CHAPTER V

APPRENTICESHIP OF TO-DAY

A true apprenticeship system, as already explained, must satisfy three

conditions: It must guarantee the adequate supervision of the youth of the

country as regards physical and moral development until the age of

eighteen at least is reached; it must supply means of effective training,

both general and specialized; and, finally, it must provide to those about

to cross the threshold of manhood an opening in some form of occupation

for which definite preparation has been given. The efficiency of the

industrial organization of to-day must be judged by the extent to which

these three conditions are satisfied.

To what extent does the apprenticeship of to-day satisfy the conditions of

a true apprenticeship system? To answer this question we must look far

beyond the narrow limits of indentured apprenticeship as it still exists.

It touches only a fringe, and a vanishing fringe, of the problem. Life for

the youth has grown more complex since the passing of the old organization

of the gilds; its success or failure is the outcome of the interplay of

numerous forces. Four factors contribute, in a more or less degree, to the

result. There is the contribution of the State--the last chapter was

concerned with the description of the machinery which has slowly been set

up during the age of reconstruction--we have yet to test its influence in

the actual working; there is the contribution of philanthropic enterprise,

as represented in the religious bodies, the clubs, the apprenticeship

associations, and skilled employment committees; there is the contribution

of the home, with its discipline and training; and, finally, there is the

contribution of the workshop, using this term to include all forms of

occupation, with the methods of entry and the organization for securing a

supply of labour. Only when we have taken into account the effects of

these four factors can we pass judgment on the apprenticeship of to-day.

I.

THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE STATE.

In estimating the contribution of the State towards apprenticeship of

to-day, it will be convenient, as in the last chapter, to trace the effect

of this influence in two sections, the one devoted to a survey of the

results of State regulation, and the other to an examination of the

achievements of State enterprise.

Sec. 1. STATE REGULATION.

In its scheme of regulation the State has aimed, broadly speaking, at

securing three results. It has endeavoured to prevent boys from being

overworked or wrongly worked; it has sought to guard them from being

engaged in demoralizing forms of employment; and it has striven to secure

satisfactory conditions within the walls of the workshop.

The third task presents the fewest difficulties. Medical science is

sufficiently advanced to prescribe the conditions as to ventilation,

heating, sanitation, and cubic contents essential to the health of the

boys. The sad catalogue of accidents is sufficiently long to show where

danger, through inadequately guarded machinery, is probable. To enforce

the necessary regulations is comparatively easy. There must be a suitable

number of inspectors, and these inspectors must be specially trained for

their work. Neither condition is at present fulfilled. The staff of

inspectors is much too small, and the inspectors themselves frequently

lack the requisite technical qualifications.

In the work of guarding boys from being engaged in occupations

demoralizing to character, the State has only recently taken the first

steps. The Employment of Children Act prohibits street trading under

certain conditions. As will appear later in this chapter, there are a

large number of occupations where regulation is much required. Indeed, it

is a comparatively new idea that the nature of the employment of the boy

may have a profound influence on the well-being of the man.

In the department of regulation the most elaborate machinery has grown up

around the attempts of the State to prevent boys from being overworked or

wrongly worked. The difficulties in the way of success have been two.

There has been the difficulty in getting the necessary law passed. In this

respect it is enough to mention that the "half-time" system, in spite of

practically universal condemnation, is still permitted, to show the almost

insurmountable obstacles presented by vested interests. There is next the

difficulty of enforcing the law. It is often urged that it is idle to

place on the statute-book laws which can easily be evaded. Too much weight

must not, however, be given to this argument. There is a moral effect in

the passing of every law. The fact that the State has condemned certain

modes of action is an important factor in the formation of public opinion.

Many people realize for the first time that the evils which are the result

of conduct hitherto regarded as harmless, because not regarded at all, are

sufficiently serious to call for State interference. The law may not have

its full effect; it will without doubt have some effect.

The question of enforcement is, however, of vital importance, and it is

well to consider the limits of the power of enforcement.

The best method of restricting the hours of employment is to see that the

boy is somewhere else during part of the working day. The half-time

system, which insured that the boy should spend half his time in school,

was established, not primarily with a view to his education, but to

prevent him from being overworked. It has, moreover, from its point of

view, been completely successful, and has in practice been enforced

without difficulty. The various laws relating to compulsory attendance at

school have exercised an influence more potent in the work of limiting

the hours of employment than all the other elaborate regulations on the

subject. If we see to it that a boy is in school, he cannot at the same

time be found in the factory. The machinery for enforcing attendance now

runs without difficulty, and its action is uniform and comprehensive.

The next method of restricting employment is the method of prohibition.

Here, again, enforcement presents no serious difficulty. If we forbid

children under a certain age to work for wages or to take part in certain

forms of occupation, it is enough to find them so engaged at any one

moment to secure a conviction.

The third method, which seeks to prevent boys from being overworked by

setting a limit on the number of hours during which they may be employed,

is almost impossible to carry out. The Shop Hours Act is frequently

infringed, and only the most rigid system of inspection can get evidence

of cases of infringement. Yet even here detection is comparatively easy. A

watch can be kept on the number of hours during which a shop is open, and

if this exceed the legal limit we have a fair presumption that the shop

assistants are over-employed. But in the case of children we cannot draw

this conclusion. We are supposing their hours are more limited than in the

case of the adults, and the mere fact that the shop is open during a

longer period affords no proof that the child is there all the day on all

days of the week. To enforce regulations of this kind we must set a watch

on the individual child, and on a large scale this is impracticable.

In judging of the results of State regulation, as described in the

preceding chapter, we may assume that the regulations are enforced--or at

any rate are enforceable--where employment is prohibited, or where

attendance at school is required, but that regulations which entail the

counting of hours have little effect in preventing overwork except by the

indirect method of forming public opinion. Further, when we are seeking a

path of reform, we must take the road of prohibition or alternative

attendance at school.

Leaving general considerations, and coming to details, it may be said

that, so far as children under the age of fourteen are concerned, the

system of State regulation, though a little cumbersome, covers a

considerable part of the field, provided always that local education

authorities make full use of the powers conferred by the Education Acts,

the School Attendance Acts, the Children Act, and the Employment of

Children Act, and provided also that the Board of Education and the Home

Office render full and cordial support. Unfortunately, these provisos are

very far from being fulfilled. More than 58 per cent. of the population,

for example, live in districts where the attendance by-laws allow of

conditional exemption at the age of twelve.

It is true that in nearly half the cases a fairly high standard of

attainment is required from the children, but with the remainder no higher

standard is required than that reached by the normal child at the age of

twelve.[91] Or, again, in connection with the Employment of Children Act,

out of seventy-four county boroughs, fifty have made by-laws in reference

to street trading, but large towns, like Leeds, Nottingham, or Salford,

have made none. Out of 191 smaller boroughs and urban districts, only

forty-one have made by-laws; and out of the sixty-two administrative

counties, other than London and Middlesex, only one.[92] It may fairly be

assumed that, where no by-laws relating to street trading exist, little is

done to enforce the other provisions of the Act.

As regards young persons, if we exclude the Acts relating to mines, which

affect a comparatively small number of lads, the Shop Hours Act, with its

mild provisions of seats for assistants and a maximum week of seventy-four

hours, the only Act which can be said to exert a large measure of

supervision is the Factory and Workshop Act. Assuming that the system of

regulation there found is adequate, and adequately enforced--both

assumptions far from being fulfilled in practice--there remain the young

persons who do not come within its provisions. The number of these is very

large. In the next chapter figures are given relating to the occupations

of London children on leaving school and between the ages of fifteen and

twenty. A study of these tables will show that not more than at most a

third of the young persons are brought within the scope of the Factory

and Workshop Act. A large proportion of the lads engaged in the building

trades, and practically the whole of those employed in shops, in

transport, in commerce, and in general labour, are excluded. In their case

there is no State supervision to regulate the conditions of their work.

Coming to concrete examples, the van-boy may in all kinds of weather spend

a dozen hours a day lolling on the tail of a cart, idle for much of his

time, and for the remainder holding the horses outside a public-house, or

lifting weights too heavy for his strength. The errand-boy, none too well

clad or shod, may, delivering parcels and messages, trudge through the

cold and rain over long leagues of streets during long stretches of the

week. The office-boy may be cooped up in a dark and ill-ventilated office

during most of the hours of daylight. The shop-boy may stand ten, twelve,

or on Saturdays fifteen hours of the twenty-four in the street or in the

shop, with one eye on the goods and the other on a penny novelette. And

there is no public authority to say whether the conditions of his

employment are satisfactory, no power to have him medically inspected, no

possible guarantee to insure that when he passes the threshold of early

manhood the vigour and the brightness of youth shall not have given way to

the feeble health and the torpor of old age. Unquestionably, we owe much

to sentiment for the evils it has denounced and remedied, but we owe also

to the regime of sentiment the fact that some two-thirds of the young

persons in the country are engaged in occupations carried on without

regulation and unvisited by any inspector of the State.

Sec. 2. STATE ENTERPRISE.

The most signal example of State enterprise in the realm of boy labour is

to be found in that huge organization of schools, elementary and

continuation, which now cover the country, and whose efficiency is rapidly

increasing. The organization has already been described; it remains to

summarize briefly its principal effects. First, the boys attend school

with astonishing regularity. An average percentage of attendances during

the year of ninety-five, and even more, is become common. Truancy is rare,

and growing rarer. The truant schools are being gradually emptied, and

several have been closed. This result is no doubt in part due to the

increased fine for non-attendance, and the pressure thus placed on the

parent. But excellent attendance implies much more than the elimination of

the truant; it means that, after making allowance for absences due to

illness and other sufficient causes, the boy attends school with perfect

regularity and punctuality at all times when the schools are opened. Now,

this ideal is in the case of the vast majority of boys attained. The

result must be attributed to the influence of the teachers over the boy.

Prosecution of the parent may cure gross irregularity, but perfect

attendance can only be secured by enlisting the co-operation of the boy.

The first effect of the school, then, is seen in the almost unqualified

regularity and punctuality of the attendance. If we reflect on the home

conditions of many of the boys, we shall be compelled to pay a high

tribute of praise to the work of the teacher. The second achievement lies

in the admirable order maintained within the walls of the school. Ready

obedience is the rule, and not the exception. This is in general not the

result of a system of harsh discipline--corporal punishment is decreasing

at once in severity and in frequency--it is due to the personal influence

of the teacher. In the third place, a spirit of industry and active

attention pervades the work of the school. In discussing with the

authorities of secondary schools the career of the children who have won

scholarships from the elementary schools, I have more than once been told

that the chief characteristic of these scholars lies in their patient and

strenuous diligence. In this respect they serve as an admirable example to

the fee-paying pupils. It is true that the scholars are picked children,

but ability and diligence are, as experience shows, by no means

inseparable companions. Here, again, we see the effect of the school.

Finally, the schools are institutions which make for character in the best

sense of the word. The moral training is gradually freeing itself from the

"do and don't" of the home, and is beginning to reach the higher level of

morality where the command is "to be this, not that." A standard of school

honour is being sought for, and sometimes attained. To take a single

example. In what is perhaps the poorest school in all London, set in the

most squalid and vice-haunted region, it has been made a matter of honour

with the boys who are receiving school dinners to come to the headmaster

as soon as the home circumstances temporarily improve and say: "I don't

want a dinner this morning, because father has got a day's work."

Habits of regularity, obedience, and industry, and the cultivation of a

sense of honour--these are the chief results of State supervision carried

out by means of the schools. Two questions require an answer: Do these

qualities, found within the precincts of the school, overflow and affect

the conduct of the boys outside the school? Do they last when school-days

are over, and the boys gone out to work? With regard to the first, there

is good reason to believe that they do overflow. The school training does

influence the conduct of the boys outside. No one who has watched a

zealous headmaster replace an ancient and inefficient teacher of the old

type can fail to have observed a striking change in the behaviour of the

boys as seen in the street and in the home. With regard to the second

question, we must reply that undoubtedly in many cases the qualities

gradually disappear. When we come, as we shall do shortly, to the survey

of the conditions of boy labour, we shall not be surprised at this

unfortunate truth. It would be difficult to imagine any form of training

that would be permanent when all discipline is relaxed or entirely

discontinued at the most critical period of the development of the boy.

The elementary school is now made responsible for the supervision of the

health of the children. Medical inspection of all children is now

compulsory, while medical treatment is made legal. The education authority

may also draw on the rates to provide meals for necessitous children. It

is too soon to estimate the effect of these new powers, but if they are

used with wise generosity they should exercise a profound influence on the

health of the rising generation.

But however beneficent may be the influence of the elementary school, it

comes to an end abruptly at the age of fourteen, and often a year or two

earlier. Up to the age of leaving school, the boy is carefully guarded by

the State, and then, with no transitional stage, he becomes a man, and, so

far as the State is concerned, all control is withdrawn. Two or three per

cent., with the help of scholarships, may pass annually to the secondary

school, where State supervision is continued. Not more than 30 per cent.

of those who leave the elementary school attend an evening school,[93] and

even if they do there is no medical inspection in such places, and little

effective discipline is possible for boys attending evening school on two

or three nights a week. The remaining two-thirds disappear from the sight

of the State, which henceforth renounces all responsibility for their

supervision.

We have next to regard the schools as training-grounds for the workmen of

the future. We ought not to look to the elementary schools to provide any

definite preparation for a trade. Unfortunately, through no fault of

their own, and because of the industrial development of the day, the

schools are turning out in thousands lads completely equipped for a

certain class of occupation. We have already seen that the most signal

triumph of the schools is to be found in the habits of regularity,

intelligence, and obedience, which they impress on the boys. Now, these

qualities are essential to success in all walks of life; but for one form

of employment alone are they all that is required. This form of employment

includes those occupations in which boys and boys only are engaged, and

where the boys are discharged as soon as they become men. The

messenger-boy, the shop-boy, the van-boy, and even the boy who attends to

some machine which monotonously performs a single operation--the boy who

comes into one of these classes need take with him nothing but the three

recommendations of regularity, obedience, and intelligence. We shall trace

later the disastrous effects of these forms of employment. It is not

without significance that the rapid increase in the number of boys so

engaged has synchronized with the rapid improvement in the system of

elementary education. It is something of a tragedy that the most signal

triumph of the schools should be, perhaps, the cause of their most signal

failure.

Definite training must be looked for in the continuation school. It is

unnecessary to add much to what has been said in the last chapter; the

State offers opportunity, but with its existing powers can do little more.

Speaking generally, for the child of comparatively well-to-do parents,

for the clever child, for the child of unusual energy and physical vigour,

these opportunities can be enjoyed; but for the remainder--and that the

great majority--they are useless, because beyond the reach of ordinary

endeavour.

Of State enterprise in the provision of an opening it is too early to

speak; the juvenile branch of the Labour Exchange is only creeping into

existence. In the next chapter an attempt will be made to explain how best

can be realized the possibilities which lie latent in these institutions.

Sec. 3. SUMMARY.

We are now in a position to summarize the achievements and the defects of

the contribution of the State towards the creation of a true

apprenticeship system. Its machinery of regulation has removed the worst

abuses of child labour, and in certain departments of industry protects,

with some degree of success, the health of the young persons engaged. Its

enterprise in the field of education is providing supervision over the

health and conduct of the boy till he reaches the age of fourteen, while

for the young person it offers opportunities of longer supervision and

technical training.

If much has been done, much more remains undone. Regulation still leaves

rampant many of the evils of child labour. Some two-thirds of the boys as

they leave school enter occupations where regulation hardly exists. State

enterprise for all practical purposes exerts no supervision over lads

between the ages of fourteen and eighteen--the most important epoch of

their lives. Technical training, and even the continuance of general

education, are possible only for a favoured few, and for the present there

is no State provision of an opening.

These are grave defects, and apprenticeship of to-day stands condemned

unless it can be shown that one or other of the remaining factors supply

what the State has failed to give.

II.

THE CONTRIBUTION OF PHILANTHROPY.

The second of the general forces, as distinguished from the individual and

special influences of the home and the workshop, which may make some

contribution towards the apprenticeship of to-day must be sought among the

varied religious and philanthropic associations. While we could not expect

from these bodies any assistance in the work of technical training, we

might hope to find in their midst conditions which make for the better

supervision and control of the lads who have left school.

Beginning with the more distinctly religious associations, we find among

them practical unanimity of opinion. One and all confess sadly that they

are unable to keep in touch with the boys after they have gone out to

work. For the tens of thousands of schoolboys who attend Sunday-school

there are only hundreds of lads on the roll of Bible-classes. The sudden

change from the status of schoolboy to the status of wage-earner, which

for the majority severed all connection with the education authority, has

even more decisively brought to an end the supervision of church and

chapel.

The miscellaneous associations represented by clubs, lads' brigades, boy

scouts, and the like, have all been called into existence for the express

purpose of exerting some measure of control over that transition period of

life which separates the boy from the man. How many lads between the ages

of fourteen and eighteen come within the sphere of influence it is not

possible to say with any exactness. The Twentieth Century League estimated

in 1903 that in London about 27,780 boys were connected with institutions

of this character, and we shall see later that there are in London about

120,000 boys between the ages of fourteen and eighteen.

It would be no less difficult to weigh the value of the work done.

Existing as they do on a voluntary basis, and free from all element of

compulsion, such supervision as they exert must take the form of tactful

guidance. Their success or failure depends less on the machinery and more

on the personal qualities of the manager. The wide and admirable influence

of the best clubs is the triumph, not of the system, but of the

exceptional individual. Exceptional individuals are, it must be

remembered, exceptional, and an organization which depends on their

presence is necessarily limited in the extent of its operations. We cannot

therefore look to these associations to meet adequately the call for

supervision.

Of recent years numerous associations have been formed with the object of

providing suitable openings for boys. There are two sides to their work.

On the one hand, situations are found, terms made with employers as to

wages and training, and steps taken to see that these terms are carried

out. On the other hand, periodic visits are paid to the boy in his home,

advice given as to attendance at evening schools, and friendly relations

established between boy and visitor. In general, these bodies are

concerned with placing out lads in skilled trades, though here and there

some attempts have been made to attack the better parts of the unskilled

labour market. Work of this character entails the expenditure of much time

and money, and requires for the negotiation with employers considerable

technical qualifications. Experience has shown that a staff of volunteers

cannot alone perform the necessary duties, and paid officers have been

appointed. The cost necessarily limits the expansion of the organization.

Out of the 30,000 boys who annually leave the elementary schools of

London, it is probable that not more than 2 per cent. come under the

influence of these associations. On the other hand, if the sphere of their

operations is limited, within that sphere it has achieved very

considerable success. They have been pioneers in a new movement, have

fully justified their existence, and must now look to the State to

continue on a larger scale, but on the same general lines, the work that

they have begun. Unlike most volunteers, these employment committees

welcome this transfer, and are now readily placing their services at the

disposal of the Board of Trade through its juvenile Labour Exchange.

This brief survey of the contribution of philanthropic enterprise to the

apprenticeship of to-day reveals one obvious conclusion: the associations

only touch a fringe of the problem, and in no way exert any comprehensive

measure of control over the lads between the ages of fourteen and

eighteen. Their number, their variety, and their enthusiasm, indicate the

urgent need of supervision rather than supervision successfully achieved.

We cannot look to them to supplement in any large degree the defects in

the scheme of State guardianship, or the more grave defects which will

appear when the conditions of home and workshop have been passed in

review.

III.

THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE HOME.

What contribution does the home make to the solution of the apprenticeship

question? We cannot, indeed, expect to find within the walls of the home

provision made for the general education of the boy, or the specialized

training of the youth; but it is not unnatural to look to the parent to

exercise supervision over his children till manhood is reached, and

likewise to offer to the boy leaving school advice and material assistance

in the selection of a trade. We are still inclined to regard the family as

the one relic of the patriarchal system that has retained a vigorous

vitality through all the ages; we are still apt to see in the home a

small world, edged off from the large world outside, self-centred,

self-ruled, and enjoying all the advantages of a benevolent despotism.

To what extent is this general assumption justified by the results of

actual experience? The question is of profound importance, and has not

received the attention it deserves from those who have written on boy

labour. If we can take it for granted that in the normal home we have the

means of controlling the boy and the growing lad up till the age of

eighteen, we have a solid foundation on which to rest the new

apprenticeship. Abnormal homes may need attention; but if the problem of

supervision is solved for the majority, if there is an authority to which

the boy submits himself as a matter of course, to add training and to

organize openings are tasks which should present no serious difficulty.

Can we look to the home to provide this fundamental basis of a true

apprenticeship system? To answer this question we must study the homes

themselves. A few years ago I devoted a large amount of time to the

collection of material touching the character of family life in towns. The

results were published in an essay entitled "The Boy and the Family." [94]

I may perhaps be allowed to summarize the conclusions there established.

Home varies from home; each may be said to have its own individuality, but

each has much in common. To give definiteness to the problem, I

endeavoured to class the homes under three types. In the main, type

number one referred to the inhabitants of one and two room tenements; type

number two embraced the families possessing three rooms; while the third

type included those persons fortunate enough to rent more than three

rooms. The size of the home proved a rough, though the best attainable,

method of classifying the characteristics of the inmates.

Supervision has been interpreted to mean two things--supervision of health

and supervision of conduct.

So far as the supervision of health is concerned, it is probable that very

few of the parents belonging to the three types possess the necessary

knowledge to carry out this duty. Among all classes of the community

ignorance on matters affecting the hygiene of the home is almost

universal. But even if knowledge were present, the resources at the

disposal of large numbers would prove inadequate to make that knowledge

effective. With type number one overcrowding is the rule; with type number

two it is common; and only in the third type do we reach conditions of

housing favourable to health.

The experience derived from medical inspection of school-children and the

administration of the Provision of Meals Act has revealed the deplorable

condition of large numbers of children when left to the unaided care of

their parents. The returns of necessitous children fed, which are

published weekly in the minutes of the London County Council, showed that

during the winter of 1909-10 at the time of most acute distress, about 9

per cent. of the children in the schools were receiving meals. A careful

inquiry, the most elaborate of its kind, made into the home circumstances

of the necessitous children in certain schools showed that the number of

children actually fed was probably below, and certainly not above, the

number who required meals. The same inquiry, with its lurid pictures of

squalor and distress, proved how small was the prospect of health for many

of those children, even though they were fed at school. It may be regarded

as a conclusive demonstration of the call for more searching regulation on

the part of the State.[95] It is probable, however, that the need for food

is far larger than that represented by the number of children actually

fed. Several inquiries, such as those carried out by Mr. Charles Booth in

London, and Mr. Rowntree in York, indicate that the effective income of

nearly a third of the population is too small to supply in adequate

quantity even the bare necessities of existence.

Medical inspection is now revealing the number of children suffering from

definite ailments, and urgently requiring medical treatment, which they

have hitherto been unable, in a large proportion of cases, to obtain. It

would appear that some 10 per cent. suffer from defective vision, about 1

per cent. from discharging ears, about the same number from ringworm,

while at least a third are suffering in health from the result of

decaying teeth.[96]

Everywhere we have abundant evidence to show that, from want of

supervision, or of the effective means of supervision in the home, large

numbers of children are growing up ill-clad, ill-nourished, and suffering

from definite diseases, all alike leading to inefficient manhood.

The second department of supervision is concerned with the supervision of

character. Can we rest satisfied that the parents exercise over the

growing lads that salutary control all growing lads require? The question

is of profound importance, if, as all agree, character is the condition of

success when the first steps are taken in the industrial world. It is

necessary to distinguish between the boy attending school and the boy

exempt from compulsory attendance. In what follows I shall draw largely on

my essay in "Studies of Boy Life." The conclusions are derived from the

experience of many years' residence in a poor part of London, and have

been tested by a careful inquiry among ministers of religion,

school-teachers, rent-collectors, and others with special knowledge of the

subject.

Sec. 1. THE BOY OF SCHOOL AGE.

If the parents are to control the boys, the boys must come much under the

personal influence of the parents; in other words, rulers and ruled must

meet frequently. Now, in all three types of family the father exercises

little direct control over the children. If of good character, he is

either out at work or out looking for work during five days of the week,

and sees the children only in the evening. On Saturday afternoons and on

Sundays he is at home; but a week-end visitor cannot be the dominant

factor in domestic affairs. If control is exercised, it must be exercised

by the mother. To trace her influence, it is necessary to picture the kind

of life led by each type. I quote from my essay:

"So far as the first type is considered, it is not easy to say when the

children and parents meet.... The general order of events is something as

follows: If it is one of the days on which he elects to work, the father

rises about five o'clock, finds his own breakfast, and then quits the

house. Some two or three hours later the school-children get out of bed,

wash their faces, take a slice of bread and dripping, and go out.

Sometimes the mother rises at that time and gets the breakfast, but in

most cases remains in bed. At nine the boys go to school. At noon school

is over, and the boys, after amusing themselves in the playground or

street for an hour, go home to get some food. The mother meanwhile has

risen, dressed the smaller children, performed the irreducible minimum of

domestic work, and then left the house to gossip with a neighbour, or earn

a few pence by charing. On rare occasions she may cook the children some

dinner, but as a rule they get what food they can find, and eat it in the

streets. Sometimes they receive a halfpenny to buy their own meal at a

fried-fish shop. The boys then return to school, escape at half-past four,

possibly go home to tea, and then once more turn for amusement to the

streets. There they remain until it is dark, and often in summer till dawn

begins to break, when at length they seek their dwelling and go to bed. In

many cases the boys do not find their way back to their own houses, but

take up their quarters for the night in the house of some friend.

Sometimes they do not sleep in a house at all. In one case of which I have

heard three boys spent a fortnight in a wash-house on the top of some

blocks. There they lived an independent existence, getting their food and

attending school regularly all the while. Later on, being discovered by a

policeman, they were sent to their respective families.... Week follows

week with little variation to mark the march of time. As brief a fragment

of the boy's life as is possible is spent within the common dwelling,

which offers him no occupation, and is entirely devoid of interest or

attraction. The mother does not demand his presence indoors, while he

himself has no wish to be there. The street, and not the house, ought

probably to be regarded as the home or meeting-place of the family." [97]

Supervision under circumstances of this kind must be an almost negligible

factor in the life of the home. Let us now come to the second type. I

quote again:

"In the second type, as already mentioned, the family usually occupies

three rooms. At first sight the conditions found in the former type seem

to prevail here also. Indeed, as a matter of fact, the boys spend hardly

more time at home than those just considered. Out of school hours they are

either in the street or employed in some form of paid work.... School,

street, meals, and bed alternate with one another here in much the same

way as they did in the first type. But while the facts remain for the most

part unchanged, their setting and colouring are very different. Another

atmosphere seems to pervade the whole life; some sense of order and

regularity begins to manifest itself; meals are at fixed hours; and the

boys are expected home and sent to bed at more or less definite times.

They return to their own tenements, and do not spend the night with some

of their neighbours. As will appear later, home interests begin to

develop; and if the boys spend their leisure in the streets, this is due

more to their own choice than to the wish of their parents.... The mother

does not display the utter indifference to the state of the dwelling or

the habits of the children conspicuous in the first type. Some sort of

ideal of home she seems to possess, but to obtain this ideal is beyond her

power. She has the look of one who feels that things are wrong, and yet

can see no remedy. She notes, for example, the evil influence the street

exerts on the characters of her boys, but does not know how to preserve

them from its overwhelming attractions." [98]

"The chief difference, then, between the first and second type lies not so

much in a different kind of life as in a certain change of atmosphere that

pervades and transforms the common existence. In the third type this

change of atmosphere becomes more conspicuous. A great part of the boy's

time is, indeed, still spent outside the dwelling-place, but the life at

home begins to assume larger proportions. There is more order and quiet in

the house--a condition which reacts favourably on the boys. They are no

longer seen hanging about the streets, loafing at the corners, or shouting

noisily in the gutters. Though much out of doors, they go farther afield,

and visit parks or museums; while, if they stay near home, they will

usually be discovered in the school playground. In the evening many of

them are indoors, and have various occupations, of which, perhaps, reading

is the chief." [99]

In type number one, then, there is, for all practical purposes, a complete

absence of supervision. In the second type there is a desire for

supervision, but the narrowness of the house accommodation thrusts the

boys into the streets. In the third type alone are the conditions

favourable to supervision.

Sec. 2. THE BOY AFTER SCHOOL DAYS.

If the boy while at school is under little parental control, it is not to

be expected that this control will be tightened when school days are over.

With the first type of family there was no supervision before, and there

is no more afterwards. The boy is self-supporting, and troubles little

about the home, and the home troubles little about him. There is a partial

exception in the case of the coster. Here the boy may become one of the

regular working members of the establishment, and remains with his father;

but the discipline is of a rude and ready sort.

With the second type of family the boy's earnings are of great importance

to the family, and the mother does her best to keep him at home. Any

exercise of discipline is avoided, lest the lad should take his earnings

and go elsewhere. He is rather in the position of a favoured lodger, whose

presence is valuable to the home, and who must be treated well for fear he

should give notice.

In the third type of family, the boy, with growing years, passes out of

the control of the mother, and is resentful of any restraint exerted by a

woman. What supervision he enjoys comes from the father. The two do not

meet often; father and son are seldom employed together, and the long

distance that frequently separates home and work places the boy beyond the

reach of parental control during the greater portion of the week.

Such in broad outline, rendered jagged, no doubt, by numerous exceptions,

is the quantity and the quality of the supervision exercised by the town

parent over the town boy. Even with the highest type no high standard is

reached, while with the lower we cannot contemplate the picture with any

degree of satisfaction. Speaking generally, the city-bred youth is

growing up in a state of unrestrained liberty; and what makes the problem

more serious is the fact that all evidence goes to show that this

disquieting phenomenon is not an accident, but the direct product of the

social and industrial conditions of the times. Towns are growing larger,

and with the growth of towns the whole conditions of family life are being

transformed. The old patriarchal system is gone; the father is no longer

an autocratic ruler in his small world. The family, so to say, has become

democratized; we have in it an association of equals in authority. Now,

the most ardent advocates of the extension of the suffrage have always

limited their demands to an appeal for adult suffrage; they have never

clamoured for children to be given a vote. Yet this, for all effective

purposes, is what happens in the home in the case of the boy as soon as he

has left school. The status of wage-earner has brought with it the status

of manhood, and his earnings have conferred on him immunity from control

and the right to be consulted in the politics of the home. Another fact,

not sufficiently recognized, tends to break down the patriarchal system.

With the steady improvement in the State schools, the boy is usually

better educated than the father; the father knows this, and the boy knows

it too.

It is idle, therefore, to look for any large amount of parental control

over the boy who has left school. We must face realities, however

unpleasant these realities may happen to be; and one of the realities of

the time is the independence of the lad. What is equally significant is

the suddenness with which this independence comes. Until the age of

fourteen he has remained under a carefully designed system of State

supervision, exerted by the school authorities; while in a large number of

cases the discipline of the home has been an important factor in his

existence. At the age of fourteen, as a general rule, the control of

school and home end together. The lad goes to bed a boy; he wakes as a

man. There should therefore be little cause for surprise if the habits of

the school and home are rapidly sloughed off in the new life of

irresponsible freedom.

Whether, therefore, we look to the State, to philanthropic enterprise, or

to the home, we find no satisfactory guarantee for the supervision of the

youth of the country. We have yet to search for this supervision in the

workshop; but if it is absent there, we shall be faced with the

disquieting phenomenon of the boy at the age of fourteen enjoying the full

and complete independence of the adult.

IV.

THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE WORKSHOP.

Having examined three out of the four factors which contribute to the

apprenticeship of to-day, and found them all inadequate, we must now turn

to the workshop in the hope that we shall discover there conditions more

favourable to the well-being of the youth of the country. If, however,

this last factor prove defective, the apprenticeship of to-day will stand

condemned, and the case for drastic reform will become unanswerable. It

will therefore be desirable to devote considerable space to this, the

central feature of the problem of boy labour.

In what follows it is proposed first to make a detailed study of

conditions in London, and then to present a general picture of the state

of boy labour in other parts of the country. London has been selected for

a detailed study because in a peculiar degree it represents the extreme

type of urbanization. There is also the advantage that in the case of

London the material required for the examination has to a large extent

been collected. The investigations of Mr. Charles Booth, the publications

and inquiries on the subject carried out by the London County Council, Mr.

Cyril Jackson's report on boy labour presented to the Poor Law Commission,

and numerous other writings, have provided for the study of London a mass

of information which, though not in all respects exhaustive, is more

complete than can be found elsewhere.

Sec. 1. LONDON.

A study of the problem of boy labour in London involves the study of three

questions. First we have to consider the case of the children who, while

still attending school, are employed for wages. Next we must devote

special attention to the boys as they leave school and distribute

themselves among the different occupations. Finally, we must watch the

later career of those lads, and in particular endeavour to ascertain in

what way and with what results is made the difficult passage from the

status of the youth to the status of the man.

_(a) The Employment of School-Children._

In London the half-time system is not permitted. The standard of

attainment for total exemption has been made sufficiently high to prevent

the great majority of boys from leaving school till the age of fourteen is

reached. It is, however, a fact that improved methods of instruction and

more rapid promotion from class to class are tending to lower the age at

which it is possible to obtain a Labour Certificate. How far this

opportunity is used it is not easy to say; but in certain schools,

situated in the poorer districts, it is alleged that there is a growing

tendency for the brighter children to claim exemption in this way. The

regularity of attendance is admirable, the average attendance in boys'

schools exceeding 90 per cent. We may therefore assume that, if the boys

work for wages, they must work at times when the schools are not opened.

To what extent are boys employed while still liable to attend school? In

1899 a return was obtained throughout the elementary schools of England

and Wales of the number of children so employed. In London, in the case of

boys, the figures were 21,755.[100] The tables also give the ages of the

children, but boys and girls are not separated. If, however, we assume

that the number of children of each sex at each age is proportionate to

the total number of children of each sex at all ages, we find that 78 per

cent. of the boys were eleven and upwards, and 22 per cent. under eleven.

The number of boys of eleven and upwards would be about 17,000. There are

in the elementary schools about 70,000 boys eleven years of age and

upwards, so that about 24 per cent. of these boys are employed. In other

words, nearly a quarter of the boys in the elementary schools above the

age of eleven were employed at the time of the return. The actual number

of boys who are employed during the course of their school career would be

considerably larger, as they would not all be employed at the same moment.

The return is more than ten years old, but, with the exception of the

children under eleven, it is improbable that there has been much change.

Similar figures may be deduced from the Report of the Interdepartmental

Committee on the Employment of School-Children, 1901.[101]

With regard to the number of hours worked, Miss Adler's evidence is

selected, and typical schools show that 56 per cent. were employed for

more than twenty hours a week, while 14 per cent. were employed

thirty-five hours or upwards.[102] In individual cases the figures were

much higher. "Thus a boy of eleven years of age, for four shillings a

week, was employed for forty-three and three-quarter hours in carrying

parcels from a chemist's shop, and, except on Sundays, was practically

every moment of his life at school or at work from seven in the morning

till nine o'clock at night. Another boy, aged thirteen, worked fifty-two

hours a week, being employed by a moulding company, and attending a

theatre for five evenings a week and for half a day on Wednesday for a

_matinee_--for the last, however, playing truant from school." [103] The

following graphic account taken from a school composition, and obtained

under circumstances which guarantee its essential accuracy, shows the

amount of work which may be compressed into a single day. It refers to

Saturday:

"I first got up from bed about half-past six, and put my clothes on and

had a wash. Then I went to work at B.'s, and swept out his shop, and then

I did the window out. But after I done the window I had my breakfast and

went in the shop again. I started taking out orders that came in. While I

was taking the orders out, Mr. B. went to the Borough market for some

potatoes, cabbages, and some onions; but when he came home I had to unload

his van. After I unloaded his van, he went for some coal, which he sells

at one and sixpence a hundredweight, but he got two tons of coal in. Then

we had dinner about one o'clock. When we had our dinner, I had a rest till

about four o'clock, when I had tea. When I had my tea I had to go and chop

some wood, when it was time to shut up the shop. I had my supper and went

home, and went to bed, and the time was about twelve o'clock." [104] It

will be seen that, with the exception of a break in the middle of the day,

the boy was on duty for nearly three-quarters of the twenty-four hours,

and for part of the time was engaged in heavy manual labour.

What effect does employment have on the physical condition of children

under the age of fourteen? "That excessive employment is injurious alike

to the education and to the health of the children is hardly in question.

It was testified to by witness after witness, many of them in no way

likely to be influenced by merely theoretical objections to child

labour." [105] On the other hand, most of the witnesses that appeared

before the Interdepartmental Committee were of opinion that "moderate

work" was in many cases not only not injurious, but "positively

beneficial." [106] It is not easy to understand what is meant by the last

statement. If some form of employment is beneficial, then the 76 per cent.

who are not so employed suffer, and steps should be taken to encourage

them to work. It is doubtful whether the witnesses would have accepted

this conclusion, from which, on their own assumptions, there is really no

escape. The difficulty lay in drawing the line. "Most of the witnesses

seemed to suggest that twenty hours might be fixed as the maximum weekly

limit; but, on the other hand, we found some cases where less than twenty

hours a week, if concentrated in one or two days, or if done at night,

must be injurious." [107]

But the evidence of most value on the subject is to be found in a Report

of the Medical Officer of the London County Council.[108] About 400 boys

employed outside school hours were examined. The following table, with

defects in percentages, was obtained as the result:[109]

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

| | Actual |Fatigue| |Severe| |Severe|

|Hours worked | Number |Signs. |Anaemia.|Nerve |Deformities.|Heart |

| Weekly. |of Boys.| | |Signs.| |Signs.|

|------------------|--------|-------|-------|------|------------|------|

|All schoolboys of | | | | | | |

| district workers| | | | | | |

| and non-workers | 3,700 | -- | 25 | 24 | 8 | 8 |

|Working 20 hours | | | | | | |

| or less | 163 | 50 | 34 | 28 | 15 | 11 |

|Working 20 to 30 | | | | | | |

| hours | 86 | 81 | 47 | 44 | 21 | 15 |

|Working over 30 | | | | | | |

| hours | 95 | 83 | 45 | 50 | 22 | 21 |

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

It will be seen that the defects rise rapidly with increase in the hours

of work; while, even in the case of those working less than twenty hours,

there is a serious deviation from the average. The fact that 50 per cent.

of those working less than twenty hours should exhibit signs of fatigue,

even where no permanent physical evil results, must seriously affect the

value of the school instruction. In every case the workers compare

unfavourably with the average for the whole of the workers and

non-workers. We cannot view with satisfaction the truth that, even in

those employed with moderation, deformities and severe heart signs should

be nearly 50 per cent. above the average. The medical officer adds other

conclusions no less disquieting. "Working eight hours on Saturday is as

inimical as thirty hours during the week, and working through the

dinner-hour appears particularly productive of anaemia," [110] "Retardation

in school work was noted in 209 out of these 330 boys, 86 being one

standard, 83 two standards, 37 three standards, and 3 four standards

behind that corresponding to their age." [111] As his final conclusion the

medical officer states: "We must set up as an ideal the suppression of

child labour below twelve years of age, and during school life regulate it

to twenty hours weekly, and a maximum of five hours on any one day." [112]

The figures, however, would seem to go far in justifying the more drastic

remedy of complete prohibition.

It is, however, fair to mention that the Report of the Interdepartmental

Committee, and also the Report of the Medical Officer, refer to a state of

affairs prior to the passing of the Employment of Children Act. Under this

Act, as explained in the last chapter,[113] employment of children under

the age of eleven is forbidden, while the by-laws of the Council place

restrictions on the number of hours children may work, and the times of

day during which such work may be carried on. It is too soon to judge of

the extent to which these restrictions can be enforced. During the first

year of effective operation in London there were, in respect of boys under

the age of sixteen, 13,461 cases of infringement. Prohibition under a

certain age or during certain times of the day is comparatively easy to

enforce; but limitation of hours, as experience of the Shop Act shows, is

extremely difficult to enforce, and peculiarly difficult where, as with

school-children, persons are not employed regularly, but work irregularly

at times when the schools are not open. To get evidence sufficient to

justify convictions is almost impossible, except in a few outrageous

cases.

What, if any, effect does the employment of school-children have on the

general question of the preparation for a trade? Into this general

question the Interdepartmental Committee did not enter. They did indeed

regard certain forms of occupation as injurious, while they pronounced as

beneficial employment in moderation. But this statement has apparently

reference only to matters of health, and not to the relation of employment

during school days to employment afterwards. The question is of great

importance, as habits, in respect of work for wages, formed by the boy

cling persistently to the youth. It is necessary, therefore, to pay some

attention to the characteristics of the work which schoolboys undertake.

In London 90 per cent. of the work would be included in the three

following classes: (1) Shops--errand-running and delivery of parcels,

milk, newspapers, and watching the goods spread on the counters outside

the shops; (2) domestic--knife and boot cleaning, and occasionally

baby-minding; and (3) street employment--hawking of newspapers, matches,

and flowers, organ-grinding, and the like. Now, none of these forms of

occupation provide any trade-training, or offer an opening with

satisfactory prospects, to the boy as he leaves school. On the other hand,

this class of work has distinctly injurious effects. First, it is

employment of a casual character. Affected as it is, on the one hand, by

attendance at school, and on the other by Saturdays and holidays, it is

essentially irregular as regards hours. Secondly, it is easy to obtain,

and consequently lightly undertaken and lightly dropped. Where another

situation can be obtained at will, there is no demand on the worker to

display the qualities that make for permanence of employment. Thirdly, it

is work in which youths as well as boys are engaged; in other words, it

does provide an opening to the boy as he leaves school--an opening which

he is likely to accept, because it is the most obvious, but at the same

time an opening in one of those forms of occupation entrance into which we

should, as will appear later, do our utmost to discourage. It is

singularly unfortunate that a boy's first association with any kind of

paid employment should be of this nature. And, finally, it is at least

open to grave doubt whether that sense of independence of home which comes

with the consciousness of earning wages should begin at as early an age

as twelve or thirteen.

It would not be easy to imagine a more unsatisfactory form of preparation

for a trade than that provided by the kind of work carried out by

wage-earning children. If we add to this demoralizing influence the

injurious effect on health and education, the case for total prohibition

of boy labour during school-days becomes very strong.

_(b) The Entry to a Trade._

The great majority of boys remain at the elementary school till they

attain the age of fourteen; it is no less true that the vast majority

cease attendance as soon as that age is reached. The period of the next

four years--that is, from fourteen to eighteen--forms the most critical

time of their career. It is during these four years that the boy must, if

ever, have taken the first steps towards learning a trade. During this

interval his physical strength must mature, his character take on itself a

more or less permanent set, and the question whether his education shall

represent something more than a faint shadow of early impressions be

finally determined. In short, it is during these four years that the

future citizen is made or marred.

The previous survey, whether of the factors which contribute to the

apprenticeship of to-day, or of the evils which are found among

wage-earning school-children, does not guarantee a favourable start in the

world of whole-time employment. Each year about 30,000 boys leave school

at the age of fourteen to take up some form of work. These figures do not

agree with the Census returns, because the latter include all London boys

in all classes of society, whether at school or at work. Here we are

concerned only with the boys of fourteen who leave the elementary school

with the intention of earning their own living. Between the ages of

fourteen and eighteen there will therefore be 120,000 boys. It is the

careers of these 120,000 boys that we must now try to follow.

What are the first occupations selected by these 120,000 boys? During the

last few years the London County Council has endeavoured to find an answer

to this question. Each head-master of an elementary school is required

annually to fill up a form in respect of each boy who has left the school

during the preceding twelve months. The information asked for is

"occupation of parent," "occupation of boy," "whether skilled or

unskilled," or "whether a place of higher education is attended." Returns

have been received and summarized for the years 1906-07 and 1907-08. The

first return was incomplete, but the second included the vast majority of

those who left. Below is given the summary for the two years:

+----------------------------------------------------------+

| | Skilled.| Unskilled.| Higher |

| | | |Education.|

|-------------------------|---------|-----------|----------|

| Number | 8,662 | 15,910 | 1,524 |

| Percentage | 33.2 | 61.0 | 5.8 |

| Percentage, 1906-07 | 28.5 | 67.9 | 3.6 |

+----------------------------------------------------------+

It will be seen that, including those who went to some higher form of

education, little more than a third of the boys left school to enter a

skilled trade.[114]

TABLE I.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

| | Number. | Percentage. |

| Class of Occupation. |------------------|------------------|

| | Parent. | Boy. | Parent. | Boy. |

|--------------------------------|---------|--------|---------|--------|

|Trades and industries | 615 | 347 | 40.87 | 18.74 |

|Domestic offices or services | 23 | 46 | 1.52 | 2.48 |

|Transport (including messengers,| | | | |

| errand-boys, van-boys, etc.) | 191 | 829 | 12.69 | 44.76 |

|Shopkeepers, shop-assistants, | | | | |

| and dealers | 137 | 133 | 9.10 | 7.18 |

|Commercial occupations | 61 | 141 | 4.05 | 7.61 |

|General labour | 436 | 215 | 28.98 | 11.61 |

|Professional occupations and | | | | |

| their subordinate services | 11 | 5 | 0.73 | 0.27 |

|General or local government | 26 | 6 | 1.73 | 0.32 |

|Defence of the country | 5 | 1 | 0.33 | 0.06 |

|Higher education | -- | 27 | -- | 1.45 |

|Unemployed | -- | 102 | -- | 5.52 |

|--------------------------------|---------|--------|---------|--------|

| Total | 1,505 | 1,852 | 100.00 | 100.00 |

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

It is unfortunate that no full analysis has been made of these returns.

The value of the information which would have thus been obtained was not

supposed to justify the labour and expenditure involved in such an

analysis. I have, however, roughly analyzed nearly 4,000 cases, and

endeavoured to classify the occupations, in accordance with the table

founded on the Census return which will be given later.[115] I selected

for this purpose typical districts in London. Table I. includes returns

from all the schools in the electoral areas of Bermondsey, North

Camberwell, and Walworth; it represents a typical miscellaneous

working-class district. Table II. includes the electoral areas of Dulwich

and Lewisham; it may be regarded as typical of suburban villadom so far as

its inhabitants send their children to the elementary schools. Table III.

includes the electoral areas of Whitechapel and St. George's-in-the-East,

districts distinguished by the presence of a large number of small trades

and sweated industries. Table IV. includes the collective results of the

three preceding tables, and may be taken as fairly typical of London as a

whole. It was necessary to exclude the returns of a few schools as

incomplete, indefinite, or obviously inaccurate. Parent stands for

occupation of parent, boy for occupation of boy. The two do not quite

correspond, as in a certain number of instances the occupation of the

parent was unknown. I have included the telegraph-boys under "Transport,"

as for my purpose this classification was the more suitable.

TABLE II.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

| | Number. | Percentage. |

| Class of Occupation. |------------------|------------------|

| | Parent. | Boy. | Parent. | Boy. |

|--------------------------------|---------|--------|---------|--------|

|Trades and industries | 347 | 151 | 35.57 | 14.86 |

|Domestic offices or services | 14 | 27 | 1.45 | 2.64 |

|Transport (including messengers,| | | | |

| errand-boys, van-boys, etc.) | 70 | 350 | 7.24 | 34.31 |

|Shopkeepers, shop-assistants, | | | | |

| and dealers | 100 | 126 | 10.34 | 12.35 |

|Commercial occupations | 180 | 157 | 18.61 | 15.38 |

|General labour | 144 | 54 | 14.89 | 5.29 |

|Professional occupations and | | | | |

| their subordinate services | 47 | 2 | 4.86 | 0.19 |

|General or local government | 66 | 9 | 6.83 | 0.88 |

|Defence of the country | 2 | 5 | 0.21 | 0.48 |

|Higher education | -- | 76 | -- | 7.45 |

|Unemployed | -- | 63 | -- | 6.17 |

|--------------------------------|---------|--------|---------|--------|

| Total | 967 | 1,020 | 100.00 | 100.00 |

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

TABLE III.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

| | Number. | Percentage. |

| Class of Occupation. |------------------|------------------|

| | Parent. | Boy. | Parent. | Boy. |

|--------------------------------|---------|--------|---------|--------|

|Trades and industries | 349 | 305 | 51.09 | 41.84 |

|Domestic offices or services | 25 | 18 | 3.66 | 2.47 |

|Transport (including messengers,| | | | |

| errand-boys, van-boys, etc.) | 72 | 189 | 10.54 | 25.93 |

|Shopkeepers, shop-assistants, | | | | |

| and dealers | 91 | 48 | 13.33 | 6.58 |

|Commercial occupations | 11 | 39 | 1.61 | 5.35 |

|General labour | 116 | 63 | 16.99 | 8.64 |

|Professional occupations | | | | |

| and their subordinate services| 10 | 3 | 1.46 | 0.41 |

|General or local government | 8 | -- | 1.17 | -- |

|Defence of the country | 1 | -- | 0.15 | -- |

|Higher education | -- | 7 | -- | 0.96 |

|Unemployed | -- | 57 | -- | 7.82 |

|--------------------------------|---------|--------|---------|--------|

| Total | 683 | 729 | 100.00 | 100.00 |

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

TABLE IV.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

| | Number. | Percentage. |

| Class of Occupation. |------------------|------------------|

| | Parent. | Boy. | Parent. | Boy. |

|--------------------------------|---------|--------|---------|--------|

|Trades and industries | 1,308 | 803 | 41.46 | 22.31 |

|Domestic offices or services | 62 | 91 | 1.97 | 2.53 |

|Transport (including messengers,| | | | |

| errand-boys, van-boys, etc.) | 333 | 1,368 | 10.55 | 38.00 |

|Shopkeepers, shop-assistants, | | | | |

| and dealers | 328 | 307 | 10.39 | 8.52 |

|Commercial occupations | 252 | 337 | 7.98 | 9.36 |

|General labour | 696 | 332 | 22.06 | 9.22 |

|Professional occupations and | | | | |

| their subordinate services | 68 | 10 | 2.16 | 0.28 |

|General or local government | 100 | 15 | 3.17 | 0.41 |

|Defence of the country | 8 | 6 | 0.26 | 0.16 |

|Higher education | -- | 110 | -- | 3.05 |

|Unemployed | -- | 222 | -- | 6.16 |

|--------------------------------|---------|--------|---------|--------|

|Total | 3,155 | 3,601 | 100.00 | 100.00 |

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

In the interpretation of these tables certain facts must be borne in mind.

None of the parents are returned as unemployed; this is because the trade

of the parent was asked for, and no account was taken as to whether he was

or was not employed. Secondly, the occupations are somewhat vaguely

described; this in particular is true of the term "labourer." More exact

information would no doubt have removed the parent from the class "general

labour," and placed him in the class "transport," and occasionally in the

classes "domestic servant" or "shop-assistant." Thirdly, the

messenger-boys are included partly under "transport" and partly under

"shop-assistants," the boy being termed sometimes an errand-boy and

sometimes a shop-boy. The term "office-boy," which appears frequently in

the returns, is vague. I have classed the office-boy as an errand-boy

unless the school return places him in the column "skilled employment,"

when I have included him under the heading "commercial occupation."

Making allowance for a certain inevitable inaccuracy which belongs to

returns of this kind, we have a general picture, accurate in all

essentials, of the distribution of boys among the various forms of

occupation immediately after leaving the elementary school. The columns

which refer to the trade of the parents, and indicate therefore the

distribution of the parents among the various forms of occupation, are of

considerable value. If we take Table IV., which may be regarded as typical

of London as a whole, and compare the last two columns, we shall at once

notice the striking difference that marks the distribution of boys and of

adults among the several kinds of employment. In "trades and industries,"

41 per cent. of parents are engaged, and only 22 per cent. of boys; 38 per

cent. of the boys are engaged in "transport," and only 10 per cent. of

parents. This fact carries with it a conclusion of great importance--son

and father can seldom work together. If, for example, 10 per cent. of the

parents are included under "transport," and 38 per cent. of the boys, it

is clear that little more than a quarter of such boys can be employed in

company with their parents. The actual facts, as revealed by an

examination of the individual returns, are much stronger, and demonstrate

the extreme rareness of father and son following the same occupation. In

the case of "trades and industries" the trade of father and son is not

infrequently the same; this is in particular true of "tailoring" trades of

the East End, included in Table III., where the proportion of adults to

boys are as fifty-one to forty-two. In suburban villadom, pictured in

Table III., the clerk is often father to the clerk, while the son of a

shopkeeper occasionally assists his parents in the shop. The coster habit

likewise runs in families. But with these exceptions father and son do not

work together. In consequence, in his first situation the boy is cut

adrift from the home and its control, such as it is. He has not his father

by his side to note and guide his conduct; and if he enters a skilled

trade, he lacks the personal interest of the parent to guarantee his

satisfactory training. We have already seen that the school supervision is

at an end; in consequence, the only disciplinary influence left is the

influence of the employer. The character of the employment and the nature

of the supervision of the master become, therefore, of supreme importance

to the well-being of the boy. It is consequently necessary to examine in

some detail the distinguishing features of the various kinds of

occupation. They are usually roughly classed as skilled or unskilled,

according as they do or do not lead to a form of employment which requires

specialized skill or specialized intelligence.

THE UNSKILLED TRADES.--Practically the whole of the unskilled trades are

included under the terms "domestic service," "transport," "shop," and

"general labour," and the great majority of the boys who select these

occupations may be said to select an unskilled trade. In Table I., a

typical working-class district, it will be seen that 66 per cent. of the

boys who leave the elementary schools come within this class. In Table

II., a suburban area, the figures are 55 per cent.; but a considerable

proportion of those included under "shops" appear to be employed in the

shops of their parents, and to be learning the business. In Table III.,

representing the small East End trades, the figures are 44 per cent.; but,

judged by wages and conditions of employment, the majority of the 42 per

cent. included under trades should be transferred to the class of

unskilled work. For all the districts, as a whole typical of London, Table

IV. shows the figures to be 58.27 per cent. The figures quoted above

ignore the boys returned as unemployed and unknown, the number of these

for all London being 6 per cent. They are boys waiting for something to

turn up; what will turn up it is impossible to predict. But it is safe to

say that a considerable portion will drift into unskilled work.

The unskilled trades fall into three classes. The first and smallest is

included under "domestic service." Under this head are found boys in

barbers' shops, page-boys, club-boys, boot and knife boys. Employment in a

barber's shop is notoriously unhealthy;[116] a barber's shop is also

supposed to be not infrequently the resort of the betting fraternity. The

fortunes of the page and club boy await the zeal of an investigator; the

knife and boot boy soon passes to some other occupation. Of the three

classes, domestic service is the least important and the soonest left by

the boy.

The second class, included under "transport" and "shopkeepers," is far the

largest and the most important. In all London some 47 per cent. of the

boys are found here; or, if we add a half of the 6 per cent. returned as

unemployed, we may say that half the boys who leave the elementary schools

belong to this class. It is necessary to take "transport" and

"shopkeepers" together, because it is impossible to tell whether a

"shop-boy" is merely an errand-boy, or a boy on the road to become a

properly trained shop-assistant. It is probable, however, that only a

small number could be regarded as future shop-assistants.

Ignoring these exceptions, we have to follow the fortunes of 50 per cent.

of the boys leaving school--in other words, of 15,000 persons. Their forms

of employment have much in common. In the first place, they are what is

known as "blind-alley" occupations--they lead nowhere. Boys only are

engaged, and when the boys become men they are cast adrift. Sometimes they

are absorbed in the adult service, but more usually, if they have not

already left, are given notice, and must at the age of eighteen seek out

some new way of earning a living. The report of Mr. Cyril Jackson makes

this fact abundantly clear.[117] "The industrial biographies received," he

says, "show clearly that there is generally a time of transition when boys

have to seek new occupations, for which they have little aptitude." [118]

Or again: "There appears to be no doubt that the restlessness of many of

the boys doing more or less unskilled work obscures from some employers

the fact that they are using a greater number of boys than can ever be

employed in connection with their trade as men. The employers who have

filled up forms often state that they 'never discharge a boy who is

willing to stay,' or 'that boys are only discharged for misconduct,' when

it is evident from the figures appearing in the same form that there must

be a considerable proportion of the boys passing out of the trade each

year.... That many employers, on the other hand, do in fact discharge a

considerable proportion of their boys because they have no room for them

as men--or, to express the same thing in the form in which it presents

itself to the masters, because they cannot afford to offer men's wages--is

shown in the short accounts of the trades in the Appendix." [119] It is

needless to labour the point further, as everyone familiar with the

conditions of boy work give evidence to the same effect.

The second characteristic of these trades is that they are mainly

concerned with fetching or carrying something--messages, letters, parcels.

It is characteristic of that stage of civilization at which we have

arrived that we want to save ourselves trouble, or to save ourselves time.

Boys are the instruments we use. "Here we are, all of us," says a modern

writer, "demanding an endless number of tiny jobs to be done on our

behalf. Every year multiplies these demands, increasing the pace at which

the jobs can be done, and the number of them that can be crowded into the

time. We learn to expect more and more conveniences at our elbow by which

communication can be made, business transacted, messages despatched,

parcels transferred, news brought up to date, transit hastened, things of

all kinds put under our hand. We touch buttons, press knobs, ring bells,

whisper down telephones, keep wires throbbing with our desires, bustle and

hustle the world along. And all this in the end means _boys_. Boys are

what we set moving. Boys are the material in which we deal. Boys are our

tools. Every wire has a boy at the end of it." [120]

Boy Labour and Apprenticeship · 第 5 / 8 章