The Cotton Factory Times. — 1885-02-20 (Manchester, Greater Manchester, England)

GRINDER.  "THE TYRANNY OF LOOM JOBBERS, (Stc.' To the Editor of the Cotton Factory Times.  Sir,—l must congratulate you on sending the best pennyworth into our house, in the form of a family newspaper, and I sincerely hope you will have no need to regret the bold step you have taken. If you take the same view that I do, you have much need to be proud of your position, for you are labouring to elevate a great portion of society, which, to my mind, has been very mnch neglected, and I believe your labours in that direction will meet with gratifying results. I am of the same opinion as yourself and others, that one way of helping toward the desired object will be to publish acts of oppression, which masters and overlookers sometimes perpetrate upon individual operatives, so as to bring such acts into public disgrace and contempt, that their perpetrators may be ashamed of their own work, and begin to do better.  It is for this reason I write at present, and give a little of my own experience in this direction. Not long ago, I had the misfortune to work under one of the so-called "shop mop tacklers," who, when a weaver, was discharged from several firms either for spoiled work or other reasons. so he learnt tackling to get out of the difficulty; but, even then, he did not fare much better, for a time at least, until a dispute arose at a firm between the tacklers and masters, which resulted in the tacklers' striking. This "shop mop tackler" was one who went to fill a vacant place. When I was under him, seeing him perpetrate so many acts of meanness, I came to the conclusion that he had made up his mind to treat his weavers the same as he had been treated when a weaver. I being naturally of a quiet and peaceable temperament, it appears he had singled me out as a suitable object upon whom he could practice his tyranny without fear of unpleasant consequences, so he came to me one day and said I was below the average, that I should have to do better. This surprised me very much, because I knew it could not be correct; but, however, I made no reply. From that week I began to book my weekly earnings, so that if ever he came again he could be met with facts. He came again about nine weeks after and said that I was sixpence per loom under the average of the other weavers of the same class of goods and the same width of loom, and that I was on my last legs. Well, I was just bewildered, but made no reply. After he had gone I reckoned up my nine weeks' wages and averaged them, then went to the slate to compare them, but found that the slate had been wiped off, and it was the first week in a new slate. There being no other way. I copied down all the earnings off the same width of loom as mine and averaged them. The result was my wage for that week came to threehalfpence per loom above the average. I waited another week and did the same. Again my average was one penny per loom above the rest, notwithstanding I had two 13-picks and two 15-picks all the nine weeks, whilst the next weaver to me had two 20. picks, one 17-picks, and only one 13-picks. Several other weavers were similar to him. I then went to the office and told the master all about it, and asked him to look the books up and see if what I said was not correct; but he did not seem inclined to have anything to do with it. I then went to the tackler and explained the matter to him, and he could not refute anything that I said, but wished to smooth it over and let it drop. However, it preyed so much on my mind that I ultimately left and went tea tramp shop for tt:o or three shillings per week less, until I could mend myself, rather than work under such a man. I will just notice another mean trick which ho played to a very quiet woman whilst I was there. One of his pet weavers, who provided him with snuff gratis, was about to have a warp out, but the tackler told him he must not have it out till after breakfast. This was a little after six o'clock in the morning, but the weaver was not able to delay the loom so much without giving rise to suspicion, so the tackler came and took his stop rod out and took it to the smithy, and kept it there till after breakfast. All this was done to screen the weaver from a spoiled warp which the tackler did not wish him to have. After breakfast this spoiled warp was brought to a poor woman close by, cud she had to fight with it as best she could. If I had been in the tackler's place I should have shuddered to look the woman in the face after I had done a trick like that. This tackler now keeps company with the master, who condescends to come and spend the Sunday afternoon with him at his own house, no doubt listening to tales. Such instances of meanness could be multiplied ad libitum, in fact I have got off well. I have known girls and young women go home and cry as if their hearts would break through the tyrannical conduct of their masters and overlookers towards thorn; and several instances have appeared in the newspapers of young women committing suicide by drowning. Of course, such cases have been brought off at the inquest as the result of temporary insanity, nevertheless it was stated in the evidence that unpleasantness exieted between them and their masters. If the truth were known it is just possible that were it not for such unpleasantness, the thought of committing suicide would never have entered the poor victims heads. W. 'I. M.