- 歡迎訪問欣可小說小說網
-
桌麵快捷
-
加入收藏
-
設為首頁
桌麵快捷
加入收藏
設為首頁
Workmen
and
factory
inspectors
protested
on
hygienic
and
moral
grounds,
but
Capital
answered:
\"My
deeds
upon
my
head!
I
crave
the
law,
The
penalty
and
forfeit
of
my
bond.\"
In
fact,
according
to
statistics
laid
before
the
House
of
Commons
on
July
26th,
1850,
in
spite
of
all
protests,
on
July
15th,
1850,
3,742
children
were
subjected
to
this
\"practice\"
in
257
factories.117Still,
this
was
not
enough.
The
Lynx
eye
of
Capital
discovered
that
the
Act
of
1844
did
not
allow
5
hours'work
before
mid-day
without
a
pause
of
at
least
30
minutes
for
refreshment,
but
prescribed
nothing
of
the
kind
for
work
after
mid-day.
Therefore,
it
claimed
and
obtained
the
enjoyment
not
only
of
making
children
of
8
drudge
without
intermission
from
2
to
8.30
p.m.,
but
also
of
making
them
hunger
during
that
time.
\"Ay,
his
breast.
So
says
the
bond.\"
This
Shylock-clinging118to
the
letter
of
the
law
of
1844,
so
far
as
it
regulated
children's
labour,
was
but
to
lead
up
to
an
open
revolt
against
the
same
law,
so
far
as
it
regulated
the
labour
of
\"young
persons
and
women.\"
It
will
be
remembered
that
the
abolition
of
the
\"false
relay
system\"
was
the
chief
aim
and
object
of
that
law.
The
masters
began
their
revolt
with
the
simple
declaration
that
the
sections
of
the
Act
of
1844
which
prohibited
the
ad
libitum
use
of
young
persons
and
women
in
such
short
fractions
of
the
day
of
15
hours
as
the
employer
chose,
were\"comparatively
harmless\"
so
long
as
the
work-time
was
fixed
at
12
hours.
But
under
the
Ten
Hours'
Act
they
were
a
\"grievous
hardship.\"
119They
informed
the
inspectors
in
the
coolest
manner
that
they
should
place
themselves
above
the
letter
of
the
law,
and
re
introduce
the
old
system
on
their
own
account.120They
were
acting
in
the
interests
of
the
ill-advised
operatives
themselves,
\"in
order
to
be
able
to
pay
them
higher
wages.\"
\"This
was
the
only
possible
plan
by
which
to
maintain,
under
the
Ten
Hours'
Act,
the
industrial
supremacy
of
Great
Britain.\"
\"Perhaps
it
may
be
a
little
difficult
to
detect
irregularities
under
the
relay
system;
but
what
of
that
Is
the
great
manufacturing
interest
of
this
country
to
be
treated
as
a
secondary
matter
in
order
to
save
some
little
trouble
to
Inspectors
and
Sub-Inspectors
of
Factories\"
121
All
these
shifts
naturally
were
of
no
avail.
The
Factory
Inspectors
appealed
to
the
Law
Courts.
But
soon
such
a
cloud
of
dust
in
the
way
of
petitions
from
the
masters
overwhelmed
the
Home
Secretary,
Sir
George
Grey,
that
in
a
circular
of
August
5th,
1848,
he
recommends
the
inspectors
not
\"to
lay
informations
against
mill-owners
for
a
breach
of
the
letter
of
the
Act,
or
for
employment
of
young
persons
by
relays
in
cases
in
which
there
is
no
reason
to
believe
that
such
young
persons
have
been
actually
employed
for
a
longer
period
than
that
sanctioned
by
law.\"
Hereupon,
Factory
Inspector
J.
Stuart
allowed
the
so-called
relay
system
during
the
15
hours
of
the
factory
day
throughout
Scotland,
where
it
soon
flourished
again
as
of
old.
The
English
Factory
Inspectors,
on
the
other
hand,
declared
that
the
Home
Secretary
had
no
power
dictatorially
to
suspend
the
law,
and
continued
their
legal
proceedings
against
the
pro
slavery
rebellion.
But
what
was
the
good
of
summoning
the
capitalists
when
the
Courts
in
this
case
the
country
magistrates
–Cobbett's
\"Great
Unpaid\"
–
acquitted
them
In
these
tribunals,
the
masters
sat
in
judgment
on
themselves
An
example.
One
Eskrigge,
cotton-spinner,
of
the
firm
of
Kershaw,
Leese,
&
Co.,
had
laid
before
the
Factory
Inspector
of
his
district
the
scheme
of
a
relay
system
intended
for
his
mill.
Receiving
a
refusal,
he
at
first
kept
quiet.
A
few
months
later,
an
individual
named
Robinson,
also
a
cotton-spinner,
and
if
not
his
Man
Friday,
at
all
events
related
to
Eskrigge,appeared
before
the
borough
magistrates
of
Stockport
on
a
charge
of
introducing
the
identical
plan
of
relays
invented
by
Eskrigge.
Four
Justices
sat,
among
them
three
cottonspinners,
at
their
head
this
same
inevitable
Eskrigge.
Eskrigge
acquitted
Robinson,
and
now
was
of
opinion
that
what
was
right
for
Robinson
was
fair
for
Eskrigge.
Supported
by
his
own
legal
decision,
he
introduced
the
system
at
once
into
his
own
factory.122Of
course,
the
composition
of
this
tribunal
was
in
itself
a
violation
of
the
law.123
These
judicial
farces,
exclaims
Inspector
Howell,\"urgently
call
for
a
remedy
–
either
that
the
law
should
be
so
altered
as
to
be
made
to
conform
to
these
decisions,
or
that
it
should
be
administered
by
a
less
fallible
tribunal,
whose
decisions
would
conform
to
the
law
...
when
these
cases
are
brought
forward.
I
long
for
a
stipendiary
magistrate.\"124
The
crown
lawyers
declared
the
masters'
interpretation
of
the
Act
of
1848
absurd.
But
the
Saviours
of
Society
would
not
allow
themselves
to
be
turned
from
their
purpose.
Leonard
Horner
reports,
\"Having
endeavoured
to
enforce
the
Act
...
by
ten
prosecutions
in
seven
magisterial
divisions,and
having
been
supported
by
the
magistrates
in
one
case
only
...
I
considered
it
useless
to
prosecute
more
for
this
evasion
of
the
law.
That
part
of
the
Act
of
1848
which
was
framed
for
securing
uniformity
in
the
hours
of
work,
...
is
thus
no
longer
in
force
in
my
district
(Lancashire).Neither
have
the
sub-inspectors
or
myself
any
means
of
satisfying
ourselves,
when
we
inspect
a
mill
working
by
shifts,
that
the
young
persons
and
women
are
not
working
more
than
10
hours
a-day....
In
a
return
of
the
30th
April,
...
of
millowners
working
by
shifts,
the
number
amounts
to
114,
and
has
been
for
some
time
rapidly
increasing.
In
general,
the
time
of
working
the
mill
is
extended
to
13
hours'
from
6
a.m.
to
7
p.m.,....
in
some
instances
it
amounts
to
15
hours,
from
5
a.m.
to
8
p.m.\"125
Already,
in
December,
1848,
Leonard
Horner
had
a
list
of
65
manufacturers
and
29
overlookers
who
unanimously
declared
that
no
system
of
supervision
could,
under
this
relay
system,
prevent
enormous
over
work.126Now,
the
same
children
and
young
persons
were
shifted
from
the
spinning-room
to
the
weaving
room,
now,
during
15
hours,
from
one
factory
to
another.
127How
was
it
possible
to
control
a
system
which,
\"under
the
guise
of
relays,
is
some
one
of
the
many
plans
for
shuffling
'the
hands'
about
in
endless
variety,
and
shifting
the
hours
of
work
and
of
rest
for
different
individuals
throughout
the
day,so
that
you
may
never
have
one
complete
set
of
hands
working
together
in
the
same
room
at
the
same
time.\"128
But
altogether
independently
of
actual
over
work,
this
so-called
relay
system
was
an
offspring
of
capitalistic
fantasy,
such
as
Fourier,
in
his
humorous
sketches
of
\"Courses
Seances,\"
has
never
surpassed,except
that
the
\"attraction
of
labour\"
was
changed
into
the
attraction
of
capital.
Look,
for
example,
at
those
schemes
of
the
masters
which
the
\"respectable\"
press
praised
as
models
of
\"what
a
reasonable
degree
of
care
and
method
can
accomplish.\"
The
personnel
of
the
workpeople
was
sometimes
divided
into
from
12
to
14
categories,
which
themselves
constantly
changed
and
recharged
their
constituent
parts.
During
the
15
hours
of
the
factory
day,
capital
dragged
in
the
labourer
now
for
30
minutes,
now
for
an
hour,
and
then
pushed
him
out
again,
to
drag
him
into
the
factory
and
to
thrust
him
out
afresh,
hounding
him
hither
and
thither,
in
scattered
shreds
of
time,
without
ever
losing
hold
of
him
until
the
full
10
hours'
work
was
done.
As
on
the
stage,
the
same
persons
had
to
appear
in
turns
in
the
different
scenes
of
the
different
acts.
But
as
an
actor
during
the
whole
course
of
the
play
belongs
to
the
stage,
so
the
operatives,
during
15
hours,
belonged
to
the
factory,
without
reckoning
the
time
for
going
and
coming.
Thus
the
hours
of
rest
were
turned
into
hours
of
enforced
idleness,
which
drove
the
youths
to
the
pot-house,
and
the
girls
to
the
brothel.
At
every
new
trick
that
the
capitalist,
from
day
to
day,
hit
upon
for
keeping
his
machinery
going
12
or
15
hours
without
increasing
the
number
of
his
hands,
the
worker
had
to
swallow
his
meals
now
in
this
fragment
of
time,now
in
that.
At
the
time
of
the
10
hours'
agitation,
the
masters
cried
out
that
the
working
mob
petitioned
in
the
hope
of
obtaining
12
hours'
wages
for
10
hours'work.
Now
they
reversed
the
medal.
They
paid
10
hours'
wages
for
12
or
15
hours'
lordship
over
labour
power.129This
was
the
gist
of
the
matter,
this
the
masters'
interpretation
of
the
10
hours'
law!
These
were
the
same
unctuous
Free-traders,
perspiring
with
the
love
of
humanity,
who
for
full
10
years,
during
the
Anti-Corn
Law
agitation,
had
preached
to
the
operatives,
by
a
reckoning
of
pounds,
shillings,
and
pence,
that
with
free
importation
of
corn,
and
with
the
means
possessed
by
English
industry,
10
hours'
labour
would
be
quite
enough
to
enrich
the
capitalists.130This
revolt
of
capital,
after
two
years
was
at
last
crowned
with
victory
by
a
decision
of
one
of
the
four
highest
Courts
of
Justice
in
England,
the
Court
of
Exchequer,which
in
a
case
brought
before
it
on
February
8th,1850,
decided
that
the
manufacturers
were
certainly
acting
against
the
sense
of
the
Act
of
1844,
but
that
this
Act
itself
contained
certain
words
that
rendered
it
meaningless.
\"By
this
decision,
the
Ten
Hours'
Act
was
abolished.\"131A
crowd
of
masters,
who
until
then
had
been
afraid
of
using
the
relay
system
for
young
persons
and
women,
now
took
it
up
heart
and
soul.132But
on
this
apparently
decisive
victory
of
capital,followed
at
once
a
revulsion.
The
workpeople
had
hitherto
offered
a
passive,
although
inflexible
and
unremitting
resistance.
They
now
protested
in
Lancashire
and
Yorkshire
in
threatening
meetings.
The
pretended
Ten
Hours'
Act
was
thus
simple
humbug,
parliamentary
cheating,
had
never
existed!
The
Factory
Inspectors
urgently
warned
the
Government
that
the
antagonism
of
classes
had
arrived
at
an
incredible
tension.
Some
of
the
masters
themselves
murmured:
\"On
account
of
the
contradictory
decisions
of
the
magistrates,
a
condition
of
things
altogether
abnormal
and
anarchical
obtains.
One
law
holds
in
Yorkshire,
another
in
Lancashire,
one
law
in
one
parish
of
Lancashire,
another
in
its
immediate
neighbourhood.
The
manufacturer
in
large
towns
could
evade
the
law,
the
manufacturer
in
country
districts
could
not
find
the
people
necessary
for
the
relay
system,
still
less
for
the
shifting
of
hands
from
one
factory
to
another,\"
&c.
And
the
first
birthright
of
capital
is
equal
exploitation
of
labour-power
by
all
capitalists.
Under
these
circumstances
a
compromise
between
masters
and
men
was
effected
that
received
the
seal
of
Parliament
in
the
additional
Factory
Act
of
August
5th,
1850.
The
working
day
for
\"young
persons
and
women,\"
was
raised
from
10
to
10
hours
for
the
first
five
days
of
the
week,
and
shortened
to
7
on
the
Saturday.
The
work
was
to
go
on
between
6
a.m.and
6
p.m.133,
with
pauses
of
not
less
than
1
hours
for
meal-times,
these
meal-times
to
be
allowed
at
one
and
the
same
time
for
all,
and
conformably
to
the
conditions
of
1844.
By
this
an
end
was
put
to
the
relay
system
once
for
all.134For
children's
labour,
the
Act
of
1844
remained
in
force.
One
set
of
masters,
this
time
as
before,
secured
to
itself
special
seigneurial
rights
over
the
children
of
the
proletariat.
These
were
the
silk
manufacturers.In
1833
they
had
howled
out
in
threatening
fashion,\"if
the
liberty
of
working
children
of
any
age
for
10
hours
a
day
were
taken
away,
it
would
stop
their
works.\"135It
would
be
impossible
for
them
to
buy
a
sufficient
number
of
children
over
13.
They
extorted
the
privilege
they
desired.
The
pretext
was
shown
on
subsequent
investigation
to
be
a
deliberate
lie.136It
did
not,
however,
prevent
them,
during
10
years,
from
spinning
silk
10
hours
a
day
out
of
the
blood
of
little
children
who
had
to
be
placed
upon
stools
for
the
performance
of
their
work.137The
Act
of
1844
certainly
\"robbed\"
them
of
the
\"liberty\"
of
employing
children
under
11
longer
than
6
hours
a
day.
But
it
secured
to
them,
on
the
other
hand,
the
privilege
of
working
children
between
11
and
13,
10
hours
a
day,and
of
annulling
in
their
case
the
education
made
compulsory
for
all
other
factory
children.
This
time
the
pretext
was
\"the
delicate
texture
of
the
fabric
in
which
they
were
employed,
requiring
a
lightness
of
touch,only
to
be
acquired
by
their
early
introduction
to
these
factories.\"
138
The
children
were
slaughtered
out-and-out
for
the
sake
of
their
delicate
fingers,
as
in
Southern
Russia
the
horned
cattle
for
the
sake
of
their
hide
and
tallow.At
length,
in
1850,
the
privilege
granted
in
1844,
was
limited
to
the
departments
of
silk-twisting
and
silk
winding.
But
here,
to
make
amends
to
capital
bereft
of
its
\"freedom,\"
the
work-time
for
children
from
11
to
13
was
raised
from
10
to
10
hours.
Pretext:
\"Labour
in
silk
mills
was
lighter
than
in
mills
for
other
fabrics,and
less
likely
in
other
respects
also
to
be
prejudicial
to
health.\"139Official
medical
inquiries
proved
afterwards
that,
on
the
contrary,
\"the
average
death-rate
is
exceedingly
high
in
the
silk
districts
and
amongst
the
female
part
of
the
population
is
higher
even
than
it
is
in
the
cotton
districts
of
Lancashire.\"140
Despite
the
protests
of
the
Factory
Inspector,renewed
every
6
months,
the
mischief
continues
to
this
hour.
141
The
Act
of
1850
changed
the
15
hours'
time
from
6
a.m.
to
8:30
p.m.,
into
the
12
hours
from
6
a.m.
to
6
p.m.
for
\"young
persons
and
women\"
only.
It
did
not,
therefore,
affect
children
who
could
always
be
employed
for
half
an
hour
before
and
2
hours
after
this
period,
provided
the
whole
of
their
labour
did
not
exceed
6
hours.
Whilst
the
bill
was
under
discussion,the
Factory
Inspectors
laid
before
Parliament
statistics
of
the
infamous
abuses
due
to
this
anomaly.
To
no
purpose.
In
the
background
lurked
the
intention
of
screwing
up,
during
prosperous
years,
the
working
day
of
adult
males
to
15
hours
by
the
aid
of
the
children.
The
experience
of
the
three
following
years
showed
that
such
an
attempt
must
come
to
grief
against
the
resistance
of
the
adult
male
operatives.
The
Act
of
1850
was
therefore
finally
completed
in
1853
by
forbidding
the
\"employment
of
children
in
the
morning
before
and
in
the
evening
after
young
persons
and
women.\"
Henceforth
with
a
few
exceptions
the
Factory
Act
of
1850
regulated
the
working
day
of
all
workers
in
the
branches
of
industry
that
come
under
it.142Since
the
passing
of
the
first
Factory
Act
half
acentury
had
elapsed.143
Factory
legislation
for
the
first
time
went
beyond
its
original
sphere
in
the
\"Printworks'
Act
of
1845.\"The
displeasure
with
which
capital
received
this
new\"extravagance\"
speaks
through
every
line
of
the
Act.It
limits
the
working
day
for
children
from
8
to
13,and
for
women
to
16
hours,
between
6
a.m.
and
10
p.m.,
without
any
legal
pause
for
meal-times.
It
allows
males
over
13
to
be
worked
at
will
day
and
night.144It
is
a
Parliamentary
abortion.145
However,
the
principle
had
triumphed
with
its
victory
in
those
great
branches
of
industry
which
form
the
most
characteristic
creation
of
the
modern
mode
of
production.
Their
wonderful
development
from
1853
to
1860,
hand-in-hand
with
the
physical
and
moral
regeneration
of
the
factory
workers,
struck
the
most
purblind.
The
masters
from
whom
the
legal
limitation
and
regulation
had
been
wrung
step
by
step
after
a
civil
war
of
half
a
century,
themselves
referred
ostentatiously
to
the
contrast
with
the
branches
of
exploitation
still
\"free.\"
146The
Pharisees
of
\"Political
Economy\"
now
proclaimed
the
discernment
of
the
necessity
of
a
legally
fixed
working
day
as
a
characteristic
new
discovery
of
their
\"science.\"147It
will
be
easily
understood
that
after
the
factory
magnates
had
resigned
themselves
and
become
reconciled
to
the
inevitable,
the
power
of
resistance
of
capital
gradually
weakened,
whilst
at
the
same
time
the
power
of
attack
of
the
working-class
grew
with
the
number
of
its
allies
in
the
classes
of
society
not
immediately
interested
in
the
question.
Hence
the
comparatively
rapid
advance
since
1860.
The
dye-works
and
bleach-works
all
came
under
the
Factory
Act
of
1850
in
1860;148lace
and
stocking
manufactures
in
1861.
In
consequence
of
the
first
report
of
the
Commission
on
the
employment
of
children
(1863)
the
same
fate
was
shared
by
the
manufacturers
of
all
earthenwares(not
merely
pottery),
Lucifer-matches,
percussion
caps,
cartridges,
carpets,
fustian-cutting,
and
many
processes
included
under
the
name
of
\"finishing.\"In
the
year
1863
bleaching
in
the
open
air149and
baking
were
placed
under
special
Acts,
by
which,
in
the
former,
the
labour
of
young
persons
and
women
during
the
night-time
(from
8
in
the
evening
to
6
in
the
morning),
and
in
the
latter,
the
employment
of
journeymen
bakers
under
18,
between
9
in
the
evening
and
5
in
the
morning
were
forbidden.
We
shall
return
to
the
later
proposals
of
the
same
Commission,which
threatened
to
deprive
of
their
\"freedom\"
all
the
important
branches
of
English
Industry,
with
the
exception
of
agriculture,
mines,
and
the
means
of
transport.150
Section
7:
The
Struggle
for
a
Normal
Working
Day.
Reaction
of
the
English
Factory
Acts
on
Other
Countries
The
reader
will
bear
in
mind
that
the
production
of
surplus-value,
or
the
extraction
of
surplus
labour,
is
the
specific
end
and
aim,
the
sum
and
substance,
of
capitalist
production,
quite
apart
from
any
changes
in
the
mode
of
production,
which
may
arise
from
the
subordination
of
labour
to
capital.
He
will
remember
that
as
far
as
we
have
at
present
gone
only
the
independent
labourer,
and
therefore
only
the
labourer
legally
qualified
to
act
for
himself,
enters
as
a
vendor
of
a
commodity
into
a
contract
with
the
capitalist.
If,therefore,
in
our
historical
sketch,
on
the
one
hand,modern
industry,
on
the
other,
the
labour
of
those
who
are
physically
and
legally
minors,
play
important
parts,
the
former
was
to
us
only
a
special
department,and
the
latter
only
a
specially
striking
example
of
labour
exploitation.
Without,
however,
anticipating
the
subsequent
development
of
our
inquiry,
from
the
mere
connexion
of
the
historic
facts
before
us
it
follows:
First.
The
passion
of
capital
for
an
unlimited
and
reckless
extension
of
the
working
day,
is
first
gratified
in
the
industries
earliest
revolutionised
by
water
power,
steam,
and
machinery,
in
those
first
creations
of
the
modern
mode
of
production,
cotton,
wool,
flax,and
silk
spinning,
and
weaving.
The
changes
in
the
material
mode
of
production,
and
the
corresponding
changes
in
the
social
relations
of
the
producers151gave
rise
first
to
an
extravagance
beyond
all
bounds,and
then
in
opposition
to
this,
called
forth
a
control
on
the
part
of
Society
which
legally
limits,
regulates,and
makes
uniform
the
working
day
and
its
pauses.This
control
appears,
therefore,
during
the
first
half
of
the
nineteenth
century
simply
as
exceptional
legislation.152As
soon
as
this
primitive
dominion
of
the
new
mode
of
production
was
conquered,
it
was
found
that,
in
the
meantime,
not
only
had
many
other
branches
of
production
been
made
to
adopt
the
same
factory
system,
but
that
manufactures
with
more
or
less
obsolete
methods,
such
as
potteries,
glass-making,&c.,
that
old-fashioned
handicrafts,
like
baking,
and,finally,
even
that
the
so-called
domestic
industries,such
as
nail-making,153had
long
since
fallen
as
completely
under
capitalist
exploitation
as
the
factories
themselves.
Legislation
was,
therefore,
compelled
to
gradually
get
rid
of
its
exceptional
character,
or
where,as
in
England,
it
proceeds
after
the
manner
of
the
Roman
Casuists,
to
declare
any
house
in
which
work
was
done
to
be
a
factory.154
Second.
The
history
of
the
regulation
of
the
working
day
in
certain
branches
of
production,
and
the
struggle
still
going
on
in
others
in
regard
to
this
regulation,prove
conclusively
that
the
isolated
labourer,
the
labourer
as
\"free\"
vendor
of
his
labour-power,
when
capitalist
production
has
once
attained
a
certain
stage,
succumbs
without
any
power
of
resistance.The
creation
of
a
normal
working
day
is,
therefore,the
product
of
a
protracted
civil
war,
more
or
less
dissembled,
between
the
capitalist
class
and
the
working-class.
As
the
contest
takes
place
in
the
arena
of
modern
industry,
it
first
breaks
out
in
the
home
of
that
industry
–
England.155The
English
factory
workers
were
the
champions,
not
only
of
the
English,but
of
the
modern
working-class
generally,
as
their
theorists
were
the
first
to
throw
down
the
gauntlet
to
the
theory
of
capital.156Hence,
the
philosopher
of
the
Factory,
Ure,
denounces
as
an
ineffable
disgrace
to
the
English
working-class
that
they
inscribed
\"the
slavery
of
the
Factory
Acts\"
on
the
banner
which
they
bore
against
capital,
manfully
striving
for
\"perfect
freedom
of
labour.\"157
France
limps
slowly
behind
England.
The
February
revolution
was
necessary
to
bring
into
the
world
the
12
hours'
law,158which
is
much
more
deficient
than
its
English
original.
For
all
that,
the
French
revolutionary
method
has
its
special
advantages.
It
once
for
all
commands
the
same
limit
to
the
working
day
in
all
shops
and
factories
without
distinction,
whilst
English
legislation
reluctantly
yields
to
the
pressure
of
circumstances,
now
on
this
point,
now
on
that,and
is
getting
lost
in
a
hopelessly
bewildering
tangle
of
contradictory
enactments.159On
the
other
hand,the
French
law
proclaims
as
a
principle
that
which
in
England
was
only
won
in
the
name
of
children,minors,
and
women,
and
has
been
only
recently
for
the
first
time
claimed
as
a
general
right.160
In
the
United
States
of
North
America,
every
independent
movement
of
the
workers
was
paralysed
so
long
as
slavery
disfigured
a
part
of
the
Republic.Labour
cannot
emancipate
itself
in
the
white
skin
where
in
the
black
it
is
branded.
But
out
of
the
death
of
slavery
a
new
life
at
once
arose.
The
first
fruit
of
the
Civil
War
was
the
eight
hours'
agitation,
that
ran
with
the
seven-leagued
boots
of
the
locomotive
from
the
Atlantic
to
the
Pacific,
from
New
England
to
California.
The
General
Congress
of
labour
at
Baltimore
(August
16th,
1866)
declared:
\"The
first
and
great
necessity
of
the
present,
to
free
the
labour
of
this
country
from
capitalistic
slavery,
is
the
passing
of
a
law
by
which
eight
hours
shall
be
the
normal
working
day
in
all
States
of
the
American
Union.
We
are
resolved
to
put
forth
all
our
strength
until
this
glorious
result
is
attained.\"161
At
the
same
time,
the
Congress
of
the
International
Working
Men's
Association
at
Geneva,
on
the
proposition
of
the
London
General
Council,
resolved
that
\"the
limitation
of
the
working
day
is
a
preliminary
condition
without
which
all
further
attempts
at
improvement
and
emancipation
must
prove
abortive...
the
Congress
proposes
eight
hours
as
the
legal
limit
of
the
working
day.\"
Thus
the
movement
of
the
working-class
on
both
sides
of
the
Atlantic,
that
had
grown
instinctively
out
of
the
conditions
of
production
themselves,
endorsed
the
words
of
the
English
Factory
Inspector,
R.
J.Saunders
\"Further
steps
towards
a
reformation
of
society
can
never
be
carried
out
with
any
hope
of
success,unless
the
hours
of
labour
be
limited,
and
the
prescribed
limit
strictly
enforced.\"162
It
must
be
acknowledged
that
our
labourer
comes
out
of
the
process
of
production
other
than
he
entered.
In
the
market
he
stood
as
owner
of
the
commodity
\"labour-power\"
face
to
face
with
other
owners
of
commodities,
dealer
against
dealer.
The
contract
by
which
he
sold
to
the
capitalist
his
labour
power
proved,
so
to
say,
in
black
and
white
that
he
disposed
of
himself
freely.
The
bargain
concluded,it
is
discovered
that
he
was
no
\"free
agent,\"
that
the
time
for
which
he
is
free
to
sell
his
labour-power
is
the
time
for
which
he
is
forced
to
sell
it,163that
in
fact
the
vampire
will
not
lose
its
hold
on
him
\"so
long
as
there
is
a
muscle,
a
nerve,
a
drop
of
blood
to
be
exploited.\"164For
\"protection\"
against
\"the
serpent
of
their
agonies,\"
the
labourers
must
put
their
heads
together,
and,
as
a
class,
compel
the
passing
of
a
law,an
all-powerful
social
barrier
that
shall
prevent
the
very
workers
from
selling.
by
voluntary
contract
with
capital,
themselves
and
their
families
into
slavery
and
death.165In
place
of
the
pompous
catalogue
of
the\"inalienable
rights
of
man\"
comes
the
modest
Magna
Charta
of
a
legally
limited
working
day,
which
shall
make
clear
\"when
the
time
which
the
worker
sells
is
ended,
and
when
his
own
begins.\"
Quantum
mutatus
ab
illo!
[What
a
great
change
from
that
time!
–Virgil]166
NOTES:
1\"A
day's
labour
is
vague,
it
may
be
long
or
short.\"
(\"An
Essay
on
Trade
and
Commerce,
Containing
Observations
on
Taxes,
&c.\"
London.
1770,
p.
73.)
2This
question
is
far
more
important
than
the
celebrated
question
of
Sir
Robert
Peel
to
the
Birmingham
Chamber
of
Commerce:
What
is
a
pound
A
question
that
could
only
have
been
proposed,
because
Peel
was
as
much
in
the
dark
as
to
the
nature
of
money
as
the
\"little
shilling
men\"
of
Birmingham.
3\"It
is
the
aim
of
the
capitalist
to
obtain
with
his
expended
capital
the
greatest
possible
quantity
of
labour
(d'obtenir
du
capital
dépense
la
plus
forte
somme
de
travail
possible).\"
J.
G.Courcelle-Seneuil.
\"Traité
théorique
et
pratique
des
entreprises
industrielles.\"
2nd
ed.
Paris,
1857,
p.
63.
4\"An
hour's
labour
lost
in
a
day
is
a
prodigious
injury
to
a
commercial
State....
There
is
a
very
great
consumption
of
luxuries
among
the
labouring
poor
of
this
kingdom:particularly
among
the
manufacturing
populace,
by
which
they
also
consume
their
time,
the
most
fatal
of
consumptions.\"
\"An
Essay
on
Trade
and
Commerce,
&c.,\"
p.
47,
and
15
5\"Si
le
manouvrier
libre
prend
un
instant
de
repos,l'économie
sordide
qui
le
suit
des
yeux
avec
inquiétude,prétend
qu'il
la
vole.\"
[If
the
free
labourer
allows
himself
an
instant
of
rest,
the
base
and
petty
management,
which
follows
him
with
wary
eyes,
claims
he
is
stealing
from
it.]
N.
Linguet,\"Théorie
des
Lois
Civiles.
&c.\"
London,
1767,
t.
II.,
p.
466.
6During
the
great
strike
of
the
London
builders,
1860-61,
for
the
reduction
of
the
working
day
to
9
hours,
their
Committee
published
a
manifesto
that
contained,
to
some
extent,
the
plea
of
our
worker.
The
manifesto
alludes,
not
without
irony,
to
the
fact,
that
the
greatest
profit-monger
amongst
the
building
masters,
a
certain
Sir
M.
Peto,
was
in
the
odour
of
sanctity(This
same
Peto,
after
1867,
came
to
an
end
a
la
Strousberg.)
7\"Those
who
labour
...
in
reality
feed
both
the
pensioners
...[called
the
rich]
and
themselves.\"
(Edmund
Burke,
l.c.,
p.
2.)
8Niebuhr
in
his
\"Roman
History\"
says
very
naively:
\"It
is
evident
that
works
like
the
Etruscan,
which
in
their
ruins
astound
us,
pre-suppose
in
little
(!)
states
lords
and
vassals.\"Sismondi
says
far
more
to
the
purpose
that
\"Brussels
lace\"
pre
supposes
wage-lords
and
wage-slaves.
9\"One
cannot
see
these
unfortunates
(in
the
gold
mines
between
Egypt,
Ethiopia,
and
Arabia)
who
cannot
even
have
their
bodies
clean,
or
their
nakedness
clothed,
without
pitying
their
miserable
lot.
There
is
no
indulgence,
no
forbearance
for
the
sick,
the
feeble,
the
aged,
for
woman's
weakness.
All
must,
forced
by
blows,
work
on
until
death
puts
an
end
to
their
sufferings
and
their
distress.\"
(\"Diod.
Sic.
Bibl.
Hist.,\"
lib.
2,
c.13.)
10That
which
follows
refers
to
the
situation
in
the
Rumanian
provinces
before
the
change
effected
since
the
Crimean
war.
11This
holds
likewise
for
Germany,
and
especially
for
Prussia
east
of
the
Elbe.
In
the
15th
century
the
German
peasant
was
nearly
everywhere
a
man,
who,
whilst
subject
to
certain
rents
paid
in
produce
and
labour
was
otherwise
at
least
practically
free.
The
German
colonists
in
Brandenburg,Pomerania,
Silesia,
and
Eastern
Prussia,
were
even
legally
acknowledged
as
free
men.
The
victory
of
the
nobility
in
the
peasants'
war
put
an
end
to
that.
Not
only
were
the
conquered
South
German
peasants
again
enslaved.
From
the
middle
of
the
16th
century
the
peasants
of
Eastern
Prussia,
Brandenburg,Pomerania,
and
Silesia,
and
soon
after
the
free
peasants
of
Schleswig-Holstein
were
degraded
to
the
condition
of
serfs.
(Maurer,
Fronhfe
iv.
vol.,
—
Meitzen,
\"Der
Boden
des
preussischen
Staats\"
—
Hanssen,
\"Leibeigenschaft
in
Schleswig-Holstein.\"
—
F.
E.)
12Further
details
are
to
be
found
in
E.
Regnault's
\"Histoire
politique
et
sociale
des
Principautés
Danubiennes,\"
Paris,
1855.
13\"In
general
and
within
certain
limits,
exceeding
the
medium
size
of
their
kind,
is
evidence
of
the
prosperity
of
organic
beings.
As
to
man,
his
bodily
height
lessens
if
his
due
growth
is
interfered
with,
either
by
physical
or
local
conditions.In
all
European
countries
in
which
the
conscription
holds,
since
its
introduction,
the
medium
height
of
adult
men,
and
generally
their
fitness
for
military
service,
has
diminished.
Before
the
revolution
(1789),
the
minimum
for
the
infantry
in
France
was
165
centimetres;
in
1818
(law
of
March
10th),
157;
by
the
law
of
March
21,
1832,
156
cm.;
on
the
average
in
France
more
than
half
are
rejected
on
account
of
deficient
height
or
bodily
weakness.
The
military
standard
in
Saxony
was
in
1780,
178
cm.
It
is
now
155.
In
Prussia
it
is
157.
According
to
the
statement
of
Dr.
Meyer
in
the
Bavarian
Gazette,
May
9th,1862,
the
result
of
an
average
of
9
years
is,
that
in
Prussia
out
of
1,000
conscripts
716
were
unfit
for
military
service,
317
because
of
deficiency
in
height,
and
399
because
of
bodily
defects....
Berlin
in
1858
could
not
provide
its
contingent
of
recruits,
it
was
156
men
short.\"
J.
von
Liebig:
\"Die
Chemie
in
ihrer
Anwendung
auf
Agrikultur
und
Physiologie.
1862,\"
7th
Ed.,
vol.
1,
pp.
117,
118.
14The
history
of
the
Factory
Act
of
1850
will
be
found
in
the
course
of
this
chapter.
15I
only
touch
here
and
there
on
the
period
from
the
beginning
of
modern
industry
in
England
to
1845.
For
this
period
I
refer
the
reader
to
\"Die
Lage
der
arbeitenden
Klasse
in
England,\"
[Condition
of
the
Working
Class
in
England]von
Friedrich
Engels,
Leipzig,
1845.
How
completely
Engels
understood
the
nature
of
the
capitalist
mode
of
production
is
shown
by
the
Factory
Reports,
Reports
on
Mines,
&c.,
that
have
appeared
since
1845,
and
how
wonderfully
he
painted
the
circumstances
in
detail
is
seen
on
the
most
superficial
comparison
of
his
work
with
the
official
reports
of
the
Children's
Employment
Commission,
published
18
to
20
years
later
(1863-1867).
These
deal
especially
with
the
branches
of
industry
in
which
the
Factory
Acts
had
not,
up
to
1862,
been
introduced,
in
fact
are
not
yet
introduced.
Here,
then,
little
or
no
alteration
had
been
enforced,
by
authority,
in
the
conditions
painted
by
Engels.
I
borrow
my
examples
chiefly
from
the
Free-trade
period
after
1848,
that
age
of
paradise,
of
which
the
commercial
travellers
for
the
great
firm
of
Free-trade,
blatant
as
ignorant,
tell
such
fabulous
tales.
For
the
rest
England
figures
here
in
the
foreground
because
she
is
the
classic
representative
of
capitalist
production,
and
she
alone
has
a
continuous
set
of
official
statistics
of
the
things
we
are
considering.
16\"Suggestions,
&c.
by
Mr.
L.
Horner,
Inspector
of
Factories,\"
in
Factories
Regulation
Acts.
Ordered
by
the
House
of
Commons
to
be
printed,
9th
August,
1859,
pp.
4,
5.
17Reports
of
the
Inspector
of
Factories
for
the
half
year.October,
1856,
p.
35.
18Reports,
&c.,
30th
April,
1858,
p.
9.
19Reports,
&c.,
l.c.,
p.
10.
20Reports
&c.,
l.c.,
p.
25.
21Reports
&c.,
for
the
half
year
ending
30th
April,
1861.See
Appendix
No.
2;
Reports,
&c.,
31st
October,
1862,
pp.7,
52,
53.
The
violations
of
the
Acts
became
more
numerous
during
the
last
half
year
1863.
Cf
Reports,
&c.,
ending
31st
October,
1863,
p.
7.
22Reports,
&c.,
October
31st,
1860,
p.
23.
With
what
fanaticism,
according
to
the
evidence
of
manufacturers
given
in
courts
of
law,
their
hands
set
themselves
against
every
interruption
in
factory
labour,
the
following
curious
circumstance
shows.
In
the
beginning
of
June,
1836,information
reached
the
magistrates
of
Dewsbury
(Yorkshire)
that
the
owners
of
8
large
mills
in
the
neighbourhood
of
Batley
had
violated
the
Factory
Acts.
Some
of
these
gentlemen
were
accused
of
having
kept
at
work
5
boys
between
12
and
15
years
of
age,
from
6
a.m.
on
Friday
to
4
p.m.
on
the
following
Saturday,
not
allowing
them
any
respite
except
for
meals
and
one
hour
for
sleep
at
midnight.
And
these
children
had
to
do
this
ceaseless
labour
of
30
hours
in
the
\"shoddyhole,\"
as
the
hole
is
called,
in
which
the
woollen
rags
are
pulled
in
pieces,and
where
a
dense
atmosphere
of
dust,
shreds,
&c.,
forces
even
the
adult
workman
to
cover
his
mouth
continually
with
handkerchiefs
for
the
protection
of
his
lungs!
The
accused
gentlemen
affirm
in
lieu
of
taking
an
oath
—
as
quakers
they
were
too
scrupulously
religious
to
take
an
oath
—
that
they
had,
in
their
great
compassion
for
the
unhappy
children,allowed
them
four
hours
for
sleep,
but
the
obstinate
children
absolutely
would
not
go
to
bed.
The
quaker
gentlemen
were
mulcted
in
￡20.
Dryden
anticipated
these
gentry:
Fox
full
fraught
in
seeming
sanctity,
That
feared
an
oath,
but
like
the
devil
would
lie,
That
look'd
like
Lent,
and
had
the
holy
leer,
And
durst
not
sin!
before
he
said
his
prayer!\"
23Rep.,
31st
Oct.,
1856,
p.
34.
24l.c.,
p.
35.
25l.c.,
p.
48.
26l.c.,
p.
48.
27l.c.,
p.
48.
28l.c.,
p.
48.
29Report
of
the
Insp.
&c.,
30th
April
1860,
p.
56.
30This
is
the
official
expression
both
in
the
factories
and
in
the
reports.
31\"The
cupidity
of
mill-owners
whose
cruelties
in
the
pursuit
of
gain
have
hardly
been
exceeded
by
those
perpetrated
by
the
Spaniards
on
the
conquest
of
America
in
the
pursuit
of
gold.\"
John
Wade,
\"History
of
the
Middle
and
Working
Classes,\"
3rd
Ed.
London,
1835,
p.
114.
The
theoretical
part
of
this
book,
a
kind
of
hand-book
of
Political
Economy,
is,considering
the
time
of
its
publication,
original
in
some
parts,
e.g.,
on
commercial
crises.
The
historical
part
is,
to
a
great
extent,
a
shameless
plagiarism
of
Sir
F.
M.
Eden's
\"The
State
of
the
Poor,\"
London,
1797.
32
Daily
Telegraph,
17th
January,
1860.
33Cf.
F.
Engels
\"Lage,
etc.\"
pp.
249-51.
34Children's
Employment
Commission.
First
report.,
etc.,1863.
Evidence.
pp.
16,
19,
18.
35Public
Health,
3rd
report,
etc.,
pp.
102,
104,
105.
36Child.
Empl.
Comm.
I.
Report,
p.
24.
37Children's
Employment
Commission,
p.
22,
and
xi.
38l.c.,
p.
xlviii.
39l.c.,
p.
liv.
40This
is
not
to
be
taken
in
the
same
sense
as
our
surplus
labour
time.
These
gentlemen
consider
10
hours
of
labour
as
the
normal
working
day,
which
includes
of
course
the
normal
surplus
labour.
After
this
begins
\"overtime\"
which
is
paid
a
little
better.
It
will
be
seen
later
that
the
labour
expended
during
the
so-called
normal
day
is
paid
below
its
value,
so
that
the
overtime
is
simply
a
capitalist
trick
in
order
to
extort
more
surplus
labour,
which
it
would
still
be,
even
if
the
labour-power
expended
during
the
normal
working
day
were
properly
paid.
41l.c.,
Evidence,
pp.
123,
124,
125,
140,
and
54.
42Alum
finely
powdered,
or
mixed
with
salt,
is
a
normal
article
of
commerce
bearing
the
significant
name
of
\"bakers'stuff.\"
43Soot
is
a
well-known
and
very
energetic
form
of
carbon,and
forms
a
manure
that
capitalistic
chimney-sweeps
sell
to
English
farmers.
Now
in
1862
the
British
juryman
had
in
a
law-suit
to
decide
whether
soot,
with
which,
unknown
to
the
buyer,
90%
of
dust
and
sand
are
mixed,
is
genuine
soot
in
the
commercial
sense
or
adulterated
soot
in
the
legal
sense.
The\"amis
du
commerce\"
[friends
of
commerce]
decided
it
to
be
genuine
commercial
soot,
and
non-suited
the
plaintiff
farmer,who
had
in
addition
to
pay
the
costs
of
the
suit.
精選分類
