Child Labor in the 19th Century

Child Labor in the 19th Century

Keywords: child labour professional revolution essay

The Industrial Revolution, one of the mainly crucial periods of change in Great Britain, occurred because of the stable political, social, and monetary, stance of the country, and also brought lasting results in Britain in each one of these areas. With its rapid growing monopoly on sea trade, its renewed fascination in scientific invention, and its own system of national banking institutions holding restricted to its financial secureness, Britain was, at the time of the Industrial Revolution, ready for change. It had been the great historical era we call up the Industrial Revolution which would permanently revolutionize city life, public class structure, the power of the British country between others of the community, the fabrication of machinery, and the power of the economy of Britain. Because of the Industrial Revolution, never once again would the British need to suffer the results of no changes regarding the inequalities of the doing work world, nor doubt the energy of their country, however come to view the term “technology” in a completely new way.

Throughout the early 19th century, the Industrial Revolution extend hugely around Britain. The usage of new Technology such as for example steam-powered machines, resulted in an massive increase in the amount of factories especially in textile factories or what’s named mills. Samuel Greg who owned the large Quarry Bank Mill was one of the initial factory owner to use the new technology .

With the increase of those factories, families began to go from the countryside into towns searching for better existence and better paid function. The incomes a farm worker was getting ,were suprisingly low, were not more than enough to feed his family and there have been less jobs working on farms as a result of the of new devices such as threshers and other inventions. Also a large number of new workers were needed to work devices in mills and the factory owners built houses for them. Locations loaded to overflowing and Manchester was primarily awful. To conquer this labour shortage factory owners possessed to find other ways of obtaining staff. One key to the problem was to get kids from orphanages and workhouses. These children became referred to as pauper apprentices. This engaged them signing contracts that nearly made them the house of the factory owner. even Many families were unwilling to permit their children to job in these innovative textile factories.

Children of poor and working-class households had worked for years and years before industrialization – assisting throughout the house or assisting in the family’s enterprise if they were capable.

The practice of inserting children to work was initially documented in the Medieval examples of narrative essays period when fathers had their children roll thread to allow them to weave on the loom. Children did a range of tasks that were auxiliary with their parents but critical to the relatives economy. The family’s household requirements determined the family’s way to obtain labor and “the interdependence of job and residence, of subsidence requirements, family relationships constituted the ‘family economy'”, and home labor needs.


Britain became the initial country to industrialize. And for that reason, it was also the first country where children’s character in work changed thus radically at a point child labor was seen as a leading political concern and a social difficulty.

One of those first factory owners which used the system (pauper apprentices) was Samuel Greg who experienced the huge Quarry Bank Mill . Greg experienced complexity finding sufficient people to do the job for him. Manchester was a little far, by eleven kilometers away and native villages were extremely small. The workers that have been imported needed cottages, and these cost about £100 each.

By 1810 Greg started to be certain that the best option to the labour issue was to build an Apprentice House close to the Quarry Bank mill also to obtain children from workhouses. The construction for the apprentices expense £200 and given living accommodation for over 90 children.

The first children to be taken to the Apprentice house came from native parishes like Macclesfield and Wilmslow, however, later he went so far as London and Liverpool to find these young workers. To provide confidence to the factory owners to consider workhouse children, people like Greg had been rewarded between £2 and £4 for each child they employed. Greg also demanded that the children were delivered to him with “two shifts, two pairs of stockings and two aprons.

The 90 children (30 boys and 60 young girls) made up 50% of the total labor force. The kids received their lodging and panel, and two pence weekly. The younger children worked well as scavengers and piecers, but after a two years, they were permitted to be involved with spinning and carding. A number of the more older males became skilled mechanics.

John Kay posted “The Moral and Physical Circumstances of the functioning Classes” in 1832, Engels wrote his well-known “The Condition of the Working Course in England” in 1844 based on the plight of the Manchester underclass, and in 1842 Edwin Chadwick released his “Report on the Sanitary Circumstances of the Labouring Populace”. ‘Official’ paupership figures for the “Township of Manchester” were the highest in Britain – higher actually than in London’s east end.

Children faced a huge change as they observed employed in textile mill was completely different from working from home. In the textile mill, Children worked from Mon to Saturday, beginning work from six in the morning and finishing at seven in the evening, with only 1 hour break for lunch between twelve and one. If children were late due to the work these were fined. If kids fell asleep or built just a mistake on the job they were beaten. Children’s cash flow were suprisingly low, sometimes just a few pence for operating sixty hours in a week, there were rules and regulations. Children workers must arrive at the mill by specific time. Lateness was punishable with an excellent. Everybody worked a number of hours and no-one was allowed to leave before some time. All this was a new experience for children, possibly where they lived.

The conditions they used to stay in were awful, the apprentice House “jerry” designed, without control or regulation of any kind…there was even less drinking water and services, no effort to give privacy of any kind. Children worked in shifts and shared beds. Nine or ten children were sharing one bedroom, and al thosel ninety kids shared the three toilets. It had been moist – there have been no double brick wall space, no damp-proof courses. Rainfall leeched between the walls, and even in summers, damp rose up the walls. The just break from damp was the building of cellars to own it. On the other hand, these cellars unavoidably became dwellings for subtenants.

Even the circumstances at the Mill operating environment were horrible; it had been built on a massive open plan scale to ensure that the foremen could see every single child worker. If they thought that workers weren’t working hard enough or absent these were punished. The rules for working in the mill were posted on walls but that had not been enough as the majority of the children workers were not educated and could not read them. Kid workers had no rights and in some cases missed their meal breaks because the foreman ordered them to continue working. Kids who worked extended hours became incredibly exhausted and located it hard to keep up the rapidity needed by the superiors. Kids were usually beat with a strap to make them work quicker. Some were dipped head first in to the water reservoir if they became sleepy. Children were also punished for arriving late for do the job and for chatting to the various other children. Parish apprentices who ran from the factory were in danger of being delivered to jail. Kids who were deemed potential runaways were located in irons.

One of the key complaints made by factory reformers concerned the express of the setting up that they children were forced to job in. A declaration published in July 1833 confirmed that Quarry Bank Mill was ” ill-drained, no conveniences, low-roofed,

dirty;; ill-ventilated;; for dressing or cleansing; no contrivance to carry off dust and additional effluvia”.

Robert Southey (1774-1843), the poet and historian, arrived in Manchester in 1808, pretending to be always a Spanish traveller. He was given a guided tour at Quarry Lender mill and saw sights ‘which will make me thank God I am no Englishman’. While his guide was praising the guidelines of child labour, Southey was searching at ‘the unnatural dexterity with which the fingers of these little creatures were participating in in the machinery’, and when his guide informed him that the mill performed a day a day, Southey figured ‘if Dante got inhabited one of his hells with children, in this article was a scene worthy to have supplied him with different images of torment.’

Until the Factory Action of 1833, the factories were absolve to decide on the working time. The laborers usually worked for more than twelve time without breaks. Consequently, kid laborers suffered insomnia and were more susceptible to mistakes and injuries.

Matthew Crabtree was among the forty-eight persons whom the Sadler Committee interviewed in the entire year of 1832. Based on the Sadler Statement that catalyzed the Factory Take action of 1833, Crabtree had performed in a factory from the age of eight. He had worked sixteen hours a moment, from five a.m. to nine p.m. He usually went to sleep soon after supper, and was woken up by his parents every morning. According to Crabtree, he was ”very severely” and ”most normally” beaten whenever he was past due to work. The fear of being beaten, explained Crabtree, was ”sufficient impulse” to keep up with his do the job despite his drowsiness.

a few child laborers had been from deprived working families who cannot find the money for to feed themselves without the kids contributing financially. Even with the children’s income, the majority of families were hardly competent to sustain themselves. in addition, the kid laborers regularly complained about the caliber of food given instead of work. Some testified before the Parliament that they cannot eat the meager meal they were given as a result of exhaustion and pollution. The photographs of childhood personnel testify malnutrition and abuse. Child laborers have small build than their wealthier peers, the wrinkled faces protected with soot block the viewer from accurately concluding the children’s get older. The child workers were under the supervision of strangers — factory managers who were utilized by the factory owners. Also, the work did not require much finesse, and there were many unemployed children ready to substitute the worker’s place. Consequently, the factory managers didn’t carry the responsibility of the welfare of the workers; they were simply paid to ensure that the factory is managed smoothly.

As we can convey from the preceding text the treatment of kids in the factories’ was sometimes cruel and extreme. The children’s safety was generally neglected and it does prove fatal on several occasions. The youngest kids, around the age of eight, weren’t old more than enough to activate the equipment and were commonly sent to come to be assistants to adult primary workers. The people responsible for the factory’s whereabouts would conquer and verbally abuse the children, and take little thought for the worker’s protection. Girls could not come to be the exception to beatings and various other harsh kinds of pain infliction; children were dipped head initially in to the water cistern if indeed they became drowsy. The girls were also susceptible to sexual harassment.

Trivial mistakes due to lack of sleep led to serious accidental injuries or mutilation. The Sadler Report commissioned by the House of Commons in 1832 said that: ”there happen to be factories, no means few in number, nor confined to the smaller mills, where serious accidents are regularly occurring, and in which, notwithstanding, dangerous parts of the machinery are allowed to remain unfenced.” The employees were generally abandoned from the moment of the accident without wages, no medical attendance, no monetary reimbursement. The regulation was harsh and the punishment inhumane and sporadic.

Such punishment to be late or not working up to the task assigned is always to come to be ”weighted.” An overseer would tie a heavy weight to worker’s neck, and have him walk along the factory aisles so the other children could find him. This punishment could go on up to one hour. Weighting led to serious injuries in the back and the neck.

In addition to the in this article the violators often had to pay the consequence monetarily! Elizabeth Bentley, before the Sadler Committee in 1832, mentioned that she was usually quartered; ”If we had been a quarter of one hour too late, they might take off half an hour; we only got a cent an hour, plus they would take a halfpenny even more.” Some witnesses compared themselves as slaves, and the overseer as slave motorists.

One could argue that insufficient schooling had forced the kids to factories, and mandatory schooling was the main element to eradicating professional child labor. It really is authentic that illiteracy blocked the kids from elevating the social and monetary hierarchy. However, the Education Act of 1870 included provisions to allow school boards to compel attendance but necessary by-laws were not enforcement to implement these provisions. In a nutshell, the mandatory schoolings in Britain had been introduced as well late to critically donate to the reform.

Also, you can argue that mandatory schooling would just wear off kids who are already exhausted from long hours of tiring labor. Schooling did little good to children who were physically deprived. Insomnia will most likely risk dangers of lethargy and expose the children to more accidents.

Child employees generally labored to aid the task of the adult personnel; the two labor populations did not directly compete with each other. Therefore, you can argue that the kid workers significantly contributed to the impoverished family members income. As the children were regarded source of labor for extended, some did not object to mailing their children to factories. Possibly if others did not approve of the procedure in workplaces, they had no valid and legal means to protest.

Most statistics that are available could not be entirely trusted. One especially was careful never to depend totally on skewed amounts or individual case studies. Also, throughout history, various scholars and ideologists contain distorted the facts to confirm their assertions.

Until the child labor issue became circumstances issue, most of the investigators touched simply the top of difficulty. The factory overseers could very easily usher the investigators away from the reality. Also, the survey has not been conducted systematically as to portray an accurate sketch of the labor picture. On the other hand, some reports have already been accused of exaggerating the existing situation to bring the kid labor issue to circumstances concern. Major government reports on child labor were uneven in the policy, focusing predominantly upon children in industrial occupations.

In addition, some ”established” historians include maneuvered the figures to exaggerate kid labor for example of corruption and depravity when kid labor helped increase the family’s financial status.


Industrial child labor has occupied just a small portion of the kid labor population. Also, it possessed lasted for a fleeting instant in British history. However, child workers in industrial workplaces have to be highlighted as history where children were placed beneath the custody of a stranger in a confined, unwholesome space; the children were exposed to a higher possibility of abuse and mistreatment.

Although child labor in Britain shared very similar characteristics with other industrialized countries of a later monroe motivated sequence example period of time, the British government fairly peacefully restricted the employment of children. The publicity of the unique commission information and the attention of the public had contributed greatly.

Child labor, around it is criticized for its faults, should be analyzed, considering every likely factor. It is true that the child laborers have experienced from exploitation and unintended neglect, yet the friends and family would’ve starved if certainly not for the contribution of the kids. History should not be hastily judged, but noticed objectively for future’s sake.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *