ENVIRONMENT DURING THE NINETEENTH CENTURY
During the eighteenth century our material civilisation, which had
long been almost stationary, began to advance with the growth of the
physical sciences, but at first with extreme slowness. The earliest
steps were made by the application of machinery to some of the domestic
arts. Some refinements were made in the manners and customs of our
daily life; but there were few, if any, indications of permanent or
widespread change, either for better or worse, in our intellectual or
moral nature.
The nineteenth century, however, saw the initiation of a great change
in the economic environment due to the rapid invention of labour-saving
machinery; which, with the equally rapid application of steam power,
led to an increase of wealth production such as had never been known
on the earth before. During the same period new modes of locomotion
were brought into daily use, the facilities for inter-communication
were increased a hundred-fold, scientific discoveries opened up to us
new and unthought-of mysteries of the universe, and the whole earth
was ransacked for its treasures, both vegetable and mineral, to an
extent that surpassed all that had been accomplished since the dawn of
civilisation.
But this rapid growth of wealth, and increase of our power over Nature,
put too great a strain upon our crude civilisation and our superficial
Christianity, and it was accompanied by various forms of social
immorality, almost as amazing and unprecedented. Some of these may be
here briefly referred to.
Our vast textile factory system may be said to have commenced with
the nineteenth century, and the profits were at first so large and so
dependent on the supply of labour that the mill-owners hired children
from the workhouses of the great cities by hundreds and even thousands.
These children, from the age of five or six upwards, were taken as
apprentices for seven years, and they really became the slaves of the
manufacturers, whose managers made them work from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m.,
or sometimes longer; and, in order to keep them awake in the close
atmosphere of the factories it was found necessary to whip them at
frequent intervals. It was not till 1819 that the age of children
employed in factories was raised to nine years, while in 1825 the
working hours were _limited_ to seventy-two a week!
From that time onward, during the whole of the nineteenth century,
there was a continued succession of "Factory Acts," each aiming at
abolishing or ameliorating the worst results of child labour—its
inhumanity, its cruelty, and its immorality. These legislative efforts
were always opposed by the employers, who usually succeeded in so
mutilating them in Committee of the House of Commons as to render them
almost useless. Mrs. E. B. Browning's noble verses, _The Cry of the
Children_, show that after nearly fifty years of struggle the condition
of the child-workers was still, in a high degree, cruel, degrading, and
therefore immoral; while that of the half-timers who succeeded them was
almost as injurious.
As the century wore on, other evils of a similar nature were
gradually brought to light. Children and women were found to be
working underground in coal mines, under equally vile conditions as
regards health and morality; and an enormous loss of life was caused
by inadequate ventilation, insecure roof-propping, imperfect winding
machinery, and other causes, all due to want of proper precautions by
the owners of the mines. As a matter of simple justice, such owners
should be held responsible to the injured person not only to the full
extent of his wages and for medical attendance, but should also pay a
liberal compensation for the pain suffered, and for the extra labour,
expense and anxiety to his family. But all such things are ignored
in the case of poor workers, so that even the money compensation is
reduced to the smallest amount possible.
It is one of the great defects of our law that deaths due to
preventable causes _in any profit-making business_ are not criminal
offences. Till they are made so, it will be impossible to save the
hundreds, or even thousands, of lives now lost owing to neglect of
proper precautions in all kinds of dangerous or unhealthy trades.
However costly such precautions may be, expense should not be
considered when human life is risked; and the present state of the law
is therefore immoral.
Notwithstanding Acts of Parliament and numerous Inspectors (whose
salaries should be paid by the mine owners), explosions and other
accidents underground continue to increase, the year 1910 being a
record year, with its 1,775 deaths; and even the number in proportion
to the workers employed is the highest for the last twenty years.
Yet no one is punished, or even held responsible for these deaths.
Surely, this shows a deplorable absence of moral feeling, both in the
general public and in Parliament. The responsibility of Parliament is
really criminal, since it always allows its legislation to be made
ineffective by the fear of diminishing the employers' profits, thus
deliberately placing money-making above human life and human well-being.
In the case of mines and quarries, Parliament is especially
responsible, because the possession of the mineral wealth of our
country by private individuals is itself a gross usurpation of public
rights, and should have been long ago declared illegal. Whatever
arguments—and they are very strong—show us that the land itself
should not be private property, are ten times stronger in the case
of the minerals within its bowels. The value of land increases with
its proper use, but in the case of minerals, the value is absolutely
destroyed. Surely, it is a crime against posterity to allow the
strictly limited mineral wealth of our country to be made private
property, and very largely sold to foreigners, solely to increase the
wealth of individuals and to the absolute impoverishment of ourselves
and our children.[45:A]
[45:A] I pointed this out forty years ago in an article
entitled _Coal a National Trust_, which I republished twelve
years ago in my _Studies, Scientific and Social_ (Vol. II.,
Chap. VIII.).
I will here add one other argument which goes to the root of the
matter by showing that the alleged owners of minerals have not even
a legal title to them. It is, I believe, a maxim of law that public
rights cannot be lost by disuse. Landed estates were, in our country,
created by the Norman Conqueror to be held subject to the performance
of feudal duties. Deep-seated minerals were then not known to exist,
and were not (I believe) specifically included in the original grants.
Except, therefore, where they have since been made private property
by _Act of Parliament_, they still remain public property. I submit,
therefore, that they may be both legally and equitably resumed by the
Government as public property, and worked for the good of the public
and of posterity. Compensation to the supposed present owners would be
a matter of favour, _not of right_.