AND ON THE CONTINENT.
47
in detail further on, for the purpose of cheapening production,a gradual raising of labour similar to that which formerly ledfrom serfdom to freedom. That factory proletar ian, whose posi-tion brings to mind serfdom, is put on one side by the Central-ised Industry growing up.
This follows, as a matter of fact, because the first low-standingfactory labour certainly did not work cheaply. As later, every-where where the factory system was introduced, one had at thattime to struggle in England with the irregularity of labour. Areliable authority informs us that at the turn of the century itwas impossible to keep the spinners at regular work. “Frequentlythey spent two or three days per week in idleness and drinking,and made the children who worked under them wait for them inthe alehouses until they decided to go to their work. Whenthey went to it, they would often work quite desperately, dayand night, in order to pay off their public-house score and to earnmore money for ‘ sprees ’ ” (29). This description reminds us ofthat which Blue-Books to-day inform us about Indian spinning-mills—large centralised establishments with the latest ma-chinery. In spite of all discipline it cannot here be avoided thatthe workers work irregularly, and stop to eat and rest themselvesin between. One is therefore compelled to keep such a largonumber of workers that those who work can take the places ofthose who do not. It is allowed, under this arrangement, that themen go out and smoke during working hours, the women suckletheir children, workers often remain away for weeks in order todo agricultural work at their homes, and so on, As compensa-tion, there are no long stoppages during which the engine stands,no free Sundays, or only one per month in order to clean theengine, and the working day is from 12 to 14 hours (30).
Also in Lancashire —to-day the country of the highest workingcapacity—a similar condition existed at that time.
How little machinery had up to then entered into the people’sconsciousness is shown by the keeping aloof, by the often inimicalposition, of most writers, compared with whom Ure emphaticallytook the more progressive standpoint. Thus a well-known physicianof Manchester complains at that time about the lot of the operative
29. Ure: “Cotton Manufacture,” II., p. 448.
30. “East India Factories” (10th Feb., 1891), pp. 23, 27, 45, etc. Com-pare. further: Proceedings of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce_