OO  — — —  — 
TRANSACTIONS OF SECTION F. 927 
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9. 
The following Papers and Reports were read :— 
1. The Factories and Workshops Acts—Past and Present.! 
By G. H. L. Ricxarps. 
The author gave a brief summary of the various Factory Acts passed between 
1802 and 1889. The more important points in each Act were stated, so that those 
unacquainted with factory legislation might be able to appreciate the course 
adopted by the Legislature in promoting the safety, comfort, and improved con- 
dition of the industrial classes in this country, as shown by the gradual and careful 
manner in which the various Acts have been introduced. 
The very important Act of 1878 was carefully considered, with reference to 
‘domestic workshops,’ which then formed a new feature of the legislation on this 
subject. Some remarks followed as to further legislation in that direction. Evi- 
dence of the improvement in the physical condition of the factory operatives from 
personal medical experience was also adduced, 
2. Modern Changes in the Mobility of Labour. By H. Luewettyn Sura, 
The author proposed to discuss the effects on mobility of labour of the intro- 
duction of machinery and the tendency to production on a large scale. He treated 
mobility chiefly from the point of view of free change of occupation rather than 
of place. 
Mobility is not the same as movement, nor is the one measured by the other. 
We may have high mobility and little movement, and the reverse. Many modern 
changes tend to increase mobility at the expense of movement. He drew examples 
from the case of the old nomadic hand-combers, the influx to the towns and the 
disturbance of labour caused by the Lancashire cotton famine. So in the case of 
mobility from trade to trade, in normal times there may be in practice no inter- 
change of labour, yet mobility may be almost perfect, except for a slight initial 
friction. By mobility is meant the free economic choice of employment, either by 
change of occupation or place. It is measured by the extent to which a set of 
workers engaged in a particular process, or in making a particular article, would 
or would not suffer economically by a change in the demand for that process 
or that article. There is besides ‘ initial mobility’ to be considered, ¢.e., the free 
effective choice of occupation at the outset. This is affected by localisation of 
industries, and the tendency to heredity, which again is strongest in domestic 
trades and weakest in factories. Excessive localisation of industries is in many 
- districts giving way to local diversification. 
Labour may be specialised in two ways—(1) with regard to a particular process, 
(2) with regard to a particular product, e.g., the modern ‘engineer’ and the old 
bootmaker. Thus we have to consider mobility both as (a) between different 
processes of the same manufacture, and (5) between corresponding processes in 
different manufactures. There are then two possible degrees of freedom, and 
the general effect of machinery is to close the channels (a), and open up 
channels (0). 
’ As an example of modern changes, he took the change from the old hand- 
combers, with their specialised skill, to the modern combing-mill. 
(a) The makers of the combing machines, Here there are two classes of 
workers, specialised as to process, but independent of the product. 
(8) The workers of the machines. The motive-power department is completely 
unspecialised so far as the product is concerned. He discussed how far the process 
of minding the combing machines is specialised. 
Examples were drawn from other kinds of machinery, and the power of inter- 
1 Published in eatenso in Hygiene, December 1890. 
