Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T04:58:52.690Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Coal Mines Act of 1842, Social Reform, and Social Control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Alan Heesom
Alan Heesom
Affiliation:
University of Durham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Oliver Macdonagh’s ‘model’ for social legislation in the mid-nineteenth century is, after more than twenty years, a familiar one. It requires the exposure of a social evil, preferably in sensational terms, which sets in motion ‘an irresistible engine of change’. The increased scale of industrial processes, coupled with the ‘ widespread and ever-growing influence of humanitarian sentiment’, and stricter views of sexual morality and ‘decency’ combined to put pressure on legislators to assume new social responsibilities. This pressure, it has been said, frequently owed its origin to a pervasive Christianity, or at least to the work of churchmen, while legislation rested less on philosophic foundations than on forces which, if not inevitable, were at least inherently probable in the context of Victorian social and political life - in short, were part of a ‘self-generating’ process.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , March 1981 , pp. 69 - 88
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Macdonagh, O., ‘The nineteenth century revolution in government; a reappraisal’, Historical Journal, 1 (1958), 52–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Macdonagh, , A pattern of government growth 1800–1860 (London, 1961), p. 16Google Scholar. For a recent summary of the debate provoked by Macdonagh’s work see Cromwell, V., Revolution or evolution; British government in the nineteenth century (London, 1977).Google Scholar

2 Macdonagh, O., ‘Coal mines regulation; the first decade, 1842–1852’, R., Robson (ed.), Ideas and institutions of Victorian Britain (London, 1967), pp. 58–86Google Scholar. Taylor, A. J., Laissez-faire and state intervention in nineteenth-century Britain (London, 1972), pp. 57–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 Macdonagh, Government growth, p. 16.

4 3 Hansard, LV, 1273–4. Ashley's diary, 13 July, 31 Dec. 1842, Hodder, E., The life and works of the seventh earl of Shajtesbury (London, 1887), 1, 430, 432Google Scholar. Gash, N., ‘Ashley and the Conservative party in 1842’, English Historical Review, LIII (1938), 679–81. Cf. Ashley's comment, ‘sure I am... that I have got more from the whigs than I shall ever get from my own friends’. Hodder, Shaftesbury, 1, 329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 3 Hansard, LXXVII, 639–40.

6 Ferguson, R., ‘Colliers and collieries’, Quarterly Review, LXX (June 1842), 159. Morning Chronicle, 10 May 1842. Ashley's diary, 14 May 1842; Hodder, Shaftesbury, 1, 418.Google Scholar

7 The Times, 29 April 1842.

8 C[hildren's] E[mployment] C[ommission, first report], appendix part II (Parl. Papers, 1842, xvii), 159–61. Cf. Celina Fox, ‘The development of social reportage in English periodical illustration during the 1840s and early 1850s’, Past and Present, no. 74 (1977), pp. 94–9.

9 Ferguson, , ‘Colliers and collieries’, p. 194. 3 Hansard, LXIV, 539; LXV, 117.Google Scholar

10 Vane, C.W., marquess of Londonderry, A letter to lord Ashley on the Mines and Collieries Bill (London, 1842), p. 29.Google Scholar

11 3 Hansard, LXIII, 1321, 1326–7, 1362.

12 Macdonagh, ‘Revolution in government’, p. 58.

13 3 Hansard, LXIII, 1321.

14 Hart, J., ‘Nineteenth century social reform; a tory interpretation of history’, Past and Present, no. 31 (1965), p. 49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15 Ferguson, ‘Colliers and collieries’, p. 159.

16 3 Hansard, LXIII, 1327, 1359.

17 Hart, ‘Tory interpretation’, pp. 49–50.

18 Ashley, Lord, ‘Infant labour’, Quarterly Review, LXVII (Dec. 1840), 175.Google Scholar

19 3 Hansard, Lxiii, 1323. J. L, . and Hammond, B., Lord Shaftesbury (London, 1923), pp. 77—8.Google Scholar

20 Hart, ‘Tory interpretation’, pp. 50–1.

21 Ashley's diary, 1 June 1842, Hodder, Shaftesbury, 1, 420.

22 Buddie's ‘comments on lord Ashley's speech on labour in mines’, N[ational] C[oal] Bfoard] papers, Durham County Record Office, NCB I/JB/1788.

23 3 Hansard, LV, 1278; LXIII, 1362. Ashley recorded that ‘even Joseph Hume was touched’; Hodder, Shaftesbury, 1, 422.

24 Ferguson, ‘Colliers and collieries’, p. 194. Aydelotte, W. O., ‘The conservative and radical interpretations of early Victorian social legislation’, Victorian Studies, xi; (Dec. 1967), 225–36, points out that the divisions on the Coal Mines Bill were too small to be statistically meaningful in terms of party support, but the debate confirms Aydelotte's view that it was a measure of ‘mixed origin’.Google Scholar

25 Ashley's diary, 23 June 1842, Hodder, Shaftesbury, 1, 426. Ashley's diary, 16 May 1842, Best, G. F. A., Shaftesbury (London, 1964), p. 86.Google Scholar

26 Hart, ‘Tory interpretation’, pp. 54–5. Clark, G. S. R. Kitson, The making of Victorian England. (London, 1962), p. 20.Google Scholar

27 Ashley's diary, 5 Jan. 1841, Hodder, Shaftesbury, 1, 325–6.

28 Londonderry to Buddie, 12 May 1842, NCB papers, NCB I/JB/1781. Wellington to Londonderry, 12 May 1842, Londonderry papers, Durham County Record Office, D/Lo/C 113 (202). Londonderry to R. W. Brandling, coal trade papers, Northumberland County Record Office, coal trade united committee minutes, 1840–4, p. 166 6. 3 Hansard, LXIII, 196–9.

29 Ashley's diary, 26 July 1842, Hodder, Shaftesbury, 1, 431.

30 Halévy, E., History of the English people in the nineteenth century (London, 1961), iv, 27. Cf. Radnor's statement, ‘it seemed to him that the chief argument in favour of this bill was not the hardship of the system, but its indecency’, 3 Hansard, LXV, 584–5.Google Scholar

31 3 Hansard, LXIII, 1335–6.

32 Buddie's ‘comments’, NCB papers, NCB I/JB/1788.

33 3 Hansard, LXV, 585.

34 3 Hansard, LXIV, 539.

35 Buddie's ‘comments’, NCB papers, NCB I/JB/1788.

36 Macdonagh, ‘Coal mines regulation’, p. 62. Cf. A. J. Heesom, ‘The northern coal owners and the opposition of the Coal Mines Act of 1842’, International Review of Social History (forthcoming).

37 Macdonagh, ‘Revolution in government’, p. 58.

38 Hart, ‘Tory interpretation’, pp. 51–2. Roberts, D., Victorian origins of the British welfare state (New Haven, 1960), pp. 60–1Google Scholar. Roberts, D., ’Tory paternalism and social reform in early Victorian England’, American Historical Review, LXIII (1958), 328–9.Google Scholar

39 Mee, G., Aristocratic enterprise; the Fitzwilliam industrial undertakings, 1795–1857 (London, 1975)Google Scholar, passim. Heesom, A.J., ‘Entrepreneurial paternalism; the third Lord Londonderry and the coal trade’, Durham University Journal, new series, xxxv (June 1974), 238–56.Google Scholar

40 For a more detailed survey of the opposition to the Bill see Heesom, ‘Northern coal owners’.

41 Burn, W.L., The age of equipoise (London, 1964), p. 116.Google Scholar

42 Macdonagh, O., Early Victorian government, 1830–1870 (London, 1977), p. 78. Hart, ‘Tory interpretation’, pp. 51–2.Google Scholar

43 John Buddie's place-book, 1843, Londonderry papers, D/Lo/B 311, p. 14.

44 C.E.C., app. part II (P.P. 1842, xvii), 552.

45 3 Hansard, LXIII, 1334–5.

46 3 Hansard, LV, 437.

47 Buddie's ‘comments’, NCB papers, NCB I/JB/1788.

48 3 Hansard, LXIV, 539.

49 3 Hansard, LV, 1261.

50 3 Hansard, LXIII, 1348.

51 Ashley's diary, 8 Aug., 16 Dec. 1842, Hodder, Shaftesbury, i, 432, 441.

52 3 Hansard, LXXVII, 653.

53 Cf. Macdonagh, ‘Revolution in government’, p. 58.

54 Ashley thought the opposition was ‘quite in the style of the old apologies of the factory masters’; diary, 1 June 1842, Hodder, Shaftesbury, 1, 420.

55 3 Hansard, LXIII, 1348.

56 C.E.C., app.part II (P.P. 1842, XVII), 192.

57 3 Hansard, LV, 1276.

58 L. Horner, On the employment of children in factories, quoted Martin, B., ‘Leonard Homer; a portrait of an inspector of factories’, International Review of Social History, xiv (1969), 349.Google Scholar

59 Blaug, M., ‘The classical economists and the factory acts - a re-examination’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, LXXII (1958), 223 n.Google Scholar

60 James Loch to Fereday Smith, 28 Dec. 1840, Mather, F.C., Afterthe canal duke (Oxford, 1970), p. 321.Google Scholar

61 3 Hansard, LXV, 584.

62 C.E.C., app. part II (P.P. 1842, xvii), 195.

63 Morning Chronicle, 6 May 1842.

64 3 Hansard, LXIII, 1339–40.

65 3 Hansard, LXV, 120. John Buddie's place-book, 21 June 1842, Buddie papers, North of England Institute of Mining and Mechanical Engineers, shelf 47 A, vol. 13, 158–60.

66 Taylor, A.J., ‘The marquess of Londonderry and the north east coal trade’, Durham University Journal, new series, xvii (1955–6), 211–7. Heesom, ‘Northern coal owners’.Google Scholar

67 Blaug, ‘Factory acts’, pp. 223–4. Taylor, Laissez-faire and stale intervention, p. 43.

68 I know of no evidence that Londonderry had read the works of the political economists, but it seems more than probable that his agent, Buddie, a founder member of the Newcastle Literary and Philosophical Society, was familiar with them; Hiskey, C. M., ‘John Buddie, agent and entrepreneur in the north east coal trade’ (unpublished University of Durham M. Litt. thesis, 1979). P.47.Google Scholar

69 Quarterly Review, LXVII (Dec. 1840), 171–81; LXX (June 1842), 158–95. The fullest contemporary discussion was in the Westminster Review, xxxviii (1842), 86–139. The Edinburgh Review, LXXIX Jan. 1844), 130–56, commented belatedly, and was then more at pains to exonerate the factory masters from ‘ busy, prying, laborious benevolence’, than to condemn the coal owners. Cf. also Roberts, D., ‘The social conscience of tory periodicals’, Victorian Periodicals Newsletter, x (Sept. 1977), 162, 167.Google Scholar

70 Bentham, J., ‘Constitutional code’, J., Bowring (ed.) The works of Jeremy Bentham (Edinburgh, 1843), IX, 182, 188.Google Scholar

71 Henriques, U., ‘Jeremy Bentham and the machinery of social reform’, H., Hearder and H.R., Loyn (eds.), British government and administration; studies presented to S. B. Chrimes (Cardiff, 1974), P.173.Google Scholar

72 Finer, S.E., ‘The transmission of Benthamite ideas, 1820–50,’ G., Sutherland (ed.), Studies in the growth ofnineteenth century government (London, 1972), p. 29.Google Scholar

73 Ashley's diary, 3 March 1842, Hodder, Shaftesbury, 1, 409.

74 Skinner, Q., ‘The limits of historical explanation’, Philosophy, XLI (1966), 212. G. Sutherland, Nineteenth century government, p. 5.Google Scholar

75 Hart, ‘Tory interpretation’, p. 45. Roberts, D., ‘Jeremy Bentham and the Victorian administrative state’, Victorian Studies, 11 (1959), 197–8. Macdonagh, ‘Revolution in government’, pp. 54–61.Google Scholar

76 3 Hansard, LV, 1274 (my italics).

77 3 Hansard, LXIII, 1348.

78 Ashley to Buddie, 28 June 1842, NCB papers, NCB I/JB/1796.

79 3 Hansard, LXXVII, 653.

80 3 Hansard, LV, 1274.

81 For contemporary difficulties over the terra’ moral’, see Johnson, R., ’ Educational policy and social control in early Victorian England’, Past and Present, no. 49 (1970), 102–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

82 Johnson, R., ‘Educating the educators; “experts” and the state, i833–9’, A.J., Donajgrodzki (ed.), Social control in nineteenth century Britain (London, 1977), p. 78.Google Scholar

83 Jones, G. Stedman, ‘Class expression versus social control? a critique of recent trends in the history of “leisure”’, History Workshop, no. 4 (Autumn 1977), p. 164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

84 Fromm, E., ‘Individual and social origins of neurosis’, C., Kluckholm and H.A., Murray (eds.), Personality in nature, society, and culture (New York, 1967), p. 517. The italics are Fromm's.Google Scholar

85 Bentham, ‘Principles of penal law’, Works, 1, 570.

86 Adam, Smith, The wealth of nations (Oxford, 1976 edn), 11, 788.Google Scholar

87 Blaug, M., ‘The economics of education in English classical political economy;a re-examination’, A.S., Skinner and T., Wilson (eds.), Essays on Adam Smith (Oxford, 1975), p. 573.Google Scholar

88 Malthus, T.R., An Essay on population (London, 1914 edn), 11, 214, 259.Google Scholar

89 E.S., Levy (ed.), Senior, N., Industrial efficiency and social economy (London, n.d.), 11, 329–31.Google Scholar

90 McCulloch, J.R., Principles of political economy (Edinburgh, 1864 edn), pp. 397–8. McCulloch's idea of a ‘worthless nostrum’ which might lead men astray was the Irish repeal movement, suggesting that his basic stance was not as far removed from his colleagues’ as he claimed.Google Scholar

91 Ashley to the central short-time committee, 26 Sept. 1842, Hodder, Shaftesbury, 1, 436.

92 Ashley, ‘Infant labour’, pp. 181–1. Cf. Ashley's view, expressed to Peel, 15 June 1842, that the kingdom was in far ‘greater peril’ than might be supposed by those who were ‘ clothed in purple and fine linen’. Peel papers, British Library Additional Manuscripts, 40483, fos. 68–9. Peel himself was rather more sceptical, believing that the ‘best feelings’ prevailed in ‘ninety-nine persons in every hundred’. Peel to Graham, 1 Sept 1842, Graham papers, Cambridge University Library, bundle 53A.

93 Ashley, ‘Infant labour’, pp. 180–1.

94 3 Hansard, LXIII, 1350–1.

95 Ashley's diary, 18 Aug. 1842, Hodder, Shaftesbury, 1, 433.

96 3 Hansard, LXVII, 47, 73.

97 C.E.C., app. part II (P.P. 1842, xvii), 192–3.

98 Report of R. J. Saunders upon the establishment of schools in the factory districts in February 1842 (P.P. 1843, xxvii), 387. Cf. Paz, D. G., ‘Working class education and the state, 1839–1849 the sources of government policy’, Journal of British Studies, xvi (1976), 136–8.Google Scholar

99 Martin, ‘Leonard Homer’, p. 440. Horner to Nassau Senior, 23 May 1837, Senior, Letters on the factory act (London, 1837), pp. 30–1; my italics.

100 A.J. Donajgrodzki, Social control, pp. 9, 15.

101 Graham to Bishop Blomfield, 27 Dec. 1842, Parker, C. S., The life and letters of Sir James Graham (London, 1907), 1, 343.Google Scholar The Edinburgh Review, another sceptic, also saw education, particularly secular education, as a panacea; [Greg, W. R.], ‘Juvenile and female labour’, Edinburgh Review, LXXIX (Jan. 1844), 151–6.Google Scholar

102 Graham to James Kay-Shuttleworth, 30 Aug. 1842, Graham papers, bundle 52B, partly printed Parker, Graham, 1, 329. Ashley agreed that education was no panacea, cf. 3 Hansard, LXVII,47.

103 Graham to Kay-Shuttleworth, 30 Aug. 1842, Parker, Graham, 1, 329. Londonderry's speech to his Irish tenantry, Northern Whig, 12 Sept. 1843. This speech pre-dates the miners’ strike of 1844 which, it has been claimed, converted Londonderry into an advocate of'social control’ theories of education, cf. Colls, R., ‘“Oh! happy English children!” coal, class and education in the north east’, Past and Present, no. 73 (1976), 75–99; A.J. Heesom, ‘Coal, class and education’, Past and Present (forthcoming).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

104 See Heesom, ‘Northern coal owners’, for a fuller discussion.

105 3 Hansard, LXIII, 1352; LXIV, 426–7.

106 Buddie to Hedworth Lambton, 28 May 1842, NCB papers, NCB I/JB/1786. Cf. Blaug, ‘Economics of education’, pp. 580–1.

107 Buddie's ‘comments’, NCB papers, NCB I/JB/1788.

108 Bentham, ‘Principles of penal law’, Works, 1, 536. Malthus, Population, ii, 213.

109 Buddie's ‘comments’, NCB papers, NCB I/JB/1788.

110 Smith, Wealth of nations, 11, 785.

111 Senior, Industrial efficiency, 11, 328.

112 Horner to Senior, 23 May 1837, Senior, Letters on the factory act, pp. 30–1. In the Report of the commissioners for inquiry into the condition of... the handloom weavers (P.P. 1841, x), 400, Senior also anticipated that the educational provisions for factory children should be extended to those employed in mines.

113 Coal trade papers, united committee minutes, 1840–4, pp. 170–2. Buddie to Lambton, 28 May 1842, NCB papers, NCB I/JB/1786.

114 Buddie's ‘comments’, NCB papers, NCB I/JB/1788. J. A. Roebuck, the radical politician, who shared the ‘social control’ view of education, and thought a proper scheme of national education would ensure an end to ‘wild and futile schemes of reform’ as well as removing the ‘stack-burning peasantry’, nevertheless condemned as a ‘gross fallacy’ the notion entertained by Buddie, that education unfitted men for ‘the common duties of life’; 3 Hansard, xx, 139–66. For Buddie's views on education, see Heesom, ‘Northern coal owners’.

115 Chadwick, in another context, claimed that part-time working ‘was intended not solely as a security for education’, but ‘as a primary security against overwork’; Chadwick, , Letter to N. W. Senior… (P.P. 1862, XLIII), 94. Ashley seems to have reversed this order of priorities.Google Scholar

116 Report of R. J. Saunders (P.P. 1843, xxvii), 387 ii. Cf. Paz, ‘Working class education’, pp. 135–8.

117 Graham to the earl of Powis, 31 Aug. 1842, Graham papers, bundle 52 B.

118 Ashley, ‘Infant labour’, passim. Cf. Ward, W. R., ‘The protestant churches, especially in Britain, and the social problems of the industrial revolution’, Religion und Kitchen im industriellen Zfitalter (Berlin, 1977), pp. 65–6, 68. The notion of a breakdown in social order which had, therefore, to be reimposed was inherent in ‘social control’ thinking. Cf. Stedman Jones, ‘Social control’, pp. 164–5.Google Scholar