Full Question:
Directions: The following excerpts come from reports of child labor practices submitted to Parliament.
The first is from a report by Superintendent of Factory Inspections Robert A. Baker in 1836, three years after the 1833 Factory Act went into effect.
The second is a personal narrative from a report compiled by the Children's Employment Commission nearly 30 years later in 1864. Read the excerpts and answer the questions that follow:
<em>My Lord, in the case of Taylor Ibbotson, and Co., I took the evidence from the mouths of the boys themselves. They stated to me that they commenced working on Friday morning, the 27th of May last, at six, A.M, and that, with the exception of meal hours and one hour at mIdnIght extra, they did not cease working till four o'clock on Saturday evening, having been two days and a night thus engaged. Believing the case scarcely possible, I asked every boy the same question, and from each received the same answer. I then went into the house to look at the time-book, and in the presence of one of the Masters referred to the cruelty of the case, and stated that I should certainly punish It with all the severity In my power.... My Lord, by a clause In the factory act, it Is enacted that, “no more than one penalty can be obtalned from any one person for any one description of offence in any one day” Had I laid the information, therefore, on all the boys for the same offence, the penalty could have only been 20/. [About $100 in 2010] a sum which appeared to me inadequate to the gross nature of the offence committed, I therefore, my lord, varied the Information, so as to enable me to sue for 80/ [about $400 In 2010], being four full penalties, could I have obtained them, laying the first for working two boys more than twelve hours on the Frlday; the second for working a boy before five o'clock on the Saturday morning; the other for working two boys in the night time, between FrIday and Saturday; and the fourth for keeping a false time-book, as to the hours of working. These views, however my lord, were not responded to, I very much regret to say, by the magistrates before whom the case was heard. The parties were only fine 50/. [about $50 fo In 2010] on each Information, and wIth an aggregate of penalties of 102 [about $100 In 20101 escaped. —Robert A. Baker, Superintendent of Factory Inspections, 1836 </em>
Question: The situation described in the first excerpt, what is the inspector's opinion of employer Taylor, Ibbotson, and co.? what phrases in the report support this
Answer:
The inspectors opinion of Taylor Ibboston and Co, is that they have engaged in criminal activities which are in violation fo the 1833 Factory Act. He is also is of the opinion that they ought to be punished to the full extend of the Law.
Explanation:
In the excerpt, he clearly states:
<em>I then went into the house to look at the time-book, and in the presence of one of the Masters referred to the cruelty of the case, and stated that I should certainly punish It with all the severity In my power.... </em>
<em />
Another phrase which supports his position states:
<em> I therefore, my lord, varied the Information, so as to enable me to sue for 80/ [about $400 In 2010], being four full penalties, ... </em>
<em />
Cheers!
