Page:The Factory Controversy - Martineau (1855).djvu/48

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
38
THE FACTORY CONTROVERSY.

which "it appears that, out of 858 accidents occasioning loss of life, only 29, or 31/2 per cent, had been occasioned by factory machinery" of any kind whatever. "Three and a half per cent!" exclaims Mr. Dickens or his contributor. "The argument is of a substantial character." If he assigns his number, of 2,000 a year, his opponents may surely cite theirs, of 31/2 per cent, or 12 in a year. But Mr. Dickens cannot endure a comparative number which may diminish the show he makes with a positive one. He follows up, and improves upon, Mr. Horner's horror at the penalty of Ten Pounds,—adopting, of course, without a hint of there being a doubt in the case, the statement that a few hooks, costing a few shillings, would have saved the life of the poor reckless fellow Ashworth, who, as we have seen, threw it away. "When," says the writer (p. 243), "the mill-owner sets that price (ten pounds) on his workman's brains, who can wonder if the workman sets a price still lower on his master's heart!" The mingled levity and fustian of the style of the specimens we have quoted will neutralise their mischief to educated people; but the responsibility of presenting such pictures, and offering such sentiment, to a half-educated order of readers, is such as few writers would like to be burdened with. We do not believe that there will be any outbreak in factory districts about this matter, with or without Mr. Dickens's incitement; because the factory people understand the value of casings and hooks better than he does; and because an amendment and elucidation of the law may be considered only a question of time; but Mr. Dickens had better consider, for the sake of his own peace of mind, as well as the good of his neighbours, how to qualify himself for his enterprise before he takes up his next task of reform. If he must give the first place to his idealism and sensibilities, let him confine himself to fiction; and if he will put himself forward as a social reformer, let him do the only honest thing,—study both sides of the question he takes up. How far he is from having done this in the present case, a short but not unimportant statement may