The Ten Hour Movement.

means to secure a livelihood. A number of others remained at their homes, but went out on strike, - one of the cases where such a course can be justified in that it was a strike in favor of, and against a violation of, law.

The following incident in connection with the strike in justice to all parties should not be omitted from this record. While the strike was pending the late Simeon Lord and William T. Crook, two of the manufacturers in this county, told their hands that they were willing to run their mills for ten hours if the rest would do so; that they would start on ten hours a day and try it for a month. If the rest did likewise they would continue so to run, but at the expiration of a month it was understood that they were free to do as the rest of the manufacturers did. This proposition was accepted and carried out in good faith on both sides during the term designated.

After a suspension for some time operations were resumed on the old system, and in violation of the law, notwithstanding the fact that by its provisions a penalty of fifty dollars was imposed on both the employer and parent of children under thirteen years of age, permitted to labor in factories. For five long years this state of things continued, when some of the more conscientious of the manufacturers not desiring to continue in this open violation of a plain law, proposed to the operatives that if they could induce the manufacturers of New England to join in the measure they would be willing to accede to their demands. Accordingly another movement was set on foot, meetings were again held, and a delegation consisting of the late John Wilde and Sandy M. Challenger was appointed. They at once attempted to discharge the duties of their mission, but were met at the outset by difficulties which were not unexpected. They were strangers (as it were) in a strange land. In an interview between the writer and Mr. Wilde after his return, the latter stated that they were somewhat at a loss how and where to commence their work. In this emergency he bethought himself of Benjamin F. Butler, Esq., then a prominent rising lawyer of Boston (now 1883 the Governor of the State of Massachusetts), who entered heartily into their plans, and gave them all the information in his power. Mr. Wilde stated that to him was to be attributed whatever of success they met with. After their return to Delaware County meetings were again called, at which the delegation gave an account of their stewardship. In the mean time the opposition to the law appeared to be dwindling away, and friends came to the aid of the workers. A general meeting was held at the court-house in Chester, at which the late Y. S. Walter, editor of the Delaware County Republican, presided, when it was agreed that a trial should be made of the effects of the new law. The late John P. Crozer was prominent in his endeavors to have the act put into practical operation, and after a few years' trial of the new, and as yet untried plan, was enthusiastic in its praise, the firm declaring that they got more work done per hour, or at a less rate of expense than ever before. Such is a brief outline of this little speck of nullification in the hitherto loyal county of Delaware. Although opposition existed, ofttimes in quarters where it was least expected; it was gratifying to find that the press of the county was uniformly on the side of the humble and weaker party. Y. S. Walter, of the Delaware County Republican, and Alexander McKeever, of the Upland Union, not only advocated the cause editorially, but threw open their columns for discussion on the merits of the question. Most of those who took an active part in the contest on this important measure have been called from the scenes of life; few only remain. But the work performed by their toils and labors continues as a blessing to posterity. A large portion of the privileges and opportunities now enjoyed by the working class, religious, social, and otherwise, were shut out from the factory operatives of a third of a century ago. Who among us would wish to go back to that period with all that that implies? Who can tell what effects would have been produced different from what has been, if we had continued to uphold a system of fourteen or fifteen hours' continuous monotonous labor out of the twenty-four, instead of the liberal and enlightened method now in operation?

The Removal Of The County-Seat To Media.

In considering the history of the removal of the county-seat from the ancient borough of Chester to Media, the present location, I must necessarily draw largely from the narrative of that event furnished by Dr. Smith, he having been an active advocate of the changes, although his recital takes coloring from his feeling somewhat in relating the incidents connected with that movement.

The first agitation of the measure occurred nearly thirty years before it was actually carried into effect, and is said originally to have been the outgrowth of political disappointment. Robert Frazer, a member of the bar of Delaware County, having been defeated in nomination for office by the delegates of Chester township and several of the districts lying in the immediate neighborhood of the county-seat, is said gave form and shape to the movement.

"Dissatisfaction had for some time existed among the people of the upper part the county," says Dr. Smith "on account of the seat of justice being situated on its southern margin. The people of the township of Radnor, residing much nearer to Norristown, the seat of justice of Montgomery County, than to Chester, petitioned for the annexation of their township to that county. The fact that the taxes of Montgomery were lower than those of Delaware is also said to have had an influence in promoting this movement. Be this as it may, the prospect of losing one of the best townships in the county was a matter of seri-