The Victorian Age was an age of contradictions. Among the different contradictions of the period, child labour played a relevant role in the Victorian society. Children were often forced to work in order to provide money and they had to face terrible living conditions: they were often sent to the coal mine because of their small stature, they were given only around 10-15%  of the wages given to adult male workers, they were forced to work in the cotton mill where many of them lost their limbs and they had to work from 12 to 14 hours a day.

The thesis expressed in the article is that the process of industrial revolution was powered by child labour. Children were, in fact, slaves. They represented the "cheap, malleable and fast learning work forces", they weren't paid, but simply fed and given dormitory accommodation.

The text is arranged into the typical organisation of an argumentative text: at first the reader is introduced to the problem, then the speaking voice provides a thesis, data that aim at reinforcing the thesis, than a paragraph has the function to conclude the text.

The data provided highlights that child labour was  common among the Victorian society, indeed during the Victorian Age the number of child at work rose substantially. In addition Professor Humphries's research – just published by Cambridge University Press – reveals that the average age at which working-class children started work fell from eleven and a half (prior to 1791) to 10 for the period 1791-1850.

In conclusion, I would like to recall the thesis by saying that child labour powered the industrial revolution. They represented the "cheap, malleable and fast learning work forces" and they were the most dynamic and efficient workers, thanks to their stature and young age. On the other hand, the living conditions of the children were unacceptable and must be doomed.