526 Evidence before 



J liavo nfvnr fdiind a single inst;ince in 

 vv'liir.li any man was prevented goiii?,. 

 unless inlorrriation had been previously 

 received, by his own want of laci- 

 tiirnily, and lodged witli the proper 

 authorities. 



Have you any fears lliat the country 

 ■would suller by the rivalry of other 

 countries, if perfect freedom was friven 

 to the artizans to go and return? — I am 

 perfectly persuaded that if the Act fur 

 the prohibition of machinery was re- 

 pealed, there would be hardly an 

 instance of a man being induced lo 

 leave this country ; nor should I be 

 afraid of the mechanical exertions of any 

 i-oiuifry while we have scope for our 

 talent and industry. 



What is your opinion of tlie effect of 

 the laws a^^ainst the combination of 

 Workmen, so far as they prohibit their 

 combining to raise their wages, to regu- 

 late them, or to regulate their hours of 

 working? — I have always found, that in 

 those employments where the wages 

 were uniform, and tlie same in amount, 

 and where an ivferior and idle man 

 was paid the same compensation as the 

 superior and industrious, tlicre have 

 always been combinations among those 

 men. Now, in all those trades where 

 the men have made their own indivi- 

 «liial engagements, we never see any 

 thing like combinations; and previous 

 to the Act for the repeal of the 51li of 

 'Elizabeth, which took place in the year 

 1814, combinations were much more 

 fre(|uent than they are now ; and, while 

 that law was in existence, every trade 

 was subject to its most mischievous 

 provisions ; but after its repeal, when a 

 inan was allowed to work at any em- 

 ployment, whether he had served one, 

 two, or three, years, or not at all, that 

 broke the neck of all combinations, 

 because then the excluding party were 

 so overwhelmed by new men, that we 

 could do without them; but that which 

 has struck most effectually at the root 

 of all combination among workmen, is 

 to pay every man according to his me- 

 rit, and to allow him to make his own 

 agreement with his employer. 



What, in your opinion, is the effect 

 of the Combination Laws now existing? 

 — My opinion is, that they have a pre- 

 judicial effect, both against the men and 

 their employers; and that it has excited 

 jealousy and ill-will: but, from my own 

 knowledge, 1 do not know a single case 

 ■where the masters have conspired 

 against the men, further than Ihat of 



theCommitlce [May J, 



associating togetiier: if the men .nie 

 allowed to make their own engage*' 

 ments, they need not fear any conspi- 

 racy ; but I know the masters could 

 conspire with impunity against the men 

 if they chose, because their numbers arc. 

 few, and they can carry on their mea- 

 sures with more sei recy, and perhaps 

 with more dexterity, than the work- 

 men : on th;it account alone the Act 

 ought to be repealed, as both paities are 

 not equally protected by it. 



Having employed a great many metiy 

 is it your opinion, tliat the men and- 

 masters should bo allowed to make 

 vVhat bargain they please, both as lo 

 amount of wages or of ■working, the- 

 method of payment, and the number of 

 apprentices; provided a summary me- 

 thod of enforcing the contract is esta- 

 blished? — It appears to me, that all that 

 is necessary is to have a law obliging 

 parlies to do that which they agree to 

 do: tluit they should be left at perfect 

 liberty. 



Do you conceive any inconvenience 

 from the repeal of all the laws which 

 now exist? — 1 think the greatest benefit 

 would result, both to the emi)loycrs and 

 employed. 



il/v. Alexander. . .. 



Have you had opportunitiesof know* 

 jug what manufactories are established 

 for the making of niachinery in France? 

 —I know, generally, the cotton manu- 

 factories in France. I know the spin- 

 ning machine and vveaving machine; 

 tliey are carried on there to a very 

 great extent. I was in Manchester, in 

 1803, when the first decree of Napoleon, 

 prohibited all the n)anufuctuied cotton 

 goo<ls of this country. 



Can you state to the Committee, 

 what was the number of cotton manu- 

 factories then existing in France? — 

 They were all confined to Rouen, in 

 Normandy; were but small establish- 

 ments, and particularly for coarse 

 cottons. 



Will you slate what number of cotton 

 spinning manufactories now exist in 

 France, and the places where they exist? 

 — We have now between five and 600 

 cotton mills, for spinning, of various 

 classes. 



Have you got any list of the places? 

 — Rouen, in the department of " la 

 Seine Inferieure ;" Lisle, in the depart- 

 ment of the North ; St. Quentin, in the 

 department of I'Aisne and Mulhouse, 

 which is in the department of " Haut 

 Rliiii." These are the four princip^il 

 departments 



