338 EEPORT— 1903. 



In Mr. Wood's paper in the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 

 (June 1902) and in the Appendix to 'A History of Factory Legislation ' 

 are tabulated all the known published statistics (supplemented by private 

 research) bearing on this question. The figures lead clearly to the conclu- 

 sion that no permanent fall in wages can be connected with restrictive 

 legislation, while in many cases a rise is recorded at the time, if any, when 

 the legislation might have caused a fall. These figures are important in 

 that they show that restrictive legislation is not inconsistent with rising 

 wages,' but of course they do not show whether it furthered or hindered 

 that rise. 



Our investigators have furnished us with a quantity of wage statistics, 

 but many are not of a nature to throw light on this question. In the 

 textile industries (cotton, wool, carpets at Kidderminster, and silk at 

 Derby), when the hours were reduced from 60 to 56^ in 1875, it appears 

 that, in general, weekly time-wages were unchanged (though at Stockport 

 they were reduced), and so were piece rates ; in some cases the piece- 

 earners were able at once to get up to their former earnings, in other cases 

 it took some time ; but the depressed state of trade which marked the late 

 seventies made the time-limit practically inoperative for some years.- 

 Similar results seem to have followed in 1902, when working hours on 

 Saturday were reduced by one. 



In the Bristol hoot trade no permanent effect is reported ; in North- 

 ampton piece-workers are said to make as much as before in shorter 

 hours ; no direct result has been found in Sheffield or Nottingham. 



The experience of a merino factory in Nottinghamshire is very 

 interesting : • The reduction of hours in 1875 did not reduce wages. The 

 men and girls at first asked for a rise of piece prices as compensation for 

 an anticipated loss. The employer promised to consider it in a while, if 

 the loss actually took place and became permanent. In four weeks it was 

 found, however, that earnings were equal in 56^ hours to what they had 

 been in the previous 60-hour week. To the employer there was, in the 

 winter, an actual gain, as the same work being done in 3^ hours less, and 

 the hours not worked being taken off the evening when artificial light was 

 needed, less gas was burnt.' The same firm reduced to 55^ hours volun- 

 tarily in 1900, and again no loss was occasioned to the operatives. 



Mr. Henderson^ reports on the application of the Act of 1867 in 

 London. In factories, he says, work is generally paid by piece, and the 

 operatives made ujd to the same total in shorter hours. A manufacturer 

 of artificial flowers told him that he got as much work out of the hands 

 of his workpeople in 101; hours as formerly in 12 or 14, and saved i.'30 

 in one season on his gas-bill. Mr. Henderson says that he knows of 

 many similar cases. Concurrently with the application of the Acts in 

 London (1867-77), there was a great increase in the demand for labour 

 and a rapid rise of wages in London ; this rise was greatest to those who 

 came ' under the protection of the Factory Acts, namely women, young 

 persons, and children.' 



' In the last part of Appendix I. below, a case is given where packers in a 

 laundry, whose class of work was specially affected by the Acts, had obtained a 

 greater increase of wages than any other class of workers in the same laundry. 



- Factory Inspector's Report^ April 1875, p. 31 (where an opinion contrary to that 

 just given is to be found), and pp. 65, 67 ; April 1876, pp. 57, 65, 98 ; 7orks., Lana., 

 Kidderminster. 



» Ihid., April 1877, pp. 21, 22, 23. 



