OCR Specification focus:
‘Factory Acts 1833–1846: pauper apprentices and child labour, opposition to measures, Royal Commission on Factory Reform 1833, Mines Act 1842, Graham’s Factory Act.’
Between 1833 and 1846, Britain passed a series of landmark Factory Acts that transformed regulation of child labour and workplace conditions, provoking intense debate and opposition.
Background: Industrialisation and Child Labour
By the early nineteenth century, the Industrial Revolution had created vast new factories powered by water and steam. These factories demanded cheap, flexible labour.
Children were often employed because they were small, could manage intricate machinery, and cost less than adults.
Many pauper apprentices—orphans or children of the poor—were contracted to work long hours in harsh conditions.
Public concern grew over the physical toll on young workers, including deformities, exhaustion, and accidents.
Pauper Apprentices: Orphaned or destitute children placed in factory work under contractual obligation, often with little oversight of welfare or working hours.
Reformers such as Lord Ashley (later Earl of Shaftesbury) and Michael Sadler pressed for legislation to protect vulnerable children from exploitation.
The Factory Act of 1833
This act marked the first major attempt to regulate factory labour on a national scale.
Key Provisions
Prohibited the employment of children under 9 years old in textile mills.
Limited children aged 9–13 to 48 hours per week and those aged 14–18 to 69 hours per week.
Required children to attend two hours of schooling daily.
Introduced a system of factory inspectors, the first attempt at state enforcement of labour law.
This represented a crucial departure from reliance on voluntary employer compliance and introduced the principle of state responsibility for workplace welfare.
Opposition
Many industrialists opposed the Act, arguing that:
It interfered with economic freedom and factory discipline.
Regulation would increase costs and reduce competitiveness.
Families dependent on child wages would suffer.
Despite resistance, the Act laid the foundations for future reforms.
The Mines Act of 1842
Although not a “factory” statute, the Mines Act 1842 extended the reforming principle to other industries.
Causes of Reform
A Royal Commission revealed shocking conditions underground: women and children worked in cramped, dangerous shafts, sometimes hauling coal on hands and knees.
Public outrage followed the publication of evidence, especially concerning the moral impropriety of mixed-gender work in confined spaces.
Provisions
Banned all women and girls from underground work.
Prohibited employment of boys under 10 years old in mines.
Appointed inspectors to enforce compliance.
This showed Parliament’s willingness to extend protective legislation beyond textiles, responding to humanitarian concerns as well as political pressure.
A hurrier pulls a laden coal tub while two “thrusters” push from behind, depicting the cramped, physical labour undertaken by children underground. Such images, reproduced from mid-century investigations, shaped public outrage and parliamentary resolve. This visual links directly to the provisions of the 1842 Act restricting child underground work. Source
Graham’s Factory Act 1844
Introduced by Sir James Graham, Home Secretary, this act refined earlier regulation and sought a balance between reformers and industrialists.
Main Measures
Reduced working hours for children aged 8–13 to 6.5 hours daily, with compulsory schooling.
Limited the hours of women to 12 per day, recognising their widespread employment in mills.
Introduced stricter requirements for machine safety, mandating fencing around dangerous equipment.
This Act represented a more systematic approach, focusing on safety as well as working hours.
Factory Inspectors: Officials appointed by the state to monitor factory conditions, enforce legal restrictions, and prosecute non-compliant employers. They became central to 19th-century labour reform.
The Factory Act of 1847 (Ten Hours Act)
One of the most famous measures of the period, championed by Lord Ashley and John Fielden.
Provisions
Limited working hours for women and young persons (13–18 years) to 10 hours per day.
Effectively reduced the length of the standard working week in textile industries.
Significance
Marked a decisive victory for humanitarian reformers and popular agitation.
Seen by opponents as an intrusion into the free market, potentially damaging productivity.
Signalled the growing political influence of public opinion and working-class campaigning.
Broader Impact of Factory Legislation 1833–1846
Social and Political Consequences
Legislation reflected a growing recognition that the state had responsibility for regulating working conditions.
The creation of factory inspection established the principle of direct enforcement, setting precedents for later social policy.
Acts symbolised a shift from laissez-faire economic ideology toward interventionism.
Opposition and Limitations
Some families resisted restrictions on child labour due to reliance on wages.
Enforcement remained inconsistent, with inspectors few in number and often outmatched by determined employers.
Legislation applied mainly to textiles and mines, leaving many industries unregulated until later decades.
Reformers’ Legacy
Campaigners such as Ashley, Sadler, and Oastler helped establish the idea of social justice in labour policy.
By 1846, reform momentum had prepared the ground for broader Victorian social legislation on health, housing, and education.
Engraving of the spinning mule and associated gearing, showing the long moving carriage and belts. These features explain why children working beneath or across the frame faced entanglement risks. Although published in 1865, the design closely reflects earlier mules addressed by 1830s–1840s safety measures. Source
The Period
Between 1833 and 1846, successive Factory Acts and the Mines Act transformed child labour regulation. They were limited in scope but introduced enduring principles of state intervention, humanitarian concern, and protection of the vulnerable in the workplace.
FAQ
Many families relied heavily on the wages of children to supplement household income, particularly in regions with high food prices.
Parents sometimes saw shorter hours as reducing the family’s ability to make ends meet, especially when adult wages were low.
Opposition could also stem from cultural attitudes where work from a young age was considered normal and necessary for instilling discipline.
The press published harrowing testimonies and illustrations of children in mines and factories, fuelling public outrage.
Campaigners like Lord Ashley skilfully used evidence from Royal Commissions to mobilise moral arguments.
This climate of pressure made it increasingly difficult for Parliament to ignore humanitarian concerns.
Factory inspectors were pioneering but limited. There were initially only four for the whole of Britain.
They struggled to monitor thousands of mills
Employers often resisted inspections, using legal loopholes.
Despite these limits, inspectors successfully brought prosecutions and created a precedent for state intervention.
By banning all women and girls from underground labour, the Act reinforced gender divisions in employment.
Women often shifted to surface work such as coal sorting or washing, but lost higher underground wages.
This reflected Victorian ideals of protecting female morality while simultaneously excluding women from certain industrial roles.
Reformers employed a mix of moral, humanitarian, and economic reasoning:
Protecting children from physical harm and moral corruption.
Linking education requirements to the future productivity of Britain.
Suggesting shorter hours would lead to healthier, more efficient workers.
These arguments broadened support, making reform a matter of both compassion and national interest.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks)
In which year was the first Factory Act passed that prohibited the employment of children under the age of nine in textile mills?
Mark scheme:
1 mark for identifying the correct year: 1833.
1 additional mark for stating the Act was the Factory Act of 1833.
Question 2 (6 marks)
Explain two ways in which the Factory Acts of 1833–1846 sought to improve conditions for child workers.
Mark scheme:
Up to 3 marks for each way explained (2 × 3 = 6).
Award 1 mark for simple identification of a measure, 2 marks for identification with some description, and 3 marks for a fully explained measure.
Accept any two from the following:
Working hours reduced (1833 limited children aged 9–13 to 48 hours per week, 1844 further reduced daily hours to 6.5).
Minimum age restrictions (no children under 9 in 1833 Act, minimum age 10 for mines in 1842).
Schooling requirements (1833 Act required two hours’ schooling daily for child workers).
Factory inspectors introduced (from 1833, provided enforcement of regulations and prosecution powers).
Safety measures (1844 Act required dangerous machinery to be fenced to protect child workers).
Maximum 6 marks: full explanations must link to the improvement in children’s working lives, not just list legislation.
.jpg){kind=link}
_(14591652239).jpg){kind=link}