EMPLOYMENT OF FEMALES ACT.

Evening Star, Issue 3942, 13 October 1875, Page 3

EMPLOYMENT OF FEMALES ACT.

To the Editor, 1S »—I acknowledge the courteous tone of your correspondent Mercy,” and will endeavor to in a like spirit. Whether the Mosriel Factory Company’s sales have been equal to its production of goods I know not, but I take it that it would not be profitable for it to produce more than what would meet a ißady market, as I have been given to understand that its workers are paid at per vard produced, and not by the hours of labor, * In fact, tuat its business, to a great extent, is conducted on the co-operative principle. This is a sufficient answer to the reference a* to paying eight hours’ wages for ten hours’ labor. “ Morey ” having acknowledged the correctness of ray former illustiation, will, I have no doubt, also acknowledge that seeing by that illustration a surplus profit was shown on the sixteen hours, while there was a loss upon the eight hours’ working of the machinery employed, the goods produced under the sixteen hours’ condition could be sold at a leas price, and that without reducing wages. Where there are such large imports, reduce the^ price rf our own manufactures, and you willjincrease the consumption of them. I leave “ Mercy” to apply these hints, nw object has been not so much to argue or debate the subject, as to incite working men to thing out the matter for themselves from a practical, and not a “stump” point of view. ln:«.t there might be shown a still larger profit by working machinery thirty-two hours may be quite possible to “ Mercv,” but I do not exactly see how it is to bo "done in a day of 'only twenty-four hours. Again, it would appear that the Factory Act has been mure honored in its bieach than in its observance, so that the argument that the Mosgiel Factory lias paid under the existing Act really came? no weight.

If by working the Mosiriel Factory ten hours per day, as I understand has been the case, it has only been able to pay ten per cent, on the capital (some people, I observe, dispute this latter statement.), then to enforce the present Act would result in reducing the profits so that it would not pay capital to maintain the rates A present allowed to 1 .bov. “ Mercy.” on reflection, I think, will ac'ii-wicd-e that it k scarcely fair, after ray declaration of adherence 1 ° right hours’ system, to att- iu t‘o make me responsible for Mr Reid’s amendment to ?k t t U r. i ; hehoius . of !a °- t0 ten. {Relieving that Mercy” is thoroughly candid in ids SLa.wment tout his oppo-ition to the amendment is bp.sed on “apprehension" that evils might •ope, 1 won,.] j an with him in advocating tins ao.opuoa c.t a thorough system A insi-.ti! . ;-mu,c against reasonable laws h.-fiA bj-oken • nut, first oi .*>ll, do nor, let us make f ;l ..vs »init if enforced, would bo productive of as treat it’ not m greater evils than what they are <.-u >- posed to prevent, hut do not. The limited room and state ot atmosphere in many of orv f icfori s are. in nrn opinion, l om what. I iiuv,uoserved and not <l, more injur ona t <, wiaki cople and more to bo deplored than the mm; ImU ! pf labor Thoui a c other public institutions outside of factories, and returning largo pci cent -ges to capitalists, to which attention mkdit be calk'd iu tin.- neuter of hours of employing labor. J would jibe to join “Mercy” in apprehending the evils that exist rather than those only that may bo feared, objecting as I co to swallow the •' “ IL ‘ * vj *' tuc take Ol stituliiug at the gnat.—l am, &c. 1 J.W.G,