The Factory Question and Industrial England, 1830–1860 by Robert Gray

Abstract

TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE Book Reviews 157 rapid and reliable determination, occupies prominent places in po­ litical agendas, as was the case in Frankland’s day. Russell misses the opportunity to draw parallels of this kind, except when dealing with mainstream developments in chemistry and chemical education. This, however, is only a minor criticism of an otherwise exemplary study, one that contributes much to our understanding of the public and private worlds ofVictorian chemistry, its rivalries, and its leading protagonist. Anthony S. Travis Dr . Travis is deputy director of the Sidney M. Edelstein Center for the History and Philosophy of Science, Technology, and Medicine at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. His recent publications include “Poisoned Groundwater and Contami­ nated Soil: The Tribulations and Trial of the First Major Manufacturer of Aniline Dyes in Basel,” Environmental History 2 (July 1997). The Factory Question and Industrial England, 1830-1860. By Robert Gray. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Pp. xiv+253; illustrations, tables, bibliography, index. $59.95 (cloth). Readers of Technology and Culturewill discover more about the lat­ ter than the former in this dense little volume. Its principal theme concerns controversies over regulating the length ofthe working day for juveniles and adult women in English textile mills. From that relatively narrow ground, the author addresses a broad range of is­ sues related to industrialization and its interpretation in contempo­ rary historiography. This cultural history approaches policy formula­ tion chiefly through analysis of rhetoric and symbolism, areas that offer academics a fertile field for insightful speculation and projec­ tion. Gray has drawn upon an impressive array of new monographs about the textile industries and communities in Lancashire and the West Riding of Yorkshire. A substantial portion of this recent litera­ ture has eluded the T&Creview process. Scholars interested in com­ parative textile history topics will find plenty to digest in the foot­ notes and select bibliography. The author intends to rescue the Industrial Revolution from the clutches ofeconomic history. During the reign ofMargaret Thatcher some practitioners of the dismal pseudoscience had disparaged the factory system as an agent of economic growth and a harbinger of social change. Gray does not attempt to refute the revisionists’ esti­ mates regarding incremental shifts in net national income and other indicators. Rather, following Maxine Berg and Pat Hudson, he relo­ cates the debate over the significance of industrialization to other terrain—the realms oflegal superstructure and social consciousness. The admirable introduction provides a tidy guide to the opposing 158 Book Reviews TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE camps of contemporary historiography. Gray then moves through the two principal sections of his argument: first, the discourses cre­ ated or appropriated by various interests advocating, opposing, or vacillating about state intervention into the relations between textile employers and a portion of their work force; second, the evolution of regulatory practice as expressed through prosecutions under the 1833 Factory Act and subsequent extensions and modifications of its provisions between 1847 and 1853. Suffice it to say that the second section is more coherent, though less ambitious, than the first. In the exegesis of vocabulary and imagery we hear the voices of politicians, clergy, physicians, literati, cranks, and the occasional chorus of workers. Unfortunately for a study of this type, we do not hear enough of the original voices. Quotations are doled out rather sparingly, and between the snippets there stretches a vast acreage of interpretation ranging from sweeping generalization to elliptical microdetail. If this compressed mode of presentation is attributable to a publisher’s decision about the permissible length ofthis volume, then erring on the side of parsimony was an unfortunate decision. Gray is exceptionally sensitive to the subregional distinctions within the textile industry of the industrial North. He addresses, for example, the question of divisions among manufacturers over the issue of regulation. His impressive knowledge ofvariations in textile products and processes permits him to identify certain patterns of compliance with the Factory Acts as well as predispositions toward evasion of their provisions; not all offenders were backward rural mills whose proprietors disliked regulation because their throstle spinning frames and preparatory machinery could be tended effec­ tively by child labor. On the other hand, as Lindy Biggs observes in another context, some advanced factories...