# The Factory Controversy; a warning against meddling legislation/Letter

PREFATORY LETTER.
TO
HENRY WHITWORTH, Esq.,
SECRETARY TO THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FACTORY OCCUPIERS.
My Dear Sir,
I propose to place at the disposal of your Association an article which I wrote for the "Westminster Review," the history of which is simply this:—
In October, 1851, there appeared in the "Westminster Review" an article (or a portion of one, for the writer was carried off by cholera before he had finished his work) on the Proper Sphere and Duties of Government. This essay, on the most important of all subjects of domestic politics, impressed me deeply, carrying out solidly, as it did, some ideas which had long been floating in my mind. I felt at once, and I have felt ever since, that it would be a good public service to illustrate in all possible ways the truths of that essay.
Some weeks ago, a representation made by Mr. Horner determined me to reproduce the subject of Meddling ​Legislation, and to take the working of the Factory Acts as my illustration, as the most complete exhibition that could be desired of the vice of the principle of Meddling Legislation, and the social mischiefs caused by its injustice and impracticableness. I did not then even know of the existence of your Association: and I mention these facts to obviate all pretext for the charge that my article was in any way instigated by any factory occupiers. What instigation there was was supplied by Mr. Horner, whose views it appeared to me highly necessary to controvert, for the sake at once of employers and employed, and indeed of all who live under the laws of England.
I mentioned my desire to obtain the facts on both sides of the question to a member of your Association who visited me soon after; and it was from Mr. Horner's Report thus obtained that I first learned the origin, date, and circumstances of your Association. What I now send you is so far from being a brief held for the Association, that it was your adversary who first put it into my head to write the article; and it was his side of the question that I read before I looked at yours.
I proposed my article to the editor of the "Westminister Review," and the proposal was accepted. From the MS., however, he started back. In regard to the doctrine, he agrees with me, he declares, entirely; but he disapproves the manner in which I have treated the sayings and doings of Mr. Horner, ​Mr. Dickens, and others. I, for my part, cannot conscientiously modify what I have said. These gentlemen have publicly assumed a ground which, in the opinion of sound statesmen, cannot he maintained; and I believe my article proves that they have supported their position by inaccurate statements, and in a temper and by language which convey their own condemnation. In a matter of literary judgment or taste, one may soften one's tone of criticism and opposition to the gentlest breath of dissent; but in a matter of political morality so vital as this, there must be no compromise and no mistake. Mr. Horner and Mr. Dickens, as Inspector and Editor, have taken up a ground which they do not pretend to establish on any principle; and they hold it in an objectionable temper, and by indefensible means. It seems to me, therefore, necessary to meet them unflinchingly, and expose, with all possible plainness, the mischief they are doing. They cannot complain, with any appearance of reason, of any plainness of speech. I have judged them by their own published statements; and the language of Mr. Horner's Reports, and of Mr. Dickens's periodical, in regard to the Factory Occupiers of England, leaves them no ground of remonstrance on the score of courtesy. I like courtesy as well as anybody can do; but when vicious legislation and social oppression are upheld by men in high places, the vindication of principle and exposure of the mischief must come before considerations of private feeling. These gentlemen have offered a challenge to society,—and certainly in no spirit or tone of courtesy; and they will not, if they claim to be rational men, object to a fair encounter of ​their challenge. On these grounds, I declined to modify my article, preferring to publish it unaltered through some other channel. As the best means of meeting the mischief it denounces, I offer it to your Association, to be published as a pamphlet, or in any way which, in the judgment of your committee, may ensure the widest circulation for it. In my present state of health, it has been something of an effort to write this article; and if I had consulted my own ease, I should have let the matter alone altogether; but the struggle for the establishment of a good or bad principle in this vital case is so important, and the existence of your Association appears to me a social fact of such extraordinary significance, that I could not have been easy to let the occasion pass without an effort on my part, for no better reason than its occasioning me fatigue and many painful emotions.
I now see additional reason to believe that no effort on the side of sound principle can be unnecessary. What influence Mr. Oastler's "Letter" of commentary on the Special Report of your Association may have I know not; but the republication of the Factory Acts by "Thomas Tapping, Esq., Barrister-at-Law," with notes which he calls explanatory, but which to his readers appear to be rather something very different, seems to show that it was high time the passionate advocates of Meddling Legislation should be met by opponents of such legislation who are by position likely to be at once dispassionate and disinterested. What can instigate any lawyer, who cannot be supposed an interested party, to write such ​a preface as Mr. Tapping's, it is difficult to imagine. On opening it, my eye falls at once on a false statement, which ought to destroy the authority of all the rest. Mr. Tapping writes (p. vi.) that "the manufacturers have instituted the 'National Association of Factory Occupiers,' the special purpose of which, it is said, is to raise a fund for defraying thereout all fines for not fencing which may be inflicted upon members. For the sake of suffering humanity it is hoped that, notwithstanding such illegal association, the inspectors will vigorously prosecute all violations of the law in this respect." This statement is dated October 2nd, 1855; whereas the Special Report of your Association, dated July, expressly declares that the Association will pay no penalties awarded under Factory Acts. Mr. Tapping tells us "it is said;" but he is not justifiable in publishing such a statement, and thereupon declaring your Association "illegal," without fully ascertaining the fact.
If the publication of my MS. should induce any considerable number of persons to inquire into the facts of the case, and investigate the principle of such special legislation as that which has singled out one class for stringent restraint, and may impose similar restraint on every other class in turn, I shall be glad that I have offered to you this spontaneous plea on behalf of your cause. I trust it can do that cause no harm, if it does no good.
I suppose, and hope, that you will print the paper just as ​it stands,—in the form of an article intended for a quarterly review. Not only does this seem to me the most simple and honest course, but it will ensure the reader against lapsing into a supposition that the writer is an agent or advocate of your committee, or in some way or other less independent and impartial than I really am.
I shall be not only thankful, but compelled, to turn over to you, as I should have done in due course to the editor of a review, any correspondence which may result from the publication of my article. My state of illness—worse since the paper was written—incapacitates me for correspondence; and I hope therefore, that you will kindly allow all letters on the subject to be addressed to you, as the Secretary of the "National Association of Factory Occupiers."
Believe me, Dear Sir, truly yours,
Harriet Martineau.
Note.—It is requested, in conformity with the wishes of Mrs. Harriet Martineau (expressed in the above prefatory letter), that any correspondence occasioned by the publication of this pamphlet be addressed to the undersigned,
Henry Whitworth, SECRETARY TO THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FACTORY OCCUPIERS.
13, Corporation Street, Manchester.