Legislature has never thought of certifying. No ordinary person, for instance, can possibly judge the quality of a watch which, from all that appears to the unpractised eye, might be worth £10 or £50. Nevertheless, it is out of the question that Government officers should be employed to inspect and stamp watches before they are allowed to be exposed for sale. The sufficient reason is, no doubt, that watches differ infinitely in details of construction and finish, so that it would be impossible to say exactly what the certification meant, or how long it would hold good. The fineness of the gold or silver composing the case is a simple definite fact which can be tested in a few moments and exactly recorded.

From a review of what precedes we may perhaps infer that Government branding is only to be approved under the following joint conditions-(1) When some special danger is to be avoided, or some special considerable advantage to be attained by Government intervention; (2) When the individual is not able to exercise proper judgment and supervision on his own behalf; (3) When the intervention required is of a simple and certain character, and the result can be certified in a manner comprehensible to all.

A

Ancient Sanitary and Trade Regulations.—It is well worthy of notice that the tendency towards sanitary inspection which some people now dread as an approach to despotism, is in reality a very old institution. study of Riley's translation of the Liber Albus, or "White Book of the City of London," and a glance through Mr. G. L. Gomme's Index of Municipal Offices (Index Society), will show that the ancient municipalities of this land

E

were minutely organised in this respect. Ale-conners, ale-founders, ale-tasters, auditors, aulnegers, beadles, bread-weighers, coal-meters, flesh-searchers, and inspectors and searchers under various other names, were employed by our ancestors to save themselves from unapparent frauds and evils. I think, too, that Mr. Gomme has clearly shown, in other writings, that the municipalities were no creations of Norman monarchs, but were really developments of original village communities. So far, therefore, as antiquarian learning can go, we have the fullest warrant for the functions of Government objected to by some persons. The tendency to centralisation, again, which is involved in much recent legislation, is due partly to the decay of local activity, and partly to the immense improvements in communication, which render every part of a kingdom now almost as accessible to the seat of government as were the outlying parts of an extensive parish or hundred to its local lords in early days. It is the vastly greater scale on which our legislative operations now proceed which makes them bear the appearance of offensive innovations and despotic encroach

ments.

In former days, too, much trouble was taken by the Government to ensure the excellence of several kinds of goods, especially woollen cloth. The Act 2d and 3d Philip and Mary, cap. 12, for instance, provides for the viewing and sealing of clothes called Bridgwaters. At Leeds the ancient regulations of the Cloth Hall continued to be exercised in full vigour until about the middle of last century. The fact, however, is, that the old system of Government certification has been replaced within the last hundred years by the modern system of

trade-marks, the legalisation of which, however, is only now being carried into effect under the Trade-Mark Acts of 1875 and 1876. The trade-mark or trade-name is a private brand, and it is essential to the continued success of a firm that they shall uphold the reputation of their marks by carefully supervising the qualities of the goods to which they are affixed. Registered trade-marks being now legal property, manufacturers become their own branders, and are urged to brand honestly by the powerful and constantly-acting motive of self-interest. Both statute and judge-made law have of late tended strongly to create and maintain property in trade reputation, and the effect is probably very good. But I see nothing in this to prohibit the employment of State inspection and certification in cases where it can be clearly shown to possess superior advantages.

As frequent complaints are now made in the manufacturing districts as to frauds committed in the packing of cotton,-earth, stones, brick-bats, and rubbish of all descriptions being sometimes found inside the bales,-it may be pointed out that such matters were well looked after by our ancestors. The packing of wool was superintended by a special officer qualified and admitted before the mayor and constables of the staple of Westminster. An elaborate treaty of commerce between Henry VII. and the Duke of Burgundy, contracted in the year 1499, provided that all wool exported should be packed by duly qualified packers, who were to certify by labels the quality of the wool. Penalties were enacted against any fraud, cheat, collusion, or deceit, especially against those who should "pack or fold up earth, stones, dung, sand, gravel, or hair in the fleeces."

CHAPTER III.

THE FACTORY ACTS AND SIMILAR LEGISLATION DIRECTLY AFFECTING LABOURERS.

THE most important mass of legislative enactments relating to labour is contained in the Factory Acts, now consolidated into the very important, long, and complicated statute known as the Factory and Workshop Act, 1878 (41 Vict. cap. 16). This Act, mainly due, as regards the passing, to Mr. (now Sir) Assheton Cross, forms a complete code of factory regulations, and replaces about sixteen previous statutes, which are enumerated and repealed in a schedule. There can be no doubt that, whether we look to the several more tentative acts by which this was preceded, to the inquiries connected with them, to the diligent and zealous labours of the factory inspectors, to the thorough inquiries of the Factory Act Commissioners of 1875,-conducted to no small extent by personal examination of the workshops,- or finally, to the prolonged and exhaustive debates in committee of the House of Commons, by which the details of the Act were finally settled, this Consolidation Act is one of the brightest achievements of legislation in this or any other country. The great fact is that it embodies disinterested legislation: the health and welfare of the people

at large form the sole object; no one class or trade is to be promoted, as in almost all the older industrial laws. If anything, it involves a sacrifice on the part of those capitalists and employers who were greatly concerned in passing it. Before, however, entering further into the matter of existing factory legislation, it will be well to consider as briefly as possible the course of events which have led up to the present state of the law.

History of English Factory Legislation. Not only is it impossible to attempt anything approaching to a history of factory legislation, but it is also unnecessary. The report or essay upon this subject prepared by Ernst, Edler von Plener, the first Secretary of the Austro-Hungarian embassy in London, leaves nothing to be desired as a most clear, accurate, and compendious historical sketch of the subject. It has been excellently translated into English by F. L. Weinmann, and published with an Introduction by Mr. Mundella (London, Chapman and Hall, 1873). This convenient little book contains also, as an appendix, abstracts of Continental laws and regulations respecting the labour and education of children. employed in factories. The history of factory legislation is not only highly technical, involving details of hours and arrangements of little general interest, but it is also complicated by the intrusion of political intrigues and struggles.

The first of the Factory Acts was the so-called Health and Morals Act, passed in 1802 (42 Geo. III. cap. 73), and generally known as the Elder Sir Robert Peel's Act. It appears to have originated out of the practice of apprenticeship-many children having been sent by the