Samuel Greg also fed them good-quality food. They were given porridge that was packed with oatmeal and on certain days they were given bacon and potatoes to eat.
Compared to other mills this food was luxurious, Why did he do this? This was due to the business mind Samuel Greg possessed he was always trying to limit his workforce of disease that is why he gave them fresh, clean water to drink and good food to eat. The health of the workers was impeccable compared to other places.
Some children ran away but after they had escaped they realised that the mill treated them well and that the conditions weren’t as bad as other mills, so many returned within a couple of weeks, some even days! One girl, named Esther Price ran away with another girl Lucy Garner after they had assaulted another worker and they didn’t want to face up to the punishment awaiting them.
Esther returned 10 days or so later she went to visit her family in Liverpool, the reasons for her return aren’t sure. I believe the poor conditions disturbed her and therefore she rushed back to the mill as fast as her legs could carry her.
When she returned “both (argued) against the severity of cutting off the girls hair” this according to Robert Hyde happened between Mrs Shawcross and Sally (Robert Hyde’s Sister).
Esther and Lucy were both confined to a small room “the windows were boarded”, this may seem harsh but wasn’t as serious as the punishment given out in other mills.
Compared to other mills Quarry Bank Mill was a good place to work if you were a child. In other mills the cotton master labelled the children to be “his property”. The shifts varied “ worked in shifts of twelve, fifteen, or more hours” the finishing times weren’t regular, like in Quarry Bank Mill.
The factories “generally dirty, unhealthy” weren’t hygienic. The apprentice houses’ weren’t like the one at Quarry Bank Mill that was a separate house “usually long, low
Sheds adjoining the factory.” Whereas only 17 children died in 22 years at Quarry Bank Mill because of clean water that prevented diseases, “dens of fever and vice” this describes an apprentice house in other mills.
The punishments in other mills were cruel and unjust; children were often “flogged” if they were tired. One worker “was hung by his wrists over moving machinery” in another mill and was forced to “avoid mutilation” of his legs by suspending himself up. This type of punishment was common in many mills and didn’t disturb many people who knew about it. Yet this type pf punishment at Quarry Bank Mill was unheard of and unthinkable.
The food wasn’t sufficient they ate hot boiled potatoes only, they were made to eat with their hands that were greasy and dirty and they probably have never heard of spoons or forks before. The separation of sexes in Quarry bank mill was a must, but in other mills they were “herded” together “ the room filled with a multitude of young persons of both sexes” which caused many problems.
One major difference was that the children weren’t educated. Samuel Greg believed in educating his workers, but other mills didn’t approve. This didn't help the workers, as they weren’t totally aware of the real dangers of machines. Samuel Greg knew education was the key to success and profit.
Frederick Engles, who supported and campaigned for the rights of the labouring classes, wrote the evidence I used from Source A. With my visit to Quarry bank and the fact that Frederick Engles campaigned for labouring classes and he described the mill as a nice place to work is sufficient evidence to conclude that this source is reliable.
Source B, again is only extracts from an interview. In this source factory inspectors who had never visited Quarry Bank Mill are questioning the superintendents. This source may not be reliable because the presence of Samuel Greg, questions the authenticity of the information in this source because his employers would not have spoken unfavourably about the treatment of the children. However the doctors own records suggest that the children were well cared for and disease was limited.
Source C, is a passage taken from “ A Social and Economic History of Britain, 1760-1792” by Pauline Gregg. The source is a secondary source because it was written in the 20th Century and constructed with primary data taken from accounts and sources written at the time. The source is reliable because sources written at the time back up the message the author is trying to deliver.
Source D, is an account given by Robert Hyde (who inherited the mill after his father’s death) the owner of Quarry Bank Mill in 1843. The source isn’t reliable as there are two accounts of this punishment one by Robert Hyde and a Worker at the mill. They both describe the punishment completely contrary and as Esther Price never wrote about we will never know what really happened, so the source isn’t reliable.
Source F, is an illustration made at the time of a mule- spinning factory. The source seems reliable, because there are children clearing under moving machines that is something that can never be questioned. The machines seem to be the same size as the ones situated in Quarry Bank Mill. So overall this source is reliable.
In my conclusion, all the sources of information suggest that Quarry Bank mill wasn’t typical of working conditions in factories during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. There were striking differences between Quarry Bank Mill and other mills in their handling of children. Samuel Greg was very business-minded and
knew how to make his business successful and to also build a good reputation. Therefore it was to his advantage that he treated his workers fairly and he benefited from this, because some of his workers stayed on till they were adults. In Styal many apprentices made the transition to free labour. They would find lodgings in the village.
In conclusion, I believe that it is safe to say that Quarry bank Mill wasn’t typical of working conditions in mills during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century, the workers were treated as humans and not as slaves like in other mills, and they were given food that was full of nutrition. The punishments were very lenient compared to the standard of punishment in other mills. I can also back this up because I visited the mill personally and was given this information by the guide in the apprentice house, and also some original documents from the mill were displayed. Many stated the working conditions of children in the mill, these seem to be reliable, as they are primary sources and written either by children who worked there or people who inspected or had visited the mill.
