The National Register.
London, England, 1816-10-14 00:00:00

CHIRIRTOPIiER PEMBEICTOK,

}'on ace, by profesAion, 4 1111, sician?--1 am.
11;o: 'our dttention been directed to children, in the course
Of ytior ; but of course they lkoe
taktri a %hare with

At %vital age may children, withmrt endatigeri ng their health,
hr• admitted into clove t Nlnu to be regAtlarly employed fi um
dtii vocit hour. :atil.?—My opinion collieliles with the upi.
Moo, olicatly given to thr Committee, ilia ett no age atm
aLrn'J t, ruipropal Liidera kilos in its.. twenty-I.ov.
What do %nu consiiler to 4w the proper time fur the em-
plu!tt..3l.l. u:Plor ten curb of ttge, without cut Lia.

ocTonr,it 14.

get ing their health ?--• Ul4::‘ 1* ten yew's I shou'd Mini: nine hnurs
in the day
What is your opi:iion of the employment of children twirler
eight years of age r-1 shoittil think under eight, fire or xix hours
it dim
It hat an consider to he the effect upon the develop-
mesa ,64.4441r,miti of the bodies of children
yea" "I a,e, if employed from t wel se to timrieeti hours a
.day?- -I think vet wilily would injure the grow th and the
health of child/NI of that age to he employed fourteen hours
out of the twelity-foor.
What would you consider tri he the efrevt mom the men'al
far niti: el eldi.11:11 motz. when, in addition to the facts
alr, ady state!, the attentiwi is constantly fixed upon you Db.
jert, for days, numth*, and yesirs?—l eannot think that it
would hese any effect in hurtintt the energy ofthe mind.
Are y on aware, Irmo sour own observation on the Nimbi ion
of society in (lii. itrat the poor with bundles base
not the option of working co many lions it day as may he
most cons enicut null most eonduc;tr to health ; tint (lies are
ellen obliged to work notch lonizer, in order to support Chem-
telses and their families?-1 ani net oss3:r.. that they do ss m k
lellger time fur their own support thaa fotirt et n or lift.. en

That is hardly an answer to the question. becanse you have
stated that tintrteett or lift' en bums is much too long a time;
the q tiestiun is, whether the poor wo k more than is convenient
and cuu,dH te to their health certainly should say not.
Tin; Committee are to understand you are of opinion. that
IMor in this country with families may support themselves
and their families by'svorkiat fon hours it day only
Without Etc aid and assistance of children ?--I know very
well, that in the F'lllllllV r time they will make seven days in
the neck. by working
atm e for emolument than for actual support, because in the
winter months they moil under that, and are very well psi).
v i. 11.1.1 for.

Then in no cases are the poor compelled to work for the
support of thelllfClsis and their families more than teu hunts
a day ?- -That is me opinion.
Have you any knowledge of the general state of health of
the children in 1111111111faCtoiies?—None at all.
Is nut the state of temperature in which the children work
most material to their health?—l should think it to be ma-
terial.

FLIVe you ever been consulted upon any contagious dis•
orders in mills, in any different parts of Englund ?—I has e
not.

From }•oar observations, which mu►t ha% e been extensive
amongst the labniiring classes, have you ever discovered any
want of feeling fruits parents towards their children ?—I cer-
tainly have not.

Ilave not you observed directly the reverse think I
certainly have •
Du you believe, where it is a matter of option in the
parents, from your general and extensive knowledge of that
class of people, they would be disposed to injure their chil-
ill en, by working them hours beyond what they are compe-
tent to ?—I most certainly think they would not.
Ito you consider that the temperature of a room the beat
of N% Melt is from tin to Citi by the therm ttttt cter is a degree of
heat prrh to
ejoeial health ?--I do not think it prejudicial to
health.

Do not you conceive that in rooms where but a small num-
ber of persons, ilecorilinit to the size of the room, are em-
ployed, it would b • conclusive to the health of those persons
in winter, if the temperature were kept agreeable and uni-
form ?—I think it certainly