This being the case they thought they could reform and reshape people and society into the condition in which it was meant to be. Henceforth in the Case involving Ms Bartonnet we do not see a court that holds her responsible for the well being of her murdered child as in earlier time periods. This woman murdered her child and whether by accident or not she was still the responsible party for the well being of this child. She was initially tried and sentenced to death by hanging. Her crime and its punishment were well defined by the letter of the law but upon appeal to the Parliament of Paris her sentence was reduce to banishment and the surrendering of her property to the state. Paris being the heart of the Enlightenment movement we are able to see it direct influence on the judicial system in this case. We see a direct denial of the overall responsibility of the courts to prosecute this woman because of the laxed attitude toward punishment and the idea was possible reform. You could all so argue that the pursuit of her own happiness, a Natural Law that is at work at all times influenced her behavior with her knowing. The child was an afterthought of this case once it got to the epicenter of the Enlightenment.
The Sadler Committee hearings took place during the Industrial Revolution(IR). The role of children during the early years of the IR was rather significant as stated in "The West" children under the age of 13 in the cotton industry made up13% of the workforce while children under 18 made up 51%. Children manned 64% of the cotton industry. A child working was not a new concept, they had worked side by side with their families or other adults for centuries on the farms in order to supply sustenance for themselves and family. The major difference that arose from the IR was the combined work force of women, men and Children. This literally separated the parents from the children.