The times., 1897-11-07


what was the sfatutable rate at the time"
Again, speaking OF the hours OF labor Prof.
Rogers asserts: 'In the fifteenth CEN
tury The wurkInen had an eight-houTs' day,
probably by their own concerted action,
assurcdly 10 the advantage OF the eIGpioy-
ers." And again: In the fifteenth CEN
tury, and IA the teeth OF restraining stat
utes the workmen secuted an eight-aours'
day. ] an sure that an eight-hours' day
is worth more 10 the employer than ten
hours davis cheaper at the same money.
But / would far rather the workmen got it
by their own combinations, and by their
own exertions, than by gift OF the legis-
lature."
Pro-. Rogers statement, frequently re-
iterated Throughout his works, that work
men had an eight hours dayin the fifteenth
ana sixteenth centuries, seems 10 be
based. il the main, on tie wages paid
To niasons Nho were employed in the erec-
tion of the Ierton bell tower, III oxford,
from May, I44a, TO May, 1851. he says:
The artisan. before 1910, could earn,
on ar average taking fifty weeks S the
amount Of his yeaTl ylabor, about e. a year.
The hours Of Gus tomary labor
could not have been long. If the
ployer onl y reCkoned halves Of days a
The maS0ns on the Merton bell tower got
rs Al q week up To the fourth week II
October, and 2S 1od from this date until
the last week in January, when the old
rate was resumed. These rates appear
to me u pnint 10 an eight-hours day The
inference which draw is confirmed by
the large number OF night hours, which
were occasionally given by man who bad
done days work already, in Needham's
account OF Henry's Henry VIII } building
changes The ordinary payment for
days work, il 1892, is about al, but the
eNUr;. hours we're paid d an hour
Elseu here lie explains: II have stated
In previous chapter that the day was one
Of eight hours and grounded my opinion
Ola the fact that extra hours, sometimes
as many as forty eight in a Week, are
frequently paid 10y the King Henry YHp
agents Those hours We're not continuous.
beiEg broken For nonschenes, dinner and
supper"
This opinion of Prof. Rogers is supported
ty the statutes themselves. The statutes
passed az different times bear amp.e proof
on their faee that the statute OF II borers
was not enforced, and the tables OF wages
paid. published by Prof. Rogers, show
that the wages paid were always cunsd-
erahly more than the statutory rate. one
statute sets forth that the statutes be not
kept nor put in execution that is To say,
tie first statute lstatute OF laborers1 be-
cause tLaf the punishment in them is too
bard on the mast ers Of such servants, for
asnuch as they shall be destitute Of ser
vantsif they should not pass the ordinance
OF tie statute that is, pay greater wages
thau the statute authorizes. Eden states
tbat the preamble 20 II Henry VII, cap.
%, ''reoites thar the former statutes had
not been executed because the remedy by
the said statutes is not very perfect " Il
tie statutes ii regard to wages could not
Re enforced, Il is not probable that the part
regulating hours could be executed more
successfully.
That the workmen Of the fifteenth and
sixteenth Centuries were employed a much
less number Of hours than those fixed by
the stat.ite ~ proven by the passage Of that
part o. II Henry VII, cap. -, which re-
lated % nours. Had not the hours actually
worked been less tlan the statute fixed
tie statute would not have been pa Ssed.
The preamble states the reason for the
enactment Of the statute fixing the hours
OF labor which was tina workmen waste
much part OF the day" The fact that
this law Of 1896 was re-ena cted in 1914,
and then repealed the next year as to
London, shows the opposition 10 its execu-
ton was very powerful. 1t evidently had
no more effect upon the hours of labor
than former statutes had had upon wages,
or the law OF Eliza beth would not Ia ve
increa sed tie penalty for failing to work
the prescribed hours.
The mas8Rs who erected the Merton bell
ower,in oxford, 1449-5l, were paid 5 2-3d.
q day, but little less than the workplen re-
ceived EEo made 50 much overtime on
Henry VII S buildings in 1882. If the ma
sons We're paid at the same rate per hourTor
their winter work they would have worked
as hours curing December and January
fraction less than seven tours a day, and
they could not have worked much longer on
accoun; Of the shOrtness Of the winter day
IN England. Henry's workman, VINO made
forty eight hours overtime ia one week, re-
ceived I'd. for bis regular days work, and
Id. an boaT for overtime. He could not
have made the overtime he did if his regu-
lar days work was as prescribed by the
statute. This man was working for the
King, and be made the overtime thirt y-six
years after the passage OF the first law
regulating hourSo If Dor, and eighteen years
after the passage Of the second law. Prof.
ROgersis evidently ri ight in insisting hat the
working day IL the fifteenth and the early
part Of the sixteenth century was one Of
eight hours. II. ii. BEADLE.