and against the Bill had been presented to

6400-499: Was to be given two sets of clothing, suitable linen, stockings, hats, and shoes, and a new set each year thereafter. Apprentices could not work during the night (between 9 pm and 6 am), and their working hours could not exceed 12 hours a day, excluding the time taken for breaks. A grace period was provided to allow factories time to adjust, but all night-time working by apprentices was to be discontinued by June 1804. All apprentices were to be educated in reading, writing and arithmetic for

#739260