Obsolete Jobs for Children Trivia Quiz

Answer: Coal mining

Anthracite mines would put the coal through a breaker, crushing the rocks down to smaller sizes for different purposes. The coal rocks would then come down the chute to the breaker boys, who (without gloves) would sort them by size and discard any impurities found. The days were long and hard (typically six days a week for ten hours a day) with other hazards than just sharp rocks and bad air. Boys could often lose a limb just moving around the processing plant, or even be crushed and die.

Records in the USA show the use of breaker boys began in 1866, and even though laws were enacted to forbid the use of boys for the purpose, they were poorly enforced. Even after the technology improved enough to make the job obsolete, breaker boys were still employed until federal child labour laws were enacted in the late 1910s.

Answer: Crossing sweeper

The 'crossing sweeper' of the 19th century, common in many large European cities, was akin to the 'windshield cleaner' of today. It was one step up from begging; a nominal service provided for the hope of a coin. With horses and horse-drawn carriages the common form of transportation, it made for very dirty streets, not to mention other types of refuse. Someone in clean, fancy clothing ran a very real risk of fouling up their nice clothing, thus the opportunity for someone to make some money to prevent such an occurrence. Crossing sweepers came in all ages and genders, but were most often children, the elderly, or people with a physical disability.

Answer: Doffer

Once fully wound, a bobbin or spindle would need to be removed to allow for more spun fiber to be collected. Removing, or 'doffing' these items was a job often given to young boys, who were quick and had nimble fingers. When the spinning frame came to a stop, the machine would be swarmed by a group of doffers to quickly exchange filled bobbins and spindles for empty ones.

Boys were also employed as sweepers (which is what it sounds like), while girls were often picked to be spinners. These jobs continued to exist until child labour laws stopped them in the early 1900s, and machines were subsequently developed to do the same thing.

Answer: Hurryer

All of the options listed were jobs in an early 19th century coal mine in England, often with a whole family employed to do the different jobs in conjunction. The father would be the 'hewer', using a hand tool to get the coal from the seam. The mother would be the 'getter', putting the hewn coal pieces into the corf for the children to 'hurry' to the surface.

A 'hurrier' had either the job of drawing (pulling) the corf by means of a harness called a 'gurl', or thrusting (pushing) the corf from the rear. Children that were too small to move the corf would often carry candles to provide light, or be employed as 'trappers', opening and closing ventilation trap doors.

Answer: An extinguisher, to snuff out torches

In the days before gas lighting in the streets, 'link-boys' were hired to guide pedestrians with a lit torch. This could be for the entire trip, or just to and from a vehicle (usually a combined service, chairman and link-boy working together). The term 'link' refers to the type of wick on the torch, often made from tow (a coarse fiber) coated in burning pitch.

Answer: True

The cotton wastage was too valuable to leave unused, so young boys and girls were employed to gather it up, as well as clean up dirt and machine oil, typically while the machines were actively running. It wouldn't do to pause production for any length of time, and there was always the chance that fallen cotton would gum up the machinery if not collected in a timely manner. Of course, with moving machinery, there was a real danger of losing fingers or limbs, or even getting your head crushed. Scavengers had to be ready to lie flat at a moment's notice to avoid getting struck by moving parts. And if they didn't do their job to the overseer's satisfaction, they could look forward to a beating.

Answer: False

Before automated pinsetters, the people who did the job were generally called... pinsetters. If they were younger, that would be typically be altered to 'pin boys'. 'Pinchasers' (sometimes called 'pin monkeys') as a job *did* exist, but their role was to maintain and troubleshoot automated pinsetters, not to manually reset the actual pins.

Answer: Powder monkey

Boys (usually between the age of 12 and 14) were commonly used for this role due to how quickly they could navigate the confines of a ship's lower decks while also being able to easily take shelter behind the ship's gunwales, being of generally smaller stature. Employment as a powder monkey was often a stepping stone to a longer career with the navy, and even when laws were enacted limiting employment to age 14 and older, the role continued to exist until the end of the 19th century.

Another employment opportunity for both boys and girls aboard ship was as a 'cabin boy' or 'ship's boy', working as an assistant to the cook, or to the various different officers.

Answer: Because it was believed that Johann Gutenberg sold his soul to build the first printing press

While Johann Gutenberg was never suspected of dealing with the dark arts, the same cannot be said of his business partner Johann Fust. One possible origin of the name came from Fust purportedly selling Gutenberg's printed bibles to King Louis XI of France, claiming that they were manuscripts done by hand. When the letters were discovered to be identical (you know... what printing looks like), he was accused of witchcraft and imprisoned. Eventually, it was all sorted out after revealing the actual production by moveable-type printing.

Another possible origin of the name came from the belief that a mischievous 'devil' could be found in every print shop that would cause problems like inverted type or misspelled text. Invariably, it was the apprentice or assistant that would catch the blame.

Answer: A young prince

According to some accounts, a 'whipping boy' was a young boy who was a companion to a prince of equivalent age (or possibly a boy king) who was undergoing tutelage. If the royal youngster did something that would normally earn a beating (as per the social mores of the day), the punishment would instead be delivered to the companion.

The thought behind this was that this would make the young royal want to avoid such discomfort from happening to their companion in the future, while still protecting the tutor from potential punishment for striking someone so far above their station.