Preview

fu* ÜduMf»,,

¿i

___

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR
OFFICE

Studies and Reports
Series F.
No. 4.

GENEVA
24 October 1921

The Use of White Lead in Painting(,)
The sixth item on the agenda of the forthcoming International
Labour Conference is the prohibition of the use of white lead
in painting. In connection with this question the Düsseldorf
Chamber of Commerce has issued the memorandum ivhich
follows. In view of the interest of the information therein
contained the International Labour Office decided to translate it
and publish it in its series of Studies and Reports. The Office
can accept no responsibility, however, for facts quoted or opinions
expressed therein.

MEMORANDUM
of the Düsseldorf Chamber of Commerce
f

The agenda^ of t h e ' International Labour Conference,
which is to take piace in Geneva in the autumn of 1921,
includes the question of the prohibition of the use of white
lead in painting, which was raised by French representatives.
In 1904, following on the conference of the International
Association for Labour Legislation at Basle in 1903, the
Düsseldorf Chamber of Commerce published a report (2)
dealing with the question of the prohibition of the use of
white lead. The present report completes that of 1904 by
considering the whole problem of white lead since that year
from the technical, hygienic, and economic point of view.
I
The movement against the use of white lead originated
in France and spread from that country to Germany. For
more than a hundred years there had been continual discussions of the danger to health arising from the use of white lead,
until at last, in 1909, the Chamber passed an Act entirely
(1) Die Verwendung von Bleiweiss im Maler- und Anstreichergewerbe;
issued by the Düsseldorf Chamber of Commerce, 1 April 1921. Düsseldorf, A. Bagel. Translated by permission. (Ed. Studies and Reports.)
(2) Cf. Part II of the Report of the Düsseldorf Chamber of Commerce
^903 (Appendix).

IL0-SH/P4
.

I III | | I | 1 1 H ¡1III

prohibiting the use of white lead in the painting of buildings
as from 1 January 1915. The extent to which the provisions
of this Act concerning the prohibition of white lead have been
applied and observed in practice will be examined in a later
section of the present report.
In Belgium an Order concerning the use of white lead in
the painting of buildings has been in force since 1910. The
most important provisions of this Order are that white lead
may only be used ground in oil, that dry rubbing down
and scraping of paint containing white lead is prohibited, and
that workers handling lead paints must undergo medical
inspection every four months.
In Holland Article X X I of the Labour Act of 1911 compels
every doctor to report to the General Director of Labour
all cases of certain diseases, among them white lead poisoning,
which occur in his practice. Provisions similar to those
which existed in Germany before the war are in force as regards
white lead factories.
In Austria-Hungary an Order was issued in 1908 prohibiting
the use of white lead for indoor painting with three unimportant exceptions. It was also made compulsory to label all
vessels used for the storage or transport of lead paints.
In Switzerland there is no prohibition. The Cantons of
Geneva and Neuchât'el, however, have issued regulations
permitting the sale of lead paints to painters only when
ready ground. A prohibition of the use of white lead on
public buildings was issued by the Federal Council, but was
withdrawn a few years ago.
The Scandinavian countries, Denmark, Sweden, and
Norway, have, so far as we know, issued no legal regulations
for protection against white lead poisoning.
Italy has no regulations concerning the manufacture or
use of white lead.
It has unfortunately been impossible to ascertain whether
regulations concerning white lead have been issued in Spain.
There are certainly white lead factories in Spain, so that
there is evidently no general prohibition of the use of this
substance.
In England the question has not gone beyond the stage
of a conference between experts and the Government. At
this conference, which took place in 1911 (3), it was recommended that, after the expiration of three years, the painting
of carriages and other vehicles with paint containing more
than 5 per cent, of lead should be prohibited.
In Germany the prohibition of white lead has been constantly
demanded since the end of the nineties, and particularly since
(3) The Home Secretary appointed two Departmental Committees in
J a n u a r y 1911 to investigate respectively the danger attendant on the use
of paints containing white lead in the painting of buildings and in coach
painting. The first of these Committees submitted its Report in January
1914 and the second in 1920. (Ed. Studies and Reports.)

the question was raised at the conference of the International
Labour Office of Basle in 1903. The demand for legislation
restricting the use of white lead was, of course, first raised
by representatives of the workers, who were continually
emphasising the alleged danger of industrial poisoning. In
1903 the painters' union requested the Eeichstag to introduce
national legislation prohibiting the use of all lead-containing
paints in the painting industry. This petition was rejected
by the Eeichstag in full session. In 1905, however, after
careful preparation, a series of regulations were laid down
in ap Order of the Federal Council dated 27 June 1905, to come
into force as from 1 January 1906. The most important
provisions of the Order were as follows :
I. In the processes of crushing, blending, mixing, and otherwise
preparing white lead, other lead colours, or mixtures thereof with other
substances in a dry state, the workers shall not directly handle pigment
containing lead and shall be adequately protected against the dust
arising therefrom.
II. The process of grinding white lead in oil or varnish shall not
be done by hand, but entirely by mechanical means, and in vessels so
constructed that, even in the' process of filling them with white lead,
no dust shall escape into the place where work is carried on.
This provision shall apply to other lead colours, provided that such
lead colours may be ground by hand by male workers over eighteen
years of age, if not more than one kilogram of red lead and one hundred
grammes of other lead colours are ground by any one worker in any one
day.
III. The processes of rubbing down and pumice-stoning dry coats
of oil colour or stopping which are not demonstrably free from lead
shall only be carried out after damping.
All sludge and debris produced by rubbing down and pumice-stoning
shall be removed before it becomes dry.
IV. The employer shall see that every worker who handles lead
colours or mixtures thereof is provided with, and wears, during working
hours, a painter's overall or other working clothes completely covering
him, as well as a head covering.
V. There shall be provided for all workers engaged in processes of
painting, distempering, whitewashing, plastering, or varnishing, in
which lead colours are used, washing utensils, nail brushes, soap, and
towels. If such processes are carried on in a new building or in a
workshop, provision shall be made for the workers to wash in a place
protected from frost, and to store their clothing in a clean place.
VI. The employer shall inform workers who handle lead colours
or mixtures thereof of the danger to health to which they are exposed,
and shall hand them, at the 4 commencement of employment, a copy
of the accompanying leaflet ( ), if they are not already provided with
it, and also a copy of these Eegulations.

The second part of the Order contains regulations for the
processes of painting, distempering, whitewashing, plastering,
or varnishing when carried on in connection with another
industry. The most important of these provisions are the
prohibition of smoking and of the consumption of alcoholic
drinks in the workrooms.
(4) This leaflet is not reprinted in this translation. (Ed. Studies and
Reports.)

— 4 —

These measures satisfied most of the demands which had
at that time been forward by experts. The regulations
as such are suitable and sufficient to restrict lead poisoning,
if not to prevent it altogether. Their success, however, as
the Ministerial Counseller, Dr. Koelsch, points out, depends
entirely on the way in which they are carried out in practice,
and the strictness with which they are observed. If this
is not effective, the protective measures must necessarily
fail. It must be admitted that the peculiar nature of the
painting industry makes the application of the Order more
difficult than is usually the case with state regulations in
Germany. The painting industry is generally not carried on
in any one spot; the workers move from place to place.
This makes it very difficult for the factory inspectors to exercise satisfactory control. I t is particularly difficult to supervise
the execution of regulations in small undertakings. Again,
it is by no means easy to induce the workers to apply measures
for the protection of their own health with the necessary
strictness. The inevitable consequence is that, even after
the Order was issued, the number of cases of plumbism, so far
at least as is shown by the statistics of the most important
sick funds up to the beginning of the war, has remained
comparatively high, and the demand for further protective
measures and in the last resort for absolute prohibition of the
use of white lead has continually been raised. In 1910 the
Society for Social Eeform presented a petition to the Ministry
of the Interior asking for a far-reaching prohibition of the
use of lead paints, especially in indoor painting. This
petition also asked that it should be made compulsory for
vessels and packages to be labelled " Containing Lead —
Poisonous ". Although the Government at first thought
it necessary to take account of the interests of the white
lead industry, which would be seriously injured by such a
prohibition, the authorities of the Federal States soon decided
to issue partial prohibitions of the use of white lead on their
territory.
The Minister of Public Works issued the following Circular
on 11 November 1913 :
The use of lead paints, especially of white lead, may be prohibited
in principle in indoor painting, as satisfactory substitutes (lithoponeand zinc white) are available. Their use for this purpose should only
be allowed when there are special reasons of a technical or artistic nature
and on condition that they are not supplied in powder form, but are
ground in unseed oil. In the case of outdoor painting, white lead
cannot as yet be dispensed with, as the substitutes have less covering
power and are more liable to crack.

The most far-reaching prohibition is contained in a
regulation of the Central Kail way Office, which was issued
to all coachbuilding works, ordering the substitution of nonpoisonous paints for white lead in all cases. It is curious

to note that this regulation is in direct contradiction to an
Order which was also issued by the Central Eailway Office
in 1907 :
As it has been shown by careful experiments extending over many
years that non-poisonous colours, especially lithopone and permanent
white, do not form a satisfactory substitute for white lead, we suggest
that the aforesaid colours should not be used in future for the painting
of wood and other parts of railway carriages.

This sudden change of opinion on the part of the Central
Eailway Office concerning the value of white lead and the
possibility of finding substitutes for it cannot fail to strike
an impartial observer; it is possibly to be attributed not so
much to conviction as to external political influences. Similar
Orders were issued by the Prussian Ministry of War, the
German Admiralty, the German Postmaster-General, and other
national and State authorities.
During the war there was on the whole very little discussion
of the white lead question, as at that time very small
quantities of this substance were being produced, and its
use almost ceased owing to the stoppage of building operation.
On the proposal of the Commission on Unhealthy Processes,
however, the Governing Body of the International Labour
Conference, which was held at Washington in 1919, placed the
prohibition of the use of white lead in painting on the agenda of
the 1921 Conference. It was OAving to French influence, as has
already been said, that the representation of employers, workers,
and governments on the preliminary committees was abandoned
(5). As a result the resolution was placed on the agenda without
preliminary examination. The Memorandum accompanying
the resolution was written by the chief of the Industrial
Hygiene Section of the International Labour Office, and is in
the main based on the assumption that the use of white lead
in the painting industry is dangerous to health, and that it
can be satisfactorily replaced by other less poisonous paints,
especially by zinc white.
The Memorandum refers in particular to the investigations
and experiments carried out for many years by French experts.
The Düsseldorf Chamber of Commerce, in its previous report,
criticised the methods of investigation by which the French
experts attempted to establish that white lead can be
replaced by less poisonous or non-poisonous paints, especially
by zinc white. The latest French experiments carried out in
(5) During its session on 20 November 1919, the .Washington Conference unanimously adopted the proposal put forward by Dr. Miall,
Technical Adviser to the British employers' delegates, to the effect that
an Advisory Committee, composed of representatives of governments,
employers' and workers' organisations, should be immediately appointed
to follow up the work of the Industrial Hygiene Section of the
International Labour Office.
This Commission has non been constituted and will take up its
work in the near future (Ed. Studies and Eeports).

— 6 —

various institutions have followed the same method, and
therefore eame to the same conclusions. It is not necessary
to repeat the criticisms of these methods. The following
report, however, deals with the feasibility of substitutes
for white lead from the standpoint of German technical
methods and practice.
II
It was stated in our previous report that in Germany
opinions on the possibility of finding substitutes for lead paints
differ enormously. The situation has altered little, if at
all, since that time.
The majority of the workers and their representatives
state that zinc oxide and lithopone are satisfactory substitutes
for white lead; but in our opinion they have not advanced
satisfactory proof in support of their assertions.
It does not appear to be disputed that in indoor painting
white lead is not indispensable, at any rate for top coats.
The difficulty of using absolutely leadless paints in outdoor
work, however, is shown by the fact that even tho-e in favour
of the prohibition of the use of lead paints are willing to allow
a certain proportion of lead in "leadless" paints. In other
words, they merely recommend in reality the use of paints
with a low lead content. Many chemical experiments on
substitutes for lead paints have been made in the last ten
years. The Berlin Chamber of Commerce summarised a
number of important investigations of this land in a report
published in 1909, which contains the following passage:
Neither zinc white nor such paints as lithopone, " brilliant white",
etc., which are now on the market, can be regarded as a satisfactory
substitute for white lead. The difference in the resistance to the weather
offered by white lead and zinc is due to their chemical composition.
White lead and zinc white are, not neutral body colours, but form a
chemical compound with the linseed oil varnish used as a solvent by
the formation of lead soap and zinc soap. Hydrolysis, i.e. the chemical
effect produced by water on the component parts of the paint film,
both glycerides and soaps, takes place very slowly and gradually in lead
soap, while in the case of zinc soap it takes place much more rapidly.
Thus if zinc paint is exposed to the atmosphere, which always contains
a considerable amount of moisture, or to water, it is bound to perish
sooner than lead paint. When lithopone is used, conditions are even
more favourable to rapid deterioration. Lithopone consists of sulphide
of zinc and barium sulphate, and sulphide of zinc does not combine
with fatty acids ; therefore zinc soap is not formed in a paint
made of lithopone and oil. The result is that a coat of paint of this
kind perishes at least as quickly as a coat of varnish without paint.
Lithopone cannot, therefore, be considered as a substitute for white
lead. The same applies to " brilliant white ", etc.

These facts, which have been proved by chemical experiment,
have been frequently confirmed by the statements of experts.
The master painters' guilds of which we have made enquiries
are unanimous in declaring that white lead is indispensable.

—

The Berlin Painters' Guild, in the Berliner Malerzeitung of
17 October 1920, issued an appeal containing the following
passage :
If more southern countries than our own h a r e been unable to maintain
the prohibition of the use of white lead in painting, such a prohibition
is an economic impossibility in a northern country like Germany.
Climatic conditions are the determining factor in painting. For outdoor
painting, e.g. house fronts, windows, doors, eaves, zinc roofing, wooden
and iron railings, iron girdeis, iron bridges, etc. there is no material
which can replico white lead. This has been conclusively proved by
many experiments and by the observation of years.

In proof of its statements the Guild adduces the result of
an investigation made by its Committee on Materials into the
durability of base colours for outdoor painting:
That colour is the most durable which remains longest in combination
with the oil, i.e. which offers the longest resistance to the saponification
of the oil by carbonic acid and sulphmous vapour fumes in the atmosphere. This colour is white lead. Owing to its metallic character it
remains longest in combination with the oil used as solvent, because
the decomposition of lead by sulphurous vapours is a slow process.
Zinc white has less covering power than white lead, and gives very
little protection to the oil solvent, because, owing to its volume, a great
deal of oil is combined with a small quantity of colour. It reacts very
strongly to carbonic acid, and the destruction of the linseed oil solvent is
thus hastened.
Lithopone absorbs the oil, because the decomposition of the vehicle
goes on not only from without but from within. The components
of lithopone, barium carbonate and zinc sulphide, are in themselves
destructive agents of the acid-absorbing linseed oil.

The Union of Painters' Guilds of the Bhineland and
Westphalia, at a conference held in October 1920, considered
the question of the prohibition of the use of white lead in
painting, and stated in a resolution that white lead was
indispensable for outdoor work. Xo other white paint
approached white lead in durability, and all others soon
deteriorated when exposed to the weather and lost their tint.
We have made enquiries of ever thirty master painters'
guilds in all, and all have come to the conclusion that it is
absolutely impossible to replace white lead. It must be
remembered, moreover, that master painters and their organisations have not the slightest reason to defend the use of
white lead, as the observation of the protective regulations
dealing with it is very trying for them. In the long run
it is surely a matter of indifference to the master paiiuer
whether he carries out his contracts with lead or any other
kind of paint.
We have further consulted a large number of ship-building
and ship-fitting firms. With a few exceptions they all state
''hat it would be very difficult for them to dispense wich white
lead. After the unfavourable experience of leadless paints

— 8 —

which most shipbuilders had during the war, the majority
have returned ;o the use of white and red lead for the painting
of ships. The North German Lloyd considers lead paints
indispensable for shipbuilding, because they constitute a
complete protection of the metal against the weather and
against acids, and thus ensure a much longer life for the ships
than if these were painted with mineral colours, for instance.
This is the great value of red lead. Even those shipyards,
however, which employ exclusively lithopone and íinc vthite
for the painting of ships, emphasise the value of white lead
for putty and filling. Xo colour is so suitable as white lead
for hardening the oil solvent without admitting air, thus
preventing the entrance of sea water. Although the use of
white lead has considerably decreased in nearly all shipyards in
comparison with 1914, this is not, as the workers claim,
because substitutes have been found, so much as because
hardly any white lead was manufactured during the war,
and because immediately after the war it could not be used
owing to its high price and to the shortage of pure, linseed
oil. (White lead will not combine with linseed oil substitutes.)
In coachbuilding works lead paints may not be used on
government' work under the Order of the Central Kail way
Office referred to above. Consequently, both the relative
and absolute decrease in the use of white lead in these establishments since 1913 has been extremely marked. Some works,
more or less by force of necessity, have entirely given up the use
of white lead; but most of them continue to use lead paints
for all but government coachbuilding. The majority of the
reports which we have received from these establishments are
in favour of the continued use of lead paints. The importance
of these paints is shown by the statement of one coachbuilding
firm that foreign railway companies attach great importance
to white lead painting and order it in their specifications, as it
has a much greater power of resistance than the substitutes
made of zinc white and lithopone. Surely this is a striking
testimony to the impossibility of replacing German lead
paints. Mention may also be made in this connection of the
decision of the German Zinc White Convention, which
certainly cannot be suspected of partiality in favour of white
lead. In the opinion of th.e Zinc White Convention the use
of white lead in outdoor painting is unavoidable, as neither
zinc white nor lithopone is an efficient substitute. The
covering power of zinc white is less than that of white lead;
in addition, the Convention states that zinc white painting
does not last so long as white lead painting, and this has been
proved by many experiments. Thus zinc white cannot
compete with white lead for painting, for in Germany, as in
most other European countries, zinc white is used for indoor
painting only, and then generally in the form of varnish paint,
while white lead is used, for outdoor work. Zinc white can
only be used for outdoor work in certain countries, e.g.

— 9 —
in the extreme north of Europe. Lithopone, according to
the Convention, is a cheap substitute for white lead, and is
often used by painters for the two first coats on the outsides
of houses, while white lead must be used for the final coat.
Lithopone may be regarded as a cheap substitute for white
paint, consisting of 70 parts of heavy spar and only 30 parts of
zinc sulphide. Being composed of these substances, concludes
the Convention, lithopone painting only lasts for a short time.
Ill
Eor our investigations it is necessary to ascertain the
relative cost of painting with different colours. The price
of dry white lead is the highest ; zinc white costs rather less,
while lithopone is by far the cheapest. Dry white lead now
hardly appears on the market, and we have therefore
ignored the prices of dry colours. For colours ground in oil
we were given the following prices for a certain day at the
end of 1920 :
white lead
zinc white
lithopone

marks per kilogramme
15
17
12

It is obvious from this comparison that zinc white ground
in oil is dearer than white lead ready for use. The reason
for this is that zinc white requires a great deal more linseed
oil than white lead to dilute it sufficiently for use. Generally
speaking the proportion of linseed oil which has to be added
to white lead is 30 per cent., to zinc white 70 per cent., and to
lithopone 40 per cent. As the raw materials of linseed oil
are imported, the price is extremely high owing to the unfavourable state of the German exchange, and this largely affects
the cost of zinc white in prepared form. At the above prices
for basic colours the cost of one coat of paint per square metre
of smooth surface on a house would be as follows :
in white lead
in zinc white
in lithopone

marts
1.85-1.90
1.40-1.45
1.15-1.20

In calculating these prices, the covering power per kilogramme of ground colour is assumed as follows :
white lead
zinc white
lithopone

square metres
7%-8
10%-12
9Y2-10

These prices make no allowance for wages and depreciation
of tools ; they are merely cost prices of raw materials. I t
might be supposed from the figures that zinc white was

— 10 —
cheaper than white lead, but this is not the case. As zinc
white has less covering power, more coats are required than
in the case of white lead to produce the same effect. This
is frankly admitted by the Zinc White Convention itself.
Mr. Odo Meisl, the proprietor of the well-known Viennese
painting firm, states in the English periodical The Journal
of Decorative Arts (1912) that the use of zinc white increases
two of the principal factors in cost, namely, the consumption of linseed oil and labour. As wages account for 60 per
cent., and raw materials for 40 per cent., of the cost of outdoor
painting, and as two coats of white lead generally have at least as
much covering power as three of zinc white, it can surely not be
denied, in spite of the lower cost of the materials for a single
coat of zinc white, that total costs are lower if white lead is
used. Taking as basis the costs of a single coat as calculated
above, the cost of finished painting per square metre with
the two materials would be as follows:
white lead
zinc white

marks
3.70-3.80
4.20-4.35

To this must be added wages and depreciation of tools.
Maintenance costs are still more important than the initial
cost of painting. It has been shown by experience that lead
painting which has been well done will last from six to eight
years, while painting which has been done with substitutes
must as a rule be renewed every two or three years. This
is attested by a great number of the reports which we have
received. The Master of the Düsseldorf Painters' Guild reports
that the old Cologne lattice railway bridge was only painted
six times with lead paints, including once with red lead,
between 1859 and 1910, and is at present being used as a
crane support in a North German shipyard, the paint still
being in good condition. Mr. Betzler, the proprietor of one
of the largest painting businesses in Cologne, states that a
certain piece of white lead painting has lasted nine years and
still looks well. Another piece of painting, which was done
in 1918 with lithopone as an experiment on a ground which
had been previously oiled twice, peeled off some time ago.
When the occupants of the house cleaned the window sills
and wall footings a few months after the painting had been
done, the paint washed off completely in some places. Privy
Councillor Lehmann of Würzburg, the well-known hygiene
expert, personally verified these facts. This should be a sufficient proof that the apparent cheapness of lithopone painting
means in the long run more expense than painting with white
lead, owing to its high cost of maintenance.
The only remaining reason for the prohibition of the use
of white lead is the danger of lead poisoning, which, it
is asserted, is very great and cannot be obviated by
preventive measures. As we have already stated, this question

—

l i -

llas aroused great interest in nearly all civilised countries, and has
led in France to the prohibition by law of the use of white lead
in painting. The French Act, however, we have been informed,
has never been strictly applied, fell into desuetude during
the war, and now exists only on paper. If an over-zealous
official should happen to refer to the prohibition, the matter
is soon shelved. Our French infoi mant considers that under
existing conditions there is not likely to be any further serious
resistance to the use of white lead in France, as the danger
involved can easily be lessened and in some circumstances
entirely avoided. As a matter of fact France has imported
considerable quantities of white lead from abroad, even, since
the war, from Germany, as her own factories are unable to
satisfy the demand, though they have been working again for
some time. The Reconstruction Committee has actually made
a claim for the delivery of 2,000 tons of white lead from German
factories. This shows what importance the French Government attaches to the danger of lead poisoning, and how far
it disregards its own law on the subject.
In Germany opinions on the danger of poisoning owing
to the use of white lead vary greatly. The workers describe
its dangers in the most lurid colours, while the employers
maintain that few if any cases of white lead poisoning occur
in their works. The master painters' guilds from which
we have made enquiries are almost unanimous in stating that
the number of cases of poisoning has greatly decreased in
recent years, and that in the last few years there have been
hardly any. The Master of a well-known guild states that
three of his uncles, who worked with lead colours almost
all their lives, reached the ages of 82, 84, and 87 respectively
without ever showing the slightest symptoms of lead poisoning.
The report of the sick fund of the Düsseldorf Painters' Guild
mentions only one case of white lead poisoning in the last four
years ; the Essen Painters' Guild writes that plumbism among
its members is a thing of the past. At a meeting of master
painters of the Ehineland which took place recently at Cologne,
attended by over 220 members, an enquiry by the chairman
elicited a reply from only one man, who stated that he had
once suffered from lead poisoning some years ago. The
sick fund of the Dortmund Painters' Guild, out of an average
of 1,000 members, had 6 cases of white lead poisoning in 1911,
7 in 1912, 10 in 1913, and none in 1919, when the number of
members was 500. A strong contrast to these figures, which
are on the whole favourable, as supplied by independent
painters and painters' associations, is presented by the prewar statistics which we have received from the local sick
funds of certain large towns. We will only reproduce the
statistical returns of two important funds, the Berlin Local
Sick Fund and the Central Sick Fund of German Painters,
which has its headquarters at Hamburg. The figures unfortunately only reach 1911 and 1912 respectively.

— 12 —
N U M B E R OF CASES AND DAYS OP I L L N E S S AMONG MALE M E M B E R S
OF B E R L I N

LOCAL SICK

Lead colic and lead poisoning

All diseases
Total
Cases !

Total

Per 100 members

Cases I

16 ,268
17 ,066
16,585
12 ,872
13,451
13,223
11 ,769
11,135
12,139
9,704

10.7
10.2
8.8
6.5
7.3
6.0
6.0
5.5
6.0
4.8

369.9
339.3
311.2
240.4
260.0
265.0
246.1
224.5
243.1
192.1

3,580' 134,212

7.1

268.2

Cases

Days

Cases I

61,633
74,683
75,120
68,817
74,280
71,137
65 ,427
68 ,230
70.092
72,155

48.8
50.4
45.6
43.3
45.8
45.6
43.2
42.6
45.8
46.7

1401.7
1485.0
1409.9
1285.1
1435.9
1425.0
1368.5
1375.6
1407.2
1428.2

470
516
471
347
379
298
285
268
302
244

22 ,899 701,574

45.7

1401.8

2,146
2,534
2,431
2,318
2,369
2,276
2,065
2,114
2 ,285
2,361

NUMBER

OF CASES AND

DAYS

Per 100 members

Days

1903
1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912

FUND

OF I L L N E S S I N

THE

SICK F U N D OF GERMAN P A I N T E R S ( H E A D Q U A R T E R S :

Total
Days

CENTRAL
HAMBURG)

Lead colic and lead poisoning

All diseases

Cases 1

Days

Per 100 persons
Cases

Days

Per 100 persons

Total
Cases

Days

Cases

Days

1903
1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911

2,897 66 ,070
2,889 69 ,340
3,397 82 ,329
3,441 86 ,308
4,035 98 ,740
4,244 09 ,769
3,992 107 ,844
3,587 90,986
3,830 91,406

39.3
35.2
35.8
34.5
39.7
43.3
43.3
40.2
40.2

897.1
844.0
867.7
864.6
971.3
1119.2
1170.7
1019.7
959.3

177
198
198
149
185
181
176
161
163

5,666
5,881
6,151
7,596
6,777
4,931
5,018
4,839
4,606

2.4
2.4
2.1
1.5
1.8
1.8
1.9
1.8
1.7

76.9
71.5
64.8
76.1
66.7
50.3
54.5
54.2
48.5

Total

34,978 861,087

39.1

962.3

1,757

57,776

1.9

64.6

There is no doubt that according to this information health
conditions among workers in the painting trade before the war
were far from ideal. Nevertheless, among the members of the
Berlin Local Sick Fund the number of cases of lead poisoning
per 100 persons fell from 10.7 in 1903 to 4.8 in 1912, and
among the members of the Central Sick Fund of German
Painters from 2.-1 in 1903 to 1.7 in 1911. The question
remains whether these returns are entirely reliable. According

— 13 —
to Lehmann, a critical examination of these figures will lead
to conclusions which imply the contrary of what might be
assumed from a superficial inspection. It is well known that
a large number of paint workers, owing to their belief that
they are constantly exposed to the danger of lead poisoning
in their work, become hypochondriacs on the subject of lead.
If they suffer from any ailment they at once think of plumbism,
and go to the doctor with a ready-made diagnosis. The
doctor very often has no standard by which to determine
symptoms of lead poisoning, and in cases of doubt often
certifies the lead worker or painter as suffering from plumbism,
although this is by no means certain. The subject has only
recently been elucidated by scientific investigation, particularly
by blood tests. The medical officer of the Leipzig Local
Sick Fund, Dr. Schoenfeld, published the results of his
blood tests under the title Zur Frühdiagnose der Bleivergiftung
(The Diagnosis of Plumbism in its early Stages) (6) in 1921. Dr.
Schoenfeld gives figures which prove that all pre-war
statistics on the subject are, to say the least, unreliable. The
investigations, which were made in the district of the Leipzig
General Local Sick Fund, only applied to persons incapable
of earning. The results were as follows :
INCAPACITY FOR EARNING DUE TO PLUMBISM
Men
1910
1911
1912
1913

Women

1 Days of sick pay

258
199
. 170
'211

26
21
24
45

9 ,465
7,138
5,670
9,126

Total
Yearly average

838
210

116
29

31,399
7,850

1919
1920
(up t o 1 Oct.)

466

Dr. Schoenfeld considers that this satisfactory decrease in the
figures of plumbism is accounted for, in addition to other
clinical symptoms, entirely by the strict application of blood
tests, which distinguish persons actually suffering from
plumbism from hypochondriacs and malingerers. The figures
of other individual local sick funds since the war are equally
good. The Munich General Local Sick Fund, which in 1919
had a membership of 217,777, only reports one case of
industrial lead poisoning in that year. The Magdeburg
General Local Sick Fund, which had 40,325 members in 1919,
(6) Reprinted from the Zentralblatt für Gewerbehygienei

— 14 —
also had only one case of plumbism, and the Dresden General
Local Sick Fund, with a membership of 157,777, had no cases
at all in the same year. Immediately after the war the
decreased production and greatly diminished use of white
lead may have had some effect on the number of cases.
Careful investigation and accurate diagnosis of plumbism,
however, clearly had more effect.
If, in spite of all preventive measures, cases of lead
poisoning still occur, they are principally due to the fact that
it has been impossible as yet to abolish carelessness, stupidity,
and lack of cleanliness as completely as could be wished. It
is well known that lead is absorbed into the system by the
inhalation of lead dust or by the entry of lead into the stomach.
The danger of the inhalation of lead dust may be regarded as
non-existent since the Order of the Federal Council of 1906
prohibited the dry rubbing down and pumice-stoning of
white lead paint, and since it has become almost universal
for painters to buy their white lead ready ground. The
entry of lead into the stomach is comparatively easy to avoid
if proper care is taken and the hands are always washed
before food is taken. Indeed, as Lehmann and Koelsch state,
the whole question of lead is more or less a question of cleanliness. On the basis of the protective measures which have
been laid down it must be possible for the employers and
workers, if they are willing, to obviate most, if not all, of
the danger. The best regulations can do nothing against
ill will and indifference. It should be regarded as one of the
duties of trade unions, sick fund authorities, works councils,
factory inspectors, and other officials and organisations
entrusted with the application of labour legislation to make
constant efforts to educate both employers and workers and
to convince them that the regulations are not an unnecessary
nuisance, but are for their own good. If both sides apply the
necessary intelligence to the regulations which were made
in their interest, the danger of plumbism will disappear
without its being necessary to have recourse to the extreme
step of prohibiting the use of white lead.
In the memorandum of the International Labour Office,
which reads almost like an indictment, the difficulty of
supervising the application of protective, measures is
mentioned as one of the principal reasons for prohibiting the
use of white lead. We have already referred to these
difficulties, which are in the main inherent in the nature of
the painting industry. In our opinion, however, they are
not in themselves a sufficient justification for the prohibition
of the use of white lead; for what guarantee is there that it
will be any easier to superase the prohibition of its use than
to supervise the strict application of the protective measures
already in force ? It is this consideration which gives rise to
the doubts expressed by Dr. Fischer, the state and industrial
physician, who is well known as one of the principal

— 15 —
supporters of an unconditional prohibition of the use of white
lead, in his article entitled Ueber das Bleiweissv erbot in
Deutschland (The Prohibition of the Use of White Lead in
Germany) (7) :
The mere prohibition ot the use of white lead or of lead paints is, of
course, not enough in itself. There must at the same time be practical
and effective provision for inspection, and the application of these
provisions will probably be by no means so easy and satisfactory as
is often supposed.

If the supervision of an absolute prohibition of the use
of lead paints presents so many difficulties, how much more
difficult would be the supervision of the use of colours
containing a certain percentage of lead, which, according to
the memorandum of the International Labour Office, would
be allowed. It would then be necessary, as Eambousek
stated in the Chemikerzeitung (8), " t o undertake, instead of
a simple qualitative test, a very accurate quantitative test
of the specimens taken by the inspectors "; for any layman
must admit that it is easier to test whether paints contain
any lead than whether their lead content exceeds a certain
amount. A further difficulty is that from the standpoint
of health it would be impossible to abolish protective regulations
entirely if such paints containing small quantities of lead
were used. In any case it has been shown by experience
that the worker, in spite of the indifference to the dangers
of his occupation which comes from habit, is generally
comparatively careful in using paints which he knows to be
poisonous. The less poisonous the paint is, the less care
will he think it necessary to take, although even the smaller
quantity of poison may be dangerous to him. The supporters
of paints with a low lead content, however, state that paint
containing 4 per cent, of lead, as suggested by the
memorandum of the International Labour Office, could
in no case injure the health of the workers. This view is
definitely opposed by Schoenfeld. In his opinion the
quantity of lead which is absorbed is not the important thing.
Poisoning is always poisoning. Eambousek also takes the
view that the continuous careless use of paints containing
even a small quantity of lead can very easily cause plumbism,
especially in those persons who are peculiarly susceptible
to lead.
The prohibition of the use of white lead in painting would
have a most serious effect on the lead smelting industry, the
whole lead paint industry, and the thousands of workers
which they employ. The sales of the lead smelting works
are largely dependent on the demand for lead paints. Before
the war the total amount of lead produced in Germany was
(7) Sozialteclinil:,. No. 22, 1912.
(8) No. 18, 1913, p. 181.

— 16 —
about 160,000 tons. One-third of this was used by the lead
paint industry, and 48,000 tons were used for the manufacture
of white lead alone. These figures suffice to show the great
extent to which the lead smelting industry depends on the
existence of a flourishing lead paint industry. This is not,
however, the only industry which would be affected by the
destruction of the lead paint industry. A number of other
industries, such as bhe pottery, enamel, linoleum, printing
and lithograph, varnish, wallpaper, accumulator, rubber,
and cable industries, as well as the entire glass industry, are
dependent on lead colours for the - manufacture of their
products.
All these industries would be most seriously affected by
the prohibition of the use of lead paints. A step which
involves such grave consequences as the universal prohibition
of the use of white lead should not be supported by statements
which, as our investigation of .1904 showed and as is
confirmed by the present report, either rest on an insecure
foundation or are incorrect.
Dusseldorf.

1 April 1921.

— 17 —

STUDIES AND REPORTS
a l r e a d y issued
Except where stated, all Studies and Reports are issued both in English and French.

Series A
No. 1.

T H E AGREEMENT B E T W E E N T H E SPANISH W O R K E R S '
TIONS, issued 25 September 1920.

T H E D I S P U T E IN T H E METAL INDUSTRY I N I T A L T .
TRADE
UNION CONTROL OF I N D U S T R T (First part), issued 25 September 1920.

A N N U A L MEETING O F T H E TRADES
issued 4 October 1920.

INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF WORKERS I N T H E FOOD AND
DRINK TRADES, issued 11 October 1920.

T H E B R I T I S H GOVERNMENT AND T H E M I N E R S ' FEDERATION OF
GREAT BRITAIN. CONFERENCE B E T W E E N S I R ROBERT H O R N E
AND THE M I N E R S ' F E D E R A T I O N , issued 11 October 1920.

T H E CONGRESS OF T H E LABOUR AND SOCIALIST I N T E R N A T I O N A L ,
issued 14 October 1920.

T H E MINERS'
1920.

T H E INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION.
issued 21 October 1920.

T H E INTERNATIONAL
22 October 1920.

" 10.

INTERNATIONAL

CONGRESS

T H E BRITISH GOVERNMENT
GREAT

BRITAIN.

UNION

CONGRESS,

CONGRESS

issued

O F METAL

ORGANISA-

1920,

October

A COMPARISON,
WORKERS,

issued

AND T H E M I N E R S ' F E D E R A T I O N OF

CONFERENCE

MENT AND THE TRIPLE
26 October 1920.

BETWEEN

INDUSTRIAL

THE

GOVERN-

ALLIANCE,

issued

"11.

T H E DISPUTE IN THE METAL INDUSTRY IN ITALY. TRADE UNION
CONTROL O F INDUSTRY (Second part), issued 4 Novemb. r
1920.

" 12.

T H E FOURTH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF B O O K B I N D E R S , issued
26 November 1920.

" 13.

T H E MINERS' STRIKE
1920.

" 14.

T H E x v t h CONGRESS OF THE GENERAL CONFEDERATION OF LABOUR
(CONFÉDÉRATION GÉNÉRALE DU TRAVAIL), FRANCE, HELD AT
ORLEANS,
27
SEPTEMBER TO 2 OCTOBER
1920, issued
23 December 1920.

" 15.

T H E INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS
issued 24 January 1921.

IN GREAT

BRITAIN,

issued

21 December

OF GENERAL FACTORY

WORKERS

#
— 18 —
N o . 16.

T E N D E N C I E S OF EUROPEAN LABOUR LEGISLATION SINCE

T H E WAR,

issued 11 F e b r u a r y 1921.
"

17.

T H E GROWTH OF TRADE UNIONISM

DURING

THE TEN TEARS

1910-

1919, issued 16 F e b r u a r y 1921.
"

18.

F I R S T SPECIAL

INTERNATIONAL

TRADE UNION CONGRESS, London,

22-27 N o v e m b e r 1920, issued 15 M a r c h 1921.
"

19.

T H E MINIMUM

PROGRAMME O F T H E GENERAL CONFEDERATION

L A B O U R O F F R A N C E , issued 18 M a r c h 1921.
"

20.' I N T E R N A T I O N A L R A I L W A T M E N ' S C O N G R E S S , L o n d o n , 29-30 N o v e m -

ber 1920, issued 11 April 1921.
"

21.

T H E PROGRAMME

A N D ORGANISATION

OF T H E CHRISTIAN

TRADE

U N I O N S O F G E R M A N T (Congress a t E s s e n 20-24 N o v e m b e r 1920),
issued 3 M a y 1921.
"

22.

L E CONGRÈS INTERNATIONAL DES OUVRIERS D U TRANSPORT (GENÈVE,

23.

NINTH

18-22 AVRIL 1921), issued 13 A u g n s t 1921. French
CONGRESS

OF T H E INTERNATIONAL

only.

FEDERATION

O F HAT

M A K E R S , issued 16 A u g u s t 1921.
"

24.

T H E NINTH

INTERNATIONAL

CONGRESS

OF METAL

WORKERS

(Lucerne, 8 A u g u s t 1921), issued 18 October 1921.

Series B
N o . 1.

COAL

PRODUCTION

International Labour
e m b e r 1920.
"

THE RUHR

DISTRICT.

E n q u i r y by

the

Office, e n d of M a y 1920, issued 1 Sept-

P A P E R S R E L A T I N G TO S C H E M E S O F I N T E R N A T I O N A L ORGANISATION F O R T H E DISTRIBUTION OF RAW MATERIALS AND FOOD-

S T U F F S , issued 5 October 1920.
'

T H E CONDITIONS OF LABOUR AND PRODUCTION IN T H E U P P E R SILESIAN

T H E SOCIALISATION O F COAL M I N E S I N G E R M A N T , i s s u e d 25 J a n u a r y

COALFIELD, issued 10 D e c e m b e r 1920.
1921.
"

T H E ESSEN

MEMORANDUM

MINES I N GERMANT

ON T H E SOCIALISATION

O F T H E COAL

(6 N o v . 1920), issued 2 8 J a n u a r y 1921.

W O R K S C O U N C I L S I N G E R M A N T , issued

29 J a n u a r y

1921.

T H E B I L L TO E S T A B L I S H W O R K E R S ' C O N T R O L I N H A L T , i s s u e d 28 F e b -

ruary 1921.
"

8. A DEMAND FOR WORKERS' CONTROL IN INDUSTRT IN FRANCE. CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE FEDERATION OF METAL WORKERS
AND THE ASSOCIATION OF METALLURGICAL AND MINING INDUSTRIES, issued 31 March 1921.

T H E REFORM OF T H E SUPREME
S U P E R I O R E D E L LAVORO) I N

COUNCIL O F LABOUR (CONSIGLIO
H A L T : TOWARDS A TECHNICAL

P A R L I A M E N T O F L A B O U R , issued 14 A p r i l 1 9 2 1 .
" 10.

P R O F I T - S H A R I N G A N D LABOUR CO-PARTNERSHIP. PROPOSAL O F T H E '
I T A L I A N CATHOLIC P A R T T , i s s u e d 16 J u n e 1921.

•

— 19 —
Series C
No. 1.

BRITISH

LEGISLATION

ON UNEMPLOYMENT

INSURANCE,

issued

26 October 1920.
"

GOVERNMENT ACTION IN DEALING WITH UNEMPLOYMENT IN ITALY,

T H E BULGARIAN LAW ON COMPULSORY LABOUR, issued 4 Novem-

T H E ACTION

issued 27 October 1920.
ber 1920.
OF THE SWISS

GOVERNMENT

IN DEALING

WITH

UNEMPLOYMENT, issued 13 November 1920.
"

T H E ORGANISATION OF UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE AND EMPLOYMENT

EXCHANGES IN FRANCE, issued 21 February 1921.

Series D
No 1.

S T A F F REGULATIONS ON T H E FRENCH RAILWAYS, issued 4 Sept-

ember 1920.
Series E
No. 1.

COMPENSATION FOR WAR DISABLEMENT IN FRANCE, ACT OF 31 MARCH

1919, issued 28 February 1921.
"

2. T H E COMPULSORY EMPLOYMENT OF DISABLED MEN, issued 25 April

1921.
COMPENSATION

FOR WAR DISABILITIES

IN GERMANY,

AUSTRIA,

POLAND, AND CZECHO-SLOVAKIA, issued September 1921.

Series F
No. 1.

CANCER OF THE BLADDER AMONG WORKERS IN ANILINE FACTORIES,

issued 23 February 1921.
"

MÉMOIRE

SUR L'INTOXICATION

SATURNINE

DANS

L'INDUSTRIE,

DÉSINFECTION D E LA LAINE EN GRANDE-BRETAGNE.

PRÉVENTION

issued 20 September 1921.
"

DU CHARBON, issued 20 September 1920.
Series H
No. 1.

CONSUMERS'

CO-OPERATIVE

SOCIETIES

I N 1919 (Denmark

and

Sweden), issued 8 September 1920.
"

SEVENTH

CONGRESS

O F T H E BELGIAN

CO-OPERATIVE

OFFICE,

issued 25 September 1920.
Series I
No. 1.

T H E INTERNATIONAL

PROTECTION OF WOMEN W O R K E R S ,

issued

15 October 1921.
Series K
No. l .

F I R S T INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS O F L A N D W O R K E R S ' UNIONS
A F F I L I A T E D TO T H E INTERNATIONAL F E D E R A T I O N OF TRADE

UNIONS, issued November 1920.
" 2. AGRARIAN CONDITIONS IN SPAIN, issued 10 N.ovember 1920.
" 3. SMALL HOLDINGS IN SCOTLAND, issued 12 November 1920.
"

T H E EIGHT HOUR DAY IN ITALIAN AGRICULTURE, issued 17 Decem-

T H E EIGHT HOUR

ber 1920..
DAY IN AGRICULTURE,

BEFORE

THE FRENCH

CHAMBER OF DEPUTIES, issued 10 Februaiy 1921.
"

T H E REGULATION OF LABOUR IN AGRICULTURE IN FRANCE, issued

23 April 1921.

•