Life in industrial cities, child labor and the reforms that followed
Grade 10 Social Studies Worksheet - Building Confidence

Circle the best answer.
Read this first
Use this
Cards A to C. Card A, a chart in our words, written today (from UK Parliament, Living Heritage): The 1833 Factory Act, group by group. Children under nine: banned from factory work. Children aged 9 to 13: a 48-hour week, and two hours of school a day. Young people aged 13 to 18: up to 12 hours a day. Inspectors: four inspectors for about 4,000 mills, so the Act was widely evaded. Before it, an 1831 Act had limited the working day to 12 hours for those under 18. Card B, a summary in our words, written today (from UK Parliament and the Science and Industry Museum): Campaigners compared the treatment of mill workers, including children, with slavery. Anthony Ashley-Cooper led the Ten Hours Movement for shorter hours. Inquiries reported mistreatment of children in factories. Mill work meant very early mornings, long hours and repetitive tasks. Card C, a summary in our words, written today (from UK Parliament): The 1842 Report on the Sanitary Condition of the Labouring Population of Great Britain was the brain-child of Edwin Chadwick. It used statistics to show differences in life expectancy by class and place of residence. It was a report, not a law.
Card A summarizes the 1833 Factory Act. Which question can it help answer, Ari asks?
- How many children were working in mills in 1833, since the law set rules for children's hours
- How children felt about school, since the law gave children under 13 two hours of school a day
- What the law required for each age group, and how many inspectors it created
- Why Parliament passed the law in 1833
Card B says campaigners compared mill work with slavery. What can that comparison show, Bo asks?
- That mill work and slavery were the same, since campaigners said they were alike
- Exactly how mill workers were treated, since campaigners knew mill conditions at first hand
- How campaigners argued for change, not an exact measure of conditions
- That Parliament agreed with the campaigners, since Ashley-Cooper led the Ten Hours Movement
Card C describes Chadwick's 1842 report. What can it help answer, Esme asks?
- What the report measured: differences in life expectancy by class and place
- What the Factory Act of 1833 required
- Why people in some places lived longer, since statistics on life expectancy explain the causes
- Whether the report became law, since important reports lead to new laws once they are read
A student writes: "The 1833 Act ended child labor in mills." What does Card A say, Jun asks?
- No: it applied just to children under nine and left older workers with no limits
- Yes: it set a 48-hour week for children aged 9 to 13, which ended work for that group
- Yes: it banned work under nine, so each child was protected from long hours
- No: it banned factory work under nine and limited hours for older children
Card A says the Act was widely evaded. A student says, "So the law had no effect." What is the fair reply, Kira asks?
- The student is wrong, since the 1831 Act had done it
- The student is right, since a law that is widely evaded cannot change anything
- The student is wrong, since four inspectors could visit each of the 4,000 mills in a year
- Evasion is shown, but the card does not say the law changed nothing
Use this
Cards D to F. Card D, a summary in our words, written today (from UK Parliament): Parliament outlawed unions under the Combination Acts in the 1790s. In 1834 six members of George Loveless's friendly society of farm workers, who were campaigning peacefully for better wages, were prosecuted and sentenced to seven years' transportation to Australia. They were later pardoned after a public outcry. Unions were recognized in law in 1871. Card E, a summary in our words, written today (from the Science and Industry Museum): Mill work meant very early mornings, long hours and repetitive tasks. In 1833 new laws banned mill work for children under nine. Card F, a summary in our words, written today (from the Science and Industry Museum and UK Parliament): By 1831 Manchester's population was 188,000, double what it was 20 years earlier. Chadwick's 1842 report used statistics to show differences in life expectancy by class and place.
A student writes: "The Tolpuddle men were punished for a violent protest." What does Card D say, Luz asks?
- No: they were punished because they were farm workers, not because of anything they did
- Yes: they broke the Combination Acts, which punished protests that used force
- Yes: transportation to Australia was the usual punishment for a violent protest
- No: they were campaigning peacefully for better wages
Cards E and F both concern Manchester's growth. What do they show together, Noah asks?
- Each person in Manchester worked in a mill, since the population grew with the mills
- A town that doubled in 20 years included many mill workers with long hours, though the cards do not say how many
- The 1833 law caused the population to double, since the law came during the growth
- Crowding caused the long hours, since the population doubled by 1831
Use this
Cards A to C. Card A, a chart in our words, written today (from UK Parliament, Living Heritage): The 1833 Factory Act, group by group. Children under nine: banned from factory work. Children aged 9 to 13: a 48-hour week, and two hours of school a day. Young people aged 13 to 18: up to 12 hours a day. Inspectors: four inspectors for about 4,000 mills, so the Act was widely evaded. Before it, an 1831 Act had limited the working day to 12 hours for those under 18. Card B, a summary in our words, written today (from UK Parliament and the Science and Industry Museum): Campaigners compared the treatment of mill workers, including children, with slavery. Anthony Ashley-Cooper led the Ten Hours Movement for shorter hours. Inquiries reported mistreatment of children in factories. Mill work meant very early mornings, long hours and repetitive tasks. Card C, a summary in our words, written today (from UK Parliament): The 1842 Report on the Sanitary Condition of the Labouring Population of Great Britain was the brain-child of Edwin Chadwick. It used statistics to show differences in life expectancy by class and place of residence. It was a report, not a law.
Cards A and B together: how do the campaigners and the Act fit, Pia asks?
- Campaigners pushed for shorter hours, and the Act set limits, but the cards do not show the campaigners caused it
- The campaigners wrote the Act, since the Act limits hours as they asked
- The Act gave a ten-hour day, which is what the Ten Hours Movement wanted
- The campaigners won in 1831, since an Act that year limited the working day to 12 hours
Card A says four inspectors for about 4,000 mills. About how many mills is that for each inspector, and what does it show, Tala asks?
- About 16,000 each, since 4 times 4,000 counts each mill for each inspector
- About 4 each, since there were four inspectors altogether
- About 100 each, so each inspector could visit each mill several times a year
- About 1,000 each, so regular visits to every mill were not possible
Use this
Cards D to F. Card D, a summary in our words, written today (from UK Parliament): Parliament outlawed unions under the Combination Acts in the 1790s. In 1834 six members of George Loveless's friendly society of farm workers, who were campaigning peacefully for better wages, were prosecuted and sentenced to seven years' transportation to Australia. They were later pardoned after a public outcry. Unions were recognized in law in 1871. Card E, a summary in our words, written today (from the Science and Industry Museum): Mill work meant very early mornings, long hours and repetitive tasks. In 1833 new laws banned mill work for children under nine. Card F, a summary in our words, written today (from the Science and Industry Museum and UK Parliament): By 1831 Manchester's population was 188,000, double what it was 20 years earlier. Chadwick's 1842 report used statistics to show differences in life expectancy by class and place.
Card D gives 1834 for the sentence and 1871 for recognizing unions. A student says the sentence lasted until recognition. What is wrong, Zee asks?
- 37 years separate them, far longer than the seven-year sentence, and the men were pardoned
- The gap is 27 years, so the sentence was served in full by 1861
- Nothing is wrong, since the sentence began in 1834 and unions were recognized in 1871
- The gap is 47 years, since 1871 minus 1824 gives the span