coal since 1871 is not much less than that shown by the table.' Outside Northumberland, Durham and Lancashire, the evidence tended to show that the increase in prices and wages did not alfect the output of the hewers. In South Wales,[1] Yorkshire,[2] Derby, Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire and Worcestershire,[3] or West Scotland,[4] the hours were not reduced, whilst in South Staffordshire, East Worcestershire, North Stadordshire, Shropshire, and Cheshire, the output per hewer was increased.
If the hours of labour in these last mentioned districts are compared with the hours of labour prevalent in Durham, Northumberland, and Lancashire for the years 1871 and 1872, the cause of the reduction of the output per man is evident. In these last mentioned counties the working week previous to the rise in prices and wages was apparently longer than in other parts of England, and the colliers utilized the rise in prices to secure either a shorter workingday or else a shorter working week or fortnight. The result was that an eight hours day was prevalent in England during the year 1872.
The choice between money and leisure presents itself to the collier as it does to every one who has to earn a living. Prosperity makes some men work harder, whilst to others it brings an opportunity for rest. The Durham hewer prefers, when wages reach a certain point, to reduce his toil; the Welshman in higher wages sees an opportunity of increasing his income. But whether the high prices bring in their train more wages or greater leisure, the total output of coal steadily increases under the influence of forces that the additional leisure may slightly modify but cannot control.
It remains to draw attention to the experience that England has already had of an eight hours day. The great rise in the price of coal that occurred in the years 1872 and 1873 resulted not merely in an increase in wages, but in a reduction of the hours of labour. The Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons appointed to inquire into 'the causes of the present dearness and scarcity of coal'[5] contains valuable evidence on the clfect of a reduction of hours on production. Unfortunately, as I have pointed out, the statistics relating to the production of coal per man previous to the year 1872 have to be used with the greatest care, as the Coal Mines Regulation
