29 i . REPORT— 1902. 



fifty hours a week through the year, but that he had to refuse orders in 

 the busy season. A Leeds worsted and wool manufactui'er found that 

 his whole work was hindered and orders lost by the impossibility of 

 employing knotters and menders overtime. One Leeds clothing firui 

 desired more legalised overtime to make up for lost time ; another found 

 the present allowance sufficient ; small firms feel the restriction more 

 than large ; others admit the difficulty but do not recommend any change. 

 In 1895 the Leeds Chambers of Commei'ce made the following represen- 

 tation to the Government : ' The time allowed by Section .53 of the Act 

 of 1878 should remain as it is, subject to the inclusion of the woollen 

 textile industry. . . . The time allowed by that Act (thirty days' over- 

 time in the year) is not excessive, having regard to the particular stre.ss of 

 work and orders there is at special times of the year. Owing to the 

 altered circumstances of trade and the altered conditions under which the 

 woollen trade is now carried on, that trade should have the same advan- 

 tages granted to it as are granted to the wholesale clothing trade.' I could 

 not find, however, that there was in 1901 any strong or widespread feeling 

 in favour of the extension of legalised overtime.^ 



Owing to the system of commission weaving, a firm can take more 

 orders than can be executed in its own premises ; and by this means a 

 pressure of work can be distributed, if not directly among the factories, at 

 any rate indirectly by the commission weavers taking work from the 

 busiest firms. The exact nature of the pressure differs greatly from town 

 to town., and factory to factory. There was no evidence that the efi'ect of 

 the Acts was to diminish the inequalities of the seasons. On the whole 

 it seems that the manufacturers are not seriously inconvenienced by 

 restricted hours, except in special branches for short periods. A few 

 extra hours would allow some employers to accept orders they would 

 otherwise refuse, and be more punctual in delivery ; some orders may 

 under present circumstances be placed in Germany that would otherwise 

 go to the West Riding ; but there is no evidence that the West Riding, 

 as a whole, cannot cope with its work, and at the most the restriction of 

 hours would be only a minor cause in displacing trade. 

 , As regards wages, it must be admitted that it is impossible to deter- 

 mine whether the reduction of hours in 1874 had direct effect on wages or 

 not. So many important changes and events took place about that time 

 that the efi'ect of the diminution of the working week by one-twentieth 

 must be masked by other changes, (reneral wage statistics are not 

 sufficiently accurate to enable us to identify a particular change of 6d. per 

 week. No one I spoke with recollects any specific change in weekly, 

 liourly, or piece rates. Two combers state that there was no change in 

 wages in 1874, but that there was a gradual fall after that date. Manu- 

 facturers near Bradford, at Batley, and in Leeds agree that the rates 

 were unaltered ; thus all on weekly wages obtained the same after as 

 before the change in hours ; but those on piece- rates (tliat is, all the 

 weavers) earned less, except in so far as they could make up by increased 

 hourly output ; whether they made up the diflference or not is a question 

 on which \ arious opinions are held, but there are no statistics to back 

 them. 



In the clothing trade, it is said, the price list hung up in accordance 



' For confirmation of this see Factor;/ Inspector's lirpnrf for 1000 (Cd. 668), 

 p. 375, re overtime allowed for AVar Office contracts. 



