the Cotton Cloth Factory Act was passed, requiring cotton employers to take regular hygrometer readings and to ensure that a minimum of of fresh air per person per hour was allowed into the weaving sheds during steaming. These stipulations, however, were not sufficient to satisfy the weavers, who still hoped for steaming to be abolished. In May 1895, over 200 weavers from two mills in Padiham went on strike against steaming in their mills. The Amalgamated Weavers' Association found that the practice of steaming was increasing during the 1890s, especially in Burnley and Padiham. In 1892, a Royal Commission on Labour found that there had been very few prosecutions under the 1889 Act. The workings of the 1889 Act were investigated some years later by a Government committee chaired by Sir Henry Enfield Roscoe. Roscoe's report of 1897 recommended increasing the infusion of fresh air to per hour and raised concerns about the purity of water used for steaming. Working conditions did not appear to have greatly improved, as the report also referred to a claim by cotton workers that they were being "stewed alive by Act of Parliament". Factory Act 1901 Four years after Roscoe's report, the Factory Act of 1901 obliged cotton employers to ensure that water for steaming came from a pure source or was suitably purified. This Act also stipulated that artificial humidity (steaming) should cease when the wet bulb of the hygrometer exceeded 75%. Two hygrometers were to be provided in each humid shed, with further hygrometers where more than 700 looms were present. Cotton Cloth Factories Act 1911 In 1906 when the Amalgamated Weavers' Association balloted its members on steaming, a vast majority were in favour of its abolition. A further Government enquiry resulted, chaired by Sir Hamilton Freer-Smith. In 1909, Freer-Smith's report: Departmental Committee on Humidity and Ventilation in Cotton Weaving Sheds, was published. The committee had included cotton mill employers and Trade Union representatives; the two sides disagreed on an upper level of humidity. Employers wanted a 75% "wet bulb" limit, whereas union members, who would have preferred abolition, sought a compromise of 70%. The subsequent Cotton Cloth Factories Act of 1911, however, specified a wet bulb limit of 75%. Cotton Cloth Factories Act 1929 The controversy continued until the late 1920s. The 1928 Home Office Report of the Departmental Committee on Artificial Humidity in Cotton Cloth Factories by J. Jackson recommended