The Sun. — London, England, 1846-05-23 00:00:00

—_,....,-........... standing order, which was also do übted by other H on. Mem- that that would no t re d uce the amount of labour. nor the re hers, he thought that Mr. O'Brien ought to h' e v e th e benefit I muneration, but, on the contrary, an adance of the doubt, and was entitled to his lit vraiion frodn confinement. ! in acme branches of female labour.it wou ld cause He felt that this v was Sir R. PEEL said that the Right Hon. Br e onet who had I most contradictory, fur be could not see how the advance in preceded receded him in as his to the remar true ks, had not said the .t there was con- ' wages was to result, asltbour was not increased—the quantity sdoubt construed, of th e or d er , but he of work would riot be more: In another part of the observed that there was doubt on the 7- merits of the case. Honourable Member's sp eec h, h e was found statire , He thought that if there was any difficult*/ at all it existed in I that if th e di m i nut i on of the hours of labour should be the interpretation of the words "be '.appointed in standing calculated to reduce wages, the working classes were spite order." The words meant that the Com etaittese was in existence. 1 wilting to take their share of the injury. The Hon. Member y I wouldhave it that the BM was not calculated to reduce wages; The House of Commons, for the purpo ea of insuring regularity in its proceedings h a d p l ace d the rules, to be determined by its l but this was a most vague calculation, and he would prove it standing orders out of its own . power t o a lt er , or to by a reference to Adam Smith, who was a great authority on interfere with, except by repeating the order. There such subjects. The Hon. Member then react an extract from were instances receding regmation in ' , which , tbe s House of Commons Adam S m i t h to prove the fallacy of the arguments of the Hot. had, by a P hot Ind themselves to Member for Olaham. He begged to tell the supporters of abide by the standing order. H e would take a this measure that he was not one of those who was at all in case which appeared t one hi t o po,„ess some analogy dined to regard the reduction of a penny or even a halfpenny to the present. It was one of the standit C s orders that every per yard upon shirting stuffs as a matter to be slighted, but it private Bill not being the Royal Bill shw,uld be referred to a appeared to him that those who supported this Bill did not seem Committee of Selection. How was that tee he decided? He to know what it was they were supporting—they did not seem apprehended it could not be settled by the question in the to understand the principles of the measure. The Nob•e Lord, House. As a matter of course the matter would be referred the Member for Newark, had found fault with the Right Hon. to a Select Committee, which would not he refused unless the Gentleman opposite for dealing with facts and figures in illus standing order was specifically repealed. So, i n th e present trating his case, and appeared to think it was what no man case, it was not a question whether Mr. Smith O'Brien ought ()weft to do ; but let him remind the House that in dealing to be excused because he had refused to ob,sy an order of the with this question they should bear in rec Ilection that it in- House. If the Hon. Members of the Ilosise thought the volved the welfare of more than half a million of people, of a authority of the House had been sufficiently vindicated, why vast amount of property, and of the interests of the reanufactu then release him at once by a special order. But to say that revs; and let him then ask were they not to have a due regard the present was a doubtful case, and that th e y sh ou ld slink out for facts and figures ? He could tell them that if they ofa compliance with the standing order in order to shake hands bad not they would only involve themselves in irre with Mr. Smith O'Brien would be derogator d e o th e dignity of trievable mischief by a bungling piece of legislation. that. House. Another principle which an Hon. Member near him had Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL did n o t thi n k th e comparison of broached, was that capital and labour were antag nistic powers the Right Hon. Gentleman did n good. He did think the —that was the doctrine of his Hon. Friend, but he begged to character of the present debate was calculated to have a very tell him that before he had enunciated it, he should have read bad effect in Ireland. It would be as well to endeavour to Adam Smith, in which he would find it laid down, that as conciliate the feelings of the people o f I re l an d, and not to exas- labour derived its remuneration from capital, the one was Aerate them by endeavouring to exp l a i n away d ou btf u l words. necessary to the existence of the other, and here was an in- The proper course to be adopted would have been to allow Mr. stance of it--here, in this country, millions of capital were in- Smith O'Brien the benefit of the doubt, in order that he might vested ,in manufactures, for the production of which large be liberated from confinement. masses of the people were necessarily employed. This w as a Sir GEORGE GREY made a few observations, which f act an d a principle, and it would be neither wise nor judicious were inaudible in the gallery. to interfere with it. Let care be taken how they were deprived Sir ROBERT INGLIS said the Hon. Member for Devon- of their foreign market, for it was quite clear, that without the port had expressed an opinion that there could be no doubt as foreign market they could not employ their people at home, . to the common sense construction o f th e sta n di ng order. Other and even now it was only by producing a superior article, and • Hon. Members had corroborated that opinion. With reference by having cheap labour, that they were enabled to rival foreign to the observations of the Hon. Member for Cork, there was no manufactures.—( Hear, bear.) In fact, the attempt at doubt the construction of the standing order might be improved, legislation on this subject only showed that those b u t as there was no doubt as to the real meaning of the order, wh o at t em pt e d it did no t understand the qu es ti on a t a ll .— he should certainly oppose th e mo ti on . (Hear, hear.) Hon. Members had stated authorities in sup . to Mr. ecide WATSON a stand said, ding when ortder he House which was the had no better support than those, they had no support at all ; quencei were of a nature that affected th e liberty of the but, on the contrary, they were practically undermining the subject, it behoved them to be very careful before they came best interests of the country.—( Hear, hear.) H e b egge d to to any decision as to its real construction. He h a d ser i ous tell the House that this Ten Hours' Bill was identical with the doubts as to the construction which had been put upon it. system of the combinations and strikes so common in the manu- He must give his vote in support of the motion, because he was factoring towns, and of which Hon. Members who supported not satified that the meaning of the order was sufficiently this Bill knew nothing whatever. By that system, at present clear fur him to give a proper vote on an occasion when the what he would call the tyrannical interference of the overseers consequences might be attended with punishment of a harsh with the masters was such that the management of the con nature. terns was, for the p resent at l east, i n the hands of the men. The House then divided, when there appeared— Some of their resolutions were most absurd, and were to this For the motion Against it Majority against Mr. S. O'Brien's release Mr. SHAW gave notice that he would persist in the motion that those two wandered into the agricultural districts, of which he had given notice f o r M on d ay nex t, namely, that and became outcasts or dissolute characters, while the the group on which Mr. O'Brien was selected to serve having system of intimidation amongst the men was so great, that terminated its labours, that Hon. Membershould be discharged threatening letters were as rife there as in Tipperary. Another from custody. result of their s,ystem was, that where a man could earn from 5/. Mr. O'CONNELL was understood to say that, under those to 6/. per wer s k, by working every day, they now earned only circumstances, he should refrain from pressing on the attention from 50s. to 60s. If such, then, was to he the result of this of the House the motion which he had intended to make that pernicious system in one town, what would it be when it had night for Mr. O'Brien's discharge. spread to all the others? In fact it would be better for all the THE TEN HOURS' BILL—ADJOURNED DEBATE. masters to combine for a universal free trade, now that the The order of the day for the adjourned debate on the second, great eaonopoly in fo o d h a d b een remove d , t h an submit to this. reading of this Bill having been read, He could tell the House that they were too much in the habit Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from the town of Not- of ander-rating the pernicious effects upon the minds of the tingham, in which the petitioners stated that the present fec.. reorkmen, of many of the debates that had taken place in that tory system was most pernicious to the health and morals of II House ; they little knew the amount of poison instilled into the children; that it produced premature death, was most dange-. i minds of those men by those speeches, and for which the em rous to the manufacturing portion of the community, and they players would have to pay. The results of this system of corn therefore prayed the House to enact the Ten Hours' Bill, bination was to leave the town of Norwich in a state of desola- Mr. G. BANKES then rose and said, that in giving his sup- tion and ruin, or if it still retained any vestiges of its former port to the principle which was now under consideration, and prosperity, it was owing to the enterprise of a few; but he m opposing the amendment which had been proposed by the would just give an instance of the feeling entertained in that Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home De- town towards the masters, and he should say it was one of the partment. he was aware that he was bound in the first place to most horrible exhibitions he had ever heard of. show that the princip'se of this Bill was consistent with the wel- A manufacturer having died, his body was fare, the interests, and safety of the community at large. He brought to Norwich to be interred—it was met by was aware also tint it was incumbent on him to show that this a large body of the workmen, who, believing that he had in- Bill, while it proposed to confer a benefit on the operative classes, jured them, followed the funeral to the churchyard, uttering would not prOduce at the same time on those classes any injury the most foul imprecations. Now, he begged to tell the to preponderate over that benefit. It was incumbent also upon House that there was no remedy for this but time. The Bill him to resaintain and to prove, as he thought he should, that the now before the House was certainly no remedy ; on the con princidat e of this Bill would not necessary occasion any injury teary, it was a step t h e gds step in the wrong direction to tho employers of those operatives for whose benefit it was —and he should give the second reading of it his most brought forward.—( Hear, hear.) He hoped he should be able strenuous opposition. He had heard it said that this question to show that whilst the operatives received a benefit, neither involved one of importance to the present Government—that they nor their employers would receive any harm. He thought this was a critical time to oppose it—that it was regarded as a that it would be unwise and unsafe to reject this measure ; and great national measure, and that it was probable the Govern when he used those terms he was far from wishing them to be ment might be defeated on it ; but he could only say, that if taken in the same light as some Hon. Members had done during they shoo dbe defeated, he would have the honour of sharing the course of the session, when other topics were brought in that defeat.---( Cheers. ) under their consideration. The danger to which he referred Lord GEORGE BENTINCK said that his Hon. Friend was one of a very different kind. It was the danger of who had just sat down had charged his friends around, that destroying the physical energy, and the moral character of in supporting the measure which was then before the House those with respect to whom they were about to legislate.— they were making themselves parties to a great party move (Hear, hear.) The number of children employed latterly in ment, and that the only interest entertained on this question factories had greatly i ncrease d , whilst the number of adults was by the Hon. Gentlemen on the benches near him. As bad proportionably d ecrease d, T hose young persons were for the charge made against him by the Hon. Gentlemen op growing up to become adult l a b ourers i n the i r turn, and they posite, he could refer them to the corn-law question, for he would find that there was nor sufficient to absorb that number, thought that, during the debate on the second reading of the and the consequence would be that they must seek Corn Bill, the opposite side of the House was en -to earn their livelihood from some other sources tirely deserted, and not one single gentleman could of employment. Let the House then endeavour to secure be seen sitting on the Opposition benches. He had to such a population some other employment, which would be however, right to for Hon. around m preserving them a s h ones t an d i ndustrious members of the which he a could not say say for himself F , rien that, ds far from hi being that a State. They would find, however, under the present factory party question with them, the great majority of his friends system, the education of the younger persons had been so much were supporters of a similar measure two years ago. In the neglected, and their physical powers so diminished, that they year 1844 his Hon. Friends around him, he might say almost were totally unfit to enter into any other employment than that in a body, supported Lord Ashley's Ten Hours' Bill, and he in which they were brought up. In their youth, there had should bite to know what right the Hon. Member for Sheffield been a total neglect of the instilment of religious truths and had to charge his friends with supporting the measure from !priMoral discipline, as regarding the persons employed in fac- party views? It there were any party in the House, who had es . ; and when t,'ney grew up, the necessary consequence was a better title to claim for themselves an honest and disinterested mat they were wnfit tor any industrious or honest employm . ent. course on that subject, it was that composed by the Gentlemen d_The.Legislattre had, he believ . ed, provided f or th e educat ion of sitting near him. The Hon. Gentleman had said that it was he younger classes of operatives, namely, of shoes) under 13 very easy to purchase cheap popularity by joining in this • Years g e , w h o now only worked six hours a day ; but were humanity- cr y ; and they retorted the charge, by asking who ( than to be told that education had ceased at 13 years of age ? had supported the cry for cheap bread, in the question Hear, hear.) He appealed to those who heard him, many of on the repeal of the corn-laws ? In this measure, whom were fathers, whether education ceased, or had aps they were not joining in the humanity -cry, nor were provased to anything like perfection, at 13 years of age? Was they risking all the great interests of the country. Met that a period when something else was springing op If there was any question on which they might be said to have lossides the good seed which had been sown Was not proceeded w ith grea t caut i on i t was on this question. Two that th e ti me w h en there Was springing up seeds of a years ago they reduced the hours of labour, and what had been natu r e oppose d to re li g i on . And did th e y not kn,,w that th e t h e resu l t o f the experience of the two years which had since cultivation of the mind consistenot merely in what was elapsed? Had this destroyed the cotton trade? Had they sown, but in what w a s to b e eradicated? seed that peried he reduced the wages of :he labourer? or had they diminished took to be the most important with regard. to the cultivation of the export trade ? Far from it. The cotton trade, both in the human mind. He alluded to the period between thirteen the export trade and the home consumption, had greatly in creased in the year 1845, and they hail reason to believe so and eighteen years of age. It was, therefore, safe and whole. s ome to pass this Bill, and it was dange rous to 'eject it. had the wages of the operatives. Where was the danger or the They had been told , in the course of th e d e b a t e whi c h had risk of a further extension of the principle? The were not lately occurred in that House, that the peopl e o f L ancas hi re treading on untried ground, they had gone cautiously to work. - and the manufacturing interests were to govern Great Brita:n. They had tried the reductien of the hours of labour to twelve He admitted that those districts were th e very lif e an d h eart of hours in 184/, and they the income ; and, taking the words o f Hon. M em b ers, he by five flours aweek. nTl7ewreasked to r e d uce t h e h ours in 1846 was another co ns id erat i on mixed would say that they should t a k e care that the blood which up with this Bill, a great measure had just passed this House, flowed through the veins of the people of that portion of the and should that measure become the law of the coun kingdon, and their morals were preserved in a moral condition. try, there was great reason to believe that a num- The Right Hon. B aronet t h e S ecretary of State for the Home h er of unskilled artisans from trades, amongst the Department had entirely misrepresented the opinions of the late agricultural labourers, would be thrown into the market. Sir Robert Peel on the factory question—( Cries of They must feel that in those trades, now the subject of legisla " Hear, hear")—because, although th e Bill passed i n tion, some protection and some division of labour would he his tim e Ten row Hours' was orsly an Eleven . Hours' Bill, he was yet inrequired. He ad m itt e d t h at t h e same quant i ty of work could favour ei aH e did not think not be done in ten hours as could be done in twelve hours • that the Rigttst Hon. Gentleman the Member for Tamworth of that there could be no doubt; but, at the same time, be was then •anfriendly to the Eleven Hours' Bill. He had did not admit that there would be one-sixth more work done then calked the elder Sir Robert Peelitness in an su d eLort of i n twel ve hours than , could be done by the same bands in ten his 'lbws. He would now call another " a en w tl be- hours, especially as they were dealing with persons under 18 lier,ed his testimony would carry with them considerable weighs, years of age . The on. Membe r f or Sh ef fi e ld sa i d that no K tole and all his connexi ons were tar el H y connected with mantras _such regulati ons were ma d e as regarded the agricultural inte factures, he meant the M em b er for Oldham.—( Hear, hear, ) re l st, and the labourer engaged in agriculture—for the best of That Hon. Gentleman said, that if. his support of the present , hadal reasons, no such regulations were required. The agricul measure would bring ruin upon the manufacturers, he would tural onelabhourerr had twe:ve hours of lab o ur, out of which they be bringing ruin upon himself.—(Hear, hear.) He tol o d f tthheomsewinter r t for dinner, and half an hour for breakfast ; and however, that it would not ruin his interests, nor any 1° the w time fo r r i m m e ci al t s bey Thhaderremlwyetreen limitedhours labour, having iabour the for same who were engaged in manufacture. So far from any diminu all artisans not em to ed in mannfacture. Their time was by titan taking place, there had been an increase in cotton manufac custom reduced to te y n hours, a f nd they only wished for those tore sin.te 1819, when a different system prevailed. He had labourers under eighteen h e e o s s a t m om e , kind of labour other witnesses to call of the same description, whose testimony was most valuable. He had the evidence of the Hon. Member which full-grown men, by ye p a r r a f s o c o r tic t e s h g a e e n :I eflrarui n the West I n .. for Sunderland, who spoke the other night, and that of other to. Had they not legislated dies? Had they not limited the time o were entitled gentlemen ; he did not think that their evidence would unialthy be co un t er b a l anc ed . He had other witnesses also. He had And was thmeoasipthoefretohfeotruVrentstanlnudfaieestormieosr,einfceowird to nine hours? the operatives themselves. In the county which he represented than the at ourwhichh or childr en he f e lt it t o b e hi s d u ty t o co llect a ll th e information he could laboured. It had been said in the course of this debate by the Upon the subject , ' and the result of that investigation had been Hon. Member for Paisley, that by a reduction of tliel; a most decided conviction on his part of the justice of the pre- labour from twelve to ten hours, they would be educing t h e v r i e o as e o n t sent measure. It was said that the operativesxhih had it n matte no cotton manufacture, to the extent of the whole of the ' home t strikes on the present question, and had consumption of this country. That statement was not founded The Bill for cruelty facture of this country amounted to one -seventh of the goods why their demands should be acceded to.. thisimported,and was country would just exceed in value four millions sterling ; show how little but it was taken up by a gentleman who fina y carried it. He Mentioned these circumstances, in order to Baronet, was there any man in that country who believed that its argume n ts of this kind, urged by the Right Hon. should be attended to. The Hon. Member f o r Montrose said to years since Mr. Huskisson had said that he had taken the that if they passed the Bill, the o p era ti v es would be the first greatest pains to ascertain the real facts upon this point, and desire that it should be repealed. Well, if that was so, they the result of his inquiries was, that the home consumption of would be happy to do so.—(" Hear, hear," from Mr. Ward.) the cotton in England in the year 1823 had amounted e could not see the danger of such' an experiment.—( Hear, to 32,000,000/. sterling. The export of cotton goods in the If he established the point that a very considerable benefit to year 1844 amounted to no more than 25,000,0001., including the public would accrue from the passing of the measure , he cotton yarn. If that we re so, an d i f the Hon. Gentlem an t h e was entitled to go to those views of the subject on which they Member . for Glasgow, who ought to be well informed on the were all agreed, that if it were for the public good to effect the . subject, was . right,. that there were but 3a millions of cotton object he p ro po s ed, that it was th e i r d u ty a t once to give it goods used in this country, with their population, this would be Canada,, the consumption their assent.—( Hear, hear.) They heard the other day, in but half-a-crown a-head. In the Indian possessions, dividing the speech of an Hon. Member, of the great increase was 7s. per head, and in our West in the demand for the Bible among the operatives ; the value of the co:ton by thethe populastion in 1840, it would appear why, then, he would be an advocate for giving them ti me t o t h at t h e consum ption in West lndies amounted to 11. 6s. read it. It was true they had been silent, and if the measure per head. Was it not ridiculousto suppose that the popula was rejected he trusted that they would continue so. tion of this empire, consumed but at the rate of half.a.crown a saidrepresented, he Mr. WARD A h f e e n m t h h e e r y s sa fo w r the peopl e of Sheffield, but he would certainly admit that he this measure supported by great men, t did not represent was not a convert their opinionr upon the . subject,. because he Oldham, and Southwark, it was rather too much to charge the measure, n to the doctrines contained in the preamble them . with supporting this measure to purchase cheap pope ofor was he nor ould he ever by an humanity cry. This measure would be for the The Nolile Le;el be aedfemhiasgogruine... las interest lty of the manufacturing classes, and the change would ()ted Mr. Carlyle h in wasdheefence treading P on not be made too suddenly. The children in the factories re dangerous ,but he would lu remind him a t de at ,t 0 dangerous ground, for ne of Carlvle's quired more protection as the cotton trade increased, for then opinions respecing corn, for on no subject had n he written with it, was that the millowners committed the greatest number of to much forc e and consistency. He would be moat anxious to o'rences against their operatives. The Bill would benefit that be convinced that the opinions which lie held on this subjectclass, and for this reason he should give his support to the Bill, were those of the Noble Lord • but he convinced was not so , Lor of the o era- Ind he felt it his duty to express' his not legislate The Hon. allow a Member who represented a great portion p Member laid down that if they could should legislate for as many as they opinion on this Bill two year, since, to noneicitslate for all they tives and manufacturing, labourers, and who had not had an and stn he i said if opportunity of giving his there weo no injury done to any interest the concede the measure he sought He perfect]; coincided once upon considerable, feeling of envy those who, garded with a consi make a short trespass their time. He owned that he re the expression, "your if is a great peacemaker," for if all the thin,gs which the Hon. Gentlemen assumed were true, why, I truth of their own opinions. he (Mr. Ward) would say, pass the measure by all means.' i lrtable f assurance as to t n o f n the other side of the question, could feel a cone- That was one of the results of this experimentalisin g on the wr;ic e rev e e s viewed with much doubt, r one he woue . w.. . confessed that he looked on both sides of the question, and queetion. oral did not deny the right of Parliament to legis- and h iatever couts , e confessed much misgivine c . WI • e °it' late f or the pction of those who were unable to help House might adopt, he looked with much misgiving to the them se o see; b u t he objected to the interference with adult consequence s of any rash labour. If they could show that women could do without em. feel an inexpressible relief or premature measure. He should ef only to be sure that he was right, ployme n t, th en , indeed, he would be one of the first to support but to be sure that he thought that he was right ; for on the such a p ro p os i t i on . however, was not the case, for he one hand he was ready to admit to some degree the re resenta rotn o believed that there was not a more helpless creature than a tions put for h w t ar t d h b ey y ttohoekp rathererasn a nd ex a s w u g p , p r o a r t supporters the o - r Bill, th e poor woman without friends to assist her ; and instead of Par- but he thoug llament interfering ' females employing their case. He did not believe, that fa to prevent from - factory labour in the average industry, it would be better, if possible, to interfere so as to number of instances, thou e h it might be • be regarded as severe or - wearing, could ensure her a proper amount of labour. An interference, such , .injurious. He did not believe that as the present, would have the effect of reducing the female in the average condition of the factory labourers, though it working classes to the miserable pittance of slot) labour. He was not so good as if they had greater enjoyment—(Heart considered that they were already sufficiently trammeled by the hear)—greater exercise, and time, there was so much effect co mbinations of the working men , who shut them Got from produced upon their health. Their real condition and health many tr a d es , H o w was it on the continent—how was it at depended much more on the proprietor of the mill, and the Rosen, and other places ? At those places it was well know n arrangements he might adopt with respect to the cleanliness and that the most respectable portion of the female population— ventilation than upon the hours of work. In all respects the dauehters of the most respectable middle classes, were the master of these mills bad more intelligence than employed in factories. Well, then, there was nothing of a they usually received credit for. As an instance he Ten Hours' Bill known there. Labour was not rest r i c t e d, referred them to many mercantile houses who were distinguished and the results were not injurious, but, on the contrary, the for their efforts in the cause of the working classes He was good effects were most apparent in the condition of that class sometimes ready to admit that the condition of the men, of Persons. The H on . M em b er f or Oldh am s aid th a t the Bill women, and child ren , engage d i n t h e manufacturing labour, W as to be a Ten Hours' Bill, and no compromise, He said would deri,-e great benefit from shorter hours of labour, He THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 23, 1846. believed that they would derive solid advantage from having more time for recreation—( Hear, hear)—both with regard to their moral and social condition; and it would be better for their minds, belies, and souls. So far he went along with thn promoters of this Bid ; but then in such a state of society as theirs, in which all departments of labour had such a relation to each other, and all kinds of business ran into each other, they could not calculate the effect of any disturbing clause which they might introduce. He need not remind Hon. Members who wer e familiar with the history of the colonies, of the cire cumstance of Spain, in order to relieve the red Indian, intro ducing the black neer° —( Hear, hear.) Thus it was they often round their benevolence defeat the very parties they were endeavouring to serve. But on reference to the present Bill, he cenld not consent to any reduction in the hours of labour beyond one hour ; or, in other words, he was in favour of its being restricted to eleven hours labour per day. But he might be asked, was not the proper way, in that case, for him to go into Committee, and to propose that reduction ?—(Hear, hear.) Under ordi nary circumstances, that course might be advisable, but, at present, he felt that he could not consent to that course. Judging from what had already fallen from Hon. Members on the crestion, there was no certainty of that proposition being carried in Committee. He thought other quarrels, and feelings arising out of other questions, had been introduced into the discussion of tee present Bill.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord who last addressed the House, who, he (Lord Morpeth) believed, was actuated by the most honourable motives, had said that he had changed his opinion on the present question. If so, that should teach him to regard with a little more allowance the change which had taken plat e on another question in the minds of others.—(Loud cheers.) His Noble Friend had admitted that an experience of two years had led to that alteration; why not, then, concede a si milar change to the three years' experience of others.— (Cheers.) But beyond this he (Lord Nlorpeth) was firmly persuaded they should confine the reduction to eleven hours a day. He could not consent that the Bill should go so far as ten hours, and even with respect to the former reduction he did not feel prepared on the present occasion to go into Com mittee. With regard to going into Committee the session and the time was adverse. They ought, in his opinion, to suspend their decision, :for he thought the present Bill was so much connected with the Bill for the repeal of the corn laws, or, in other words, the Bill for regulating the payment of labour, that he could not consent to the one till he had ascertained the fate of the other. —(Loud cheers from the pro tectionists.) Why was he interrupted by that cheer ? He was persuaded the Bill before the House would greatly injure the working classes—those who subsisted by labour—unless they were sure of the other measure to augment their wages. Would the Hon. Gentlemen on the other side who had cheered consent that the other Bill to which he referred should pass into a law in order to give effect to this ?—( Cries of "No no.") He believed that prudence and proceastination were necessary on the present occasion, and that the state of the Bi 1 for the repeal of the corn-laws offered a consideration why they should not press the question to so early a decision. They should rot only wait to ascertain the fate of that measure, hut they should watt until the had further learnt the experience of the effects that had arisen from voluntary experiments between masters and men for the abridgements of the hours of labour. Already, experiments of this kind had been made, and he did not abandon the hope that they would be carried out much further, if the Legislature did not interfere. His Right Hon. Friend had been much disappointed in what he had stated respecting strikes to abridge the hours of labour. He did not advise strikes to obtain that end, but what he said was that the operatives, while they had struck repeatedly for an increase of wages, had never entered into strikes for the reduction of the hours of labour. They had never struck for a rednction of the hours of labour. Nay, he was persuaded that if the operatives asked the masters for a reduc tion of the hours of labour, and if they would submit to a com mensurate reduction in their wages, he had no doubt it wou ld be conceded.—.(Hear, hear.) They had but to go to the masters and state this determine' ion, and it would be done. But the fact was, in some parts of Lancashire there were some of the operatives working long hours, and others short hours, at a proportionate reduction of wages ; and it was a remarkable fact that they preferred the longer hours with the increased wages, than the shorter hours with the reduced wages. Much has been said of the superiority of the English labourer—of their sinewal muscle. He admitted that superiority. He acknowledged their strength and skill, but he could not see how it could maintain itself if this Bill were passed against the labourers of foreign countries. • Ac cording to a report which had been made to that House, which was an authoritative statement, the factory labourers had to work 75, 84, and 92 hours a week. In Prussia and Austria the hours were from 92 to 89 ; in the Tyrol from 72 to 80 ; in Belgium from 80 to 90 ' • and in other na ti ons t h ey were o f a similar ch arac t er . In England, however, it was proposed to reduce them to 59 hours a week. If so, he was sure no in teriority of strength or skill could avail to balance 91 hours against 59. Now in regard to the great immorality which was alleged to exist in the manufacturing districts, according to the returns which had been made to that House, giving the commitments which had taken place all over England, it was shown that in Yorkshire and Lancashire a great decrease bad taken place in the years 1843, 1844, and 1845. In Yorkshire it had been in the last year as much as nineteen per cent. In Leicester also, which was extensively engaged in the silk, lace, and hosiery trades, a great _decrease in those years had also taken place, last year; it had been as much as 22 per cent. In Staffordshire and Warwickshire, the great seat of the hardware trades, there had been a great reduction in the last three years. So had there also been in Glouces tershire, to the extent of 9 per cent. This must satisfy them as to the charge of immorality, and was a just reason why they should not, without great consideration, seek to disturb the present system. Whatever might be thought of the abstract merits of the measure, while they were as yet ignorant of the fate of that other measure which was proposed as an equivalent for any injury that might arise from this, he thought the Hon. Members who had introduced the Bill, and the House, should suspend their decision. But, whatever they might determine, he could not omit declaring, that on no account could he sanc tion a greater reduction than one hour a day, or fixing the number of hours at eleven; and further, that, under present circumstance s , he was no t p repare d to accede to any reduction at all till th e fate of the Bill with which it ought to be accom panied was known.—( Cheers. ) Mr. AI ACAUL AY, in rising to support the Bill, Reid that if, as complained of by the Hon. Member for Sheffield, any unjust aspetsions had been cast upon the manufacturers of the country for opposing the present Bill, such aspersions met with no sympathy from him. He had no sympathy with such aspersions, as he was fully convinced the interests of the manu facturers of this country—the interests of the whole of so, iety —but especially the interests of the labouring classes, was de pendent on the present question, and the vote they should give that night. Under no circumstances should feelings of political hostility be allowed to interfere, or any ruse of political party and political warfare, be allowed to interfere with a question so deeply interesting to the great body of the people. He could assure the Hon. Member for Sheffield, and his Hon. Friends on his side of the House, that he had no desire to obtain any credit for humanity at their expense. He believed that their feelings in all respects were as kind and cordial as his own. They agreed with him as to the end to be obtained, but their present difference of opinion was in regard to the means. Dis missing from their minds all extraneous considerations, the real point they had to consider was—was the present suhject a legi tin,ate one for them to interfere with and settle, or was it one that was likely to settle itself? It was important that there should be no mi•take on this head. There were two kinds of Government to which he had great objection, and he did not know which was the greatest pest; the one was the patriarchal form of Government, or a meddling Government, who thought they could do every other persons' business better than they could themselves, and the other form of Government was a careless. indolent one, who would suffer the greatest social abuses to exist without interfering—a Government who said that things should go on without interference, as they woulu be sure to fled their level.—( Hear, hear.) If he had any objec tion to the past proceedings of Government in this country, it was that they had assumed too much function of the patriarchal form, anti meddled with things that were net within the legitimate sphere of their influence. Great philosophers, during the last generation, had drawn the attention of the speculative to this object. He did think he saw some danger in the carrying these principles to the other extreme, for it was a very remarkable circumstance that they should have lived to see that all the great communications of the empire hail been abandoned by the Government to private spe culation.—( Hear, hear.) Another instance of an error was the manner in which , orne Gentlemen looked at the question before the House. The Hon. Members for Sheffield and Montrose (Mr. Ward and Mr. Hume) resolved it into one merely of free-trade, and told them not to legislate upon the subjeet, the contract between the master and the labourer being merely one like any other commercial transaction. They said we did not interfere with the hosier at what price he was to sell his stockings, or with the grocer as to what kind of stock lie should lay in, and whether he was to give long credit and charge high prices. They argued that the labourers and the grocers would judge much better for themselves than the legis lature could do for them. He believed he was as much attached to the principle of free-trade as any other man in that House, but that was when the principle was rightly stated. It was casting ridicule on the principle of free-trade when they were pushed to an extreme. They ha.l restricted the number of cabs; it was a rainy day, and there were few upon a stand ; in fact, here was none ; and why was it not competent for any man to bring out his own cab and charge what price he liked? That was the principle of free-trade; but they had yielded that principle to the consideration of the police, and so also had they sacrificed it when a question of revenue came to be considered. Well then, the health of the community was a matter to which it should be yielded also. He had read with much satisfaction a report signed by two of the officers of the Government, the Duke of Buccleuch and the Noble Lord, who was lately at the head of the Woods and Forests, and who was now Secretary for Ireland, and there was not any document more repugnant than it to the principle of free trade, for he found in it, that a man could not on his own ground, build a house le , s than thirty feet wide, nor could he build a new one in a new street, without giving notice to certain Commissioners. He was obliged to make a drain to his house, and if he refused, the Commissioners could make a drain, and send him in the bill to pay, and he was obliged to pay it. Those who took their stand upon the extreme principle of free trade, would tell us, that they w ere to b uy c h eap and to sell dear. Now, why should not that apply to the man who ran up a cheap house without a drain, and endeavour to get the highest price for it ? Because the health of the community was concerned. He defied them to defend free trade upon these extreme prin ciples, and that was the reason that free trade, which was so excellent in itself had so much to struggle with to obtain the general assent of society. But there e ere other interests which demanded their attention—interests far higher than those which were merely commercial—they were those which co. corned the public weal—and they were to decide whether the great masses of the people should live in a method the effect of which was to abridge life, to send them to untimely graves, leaving behind th em a miserable progeny.—( Hear.) Whenever the public health or the public morality was con cerned. the Legislature ought to interfere. Take, for instance, the case of lotteries. What had they to do with the contract between the parties in the case of a lottery ? A man put his hand voluntarily into his pocket, and paid the money—there was no delusion—no injustice practiced by any one—and one would think it a fair commercial transaction, in which they could not interfere to prevent a party from risking his money. They had, however, nothing to do with the matter in a commercial point of view. They interfered with the system because they felt such 'hinge as lotteries gave encouragement to certain habits of mine and body which were incompatible with every good quality of either happiness or health.—(Cheers.) They ought therefore, to interfere with thaeskpuwbhliecthheeraltthh'e andth public morals; and he would public doubt whether twelve upon matter, n th e e alth an time d o t t be public labour Did d rals wer anyo e ne no conce rned in d examined his own feelingsthis morals, or education. Were themselves by metes from injuring inter fering to prevent the prior was desirable for health, hours a day labouring in a f t a h e e to y r l y sot justified then in hours a day h a d b een consume d i n f a ctory labour, of premature and excessive labour ? Didanyoneartildoutbhtetfheawt leisure was necessar y f or e d u c a tions ? Well, then, after twelve hours devoted to refreshment and rest, we at time remained for the operative portion of this country to devote to that educa tion which they ought to possess? Was there enough? No. He was sure they must all answer that question in the negative. —( Cheers.) He repeated, then, that the same principle which justified their interfering to prohibit contracts which they believed would be prejudicial to public morality, justi fied their interfering to prevent contracts which might prove injurious to public; health.—( Hear, hear, and cheers. ) - Th e temporal inconvenience of these laws were so great that d thy is e uetu we d r e e . n o v, t r o e b r s e e r a y e on d G a n e d n w t e e m r e e n fi y ar e allowed h t o f n a g l fall vianrto. liament abolished Easter, Whitsuntide, and thestmas holidays, but in li eu of these they provided Chri an extra holiday once during the month for the recreation of the people. Then again, under the French Revolution, they had holidays set apart of a curious nature, when ihe Sabbath observances and saints' days were abolished. It was not necessary t o go into any religious argum en t with respect to the observance of t h e Sab bath. He would as•s, was there one single argument in the speech of his lion. Friend which would not be turned into argument for a holiday en a Sunday. lie had not the re motest doubt, that if all the shopkeepers of London were put to the vote, aye or no, whether they would open shop en a Sun day, they would decide by a majority of 10,000 in the affirma tive. They troubled themselves very much about the practical effect of their legislation, but they knew that in most eases its effect was obsolete. The law with respect to the observanc e of the Sabbath was, however, beneficial in its effects, as it operated in promoting the good morals and health of the com munity. The opponents of the measure said that it was im possible to take an hour from the time of labour without di minishing production, and that in consequence the con dition of the labourer would he lowered. He thought that this argument was fully deserving the most attentive consideration. They had already, however, legislated on the subject, and th ey had shortened the hours of labour. The late Sir R o b er t P ee l sa id i n t h e d e b ates t hi r ty years ago that he ;e children und er e i g ht years o f age oug ht no t to be employed late hour s o f l a b our . If any person wou ld ta k e the troubl e to read those debates over he would find precisely the same senti ments uttered then as now. But no ruin had followed—pro. unction had not been less in consequence of reduced hours of labour. Suppose in 1546, the time of the reformation and a period of of Sun d ay great had proposedind industry s t t h ry e abolition which would be gained was thrown into the scale, would the people of England be richer now ? No ; his firm belief was they would be poorer. Do not let them forget what a curious machine man is, and how fearfully and wonderfully he is made. The day of rest recurring every week elevated the whole man both morally and physically, and this elevation told beneficially on the commercial prosperity of the character. His Hen. Friend had quoted Adam Smith, but in the very first chapter of that work the labour of men was alluded to as a thing requiring great care that it was not carried to too great an extent. Could they doubt, then, that if time were given for amuse ment and education, similar instances of men of talent would rise up from the op ratives of the country ? While, if this time were not given —if no opportunity were allowed for im htphareodvi community—wouldmn t t i t h i e on e intellectu a l cig o d. down not t g o n teh u n i e t o y gf o rt f ahv t ee h e e luas o ns p k e na r on a ld t v i n y e e haa p nr e ad r e t tu iF d ihs o e- f covered, in so far as their mechanical ingenuity and mechani cal talent had never been developed.—(Cheers.) It seemed, then, to him, that by far the most important point of view which they could take of the matter related to the commercial part of the question. The greatness of a nation depended upon its wealth, and whence sprung wealth ? What was it made one country richer than another? It was not the fertility of soil, the possession, of minerals ; or the superiority of position. All these things were valuable, indeed, when human intelligence and human energy used them, but human intelligence and human energy could do much without them, while the things he had mentioned could do nothing without human intelli gence and human energy; for they had heard of a miserable population, living in the most fertile anti nshuea.snsd. where favourably they hletre w st sawahi s t e u r the ehh t sated. existed ms p oc os a tt r es t t s ht ehmrei of greatest t l h at hne that tw, undero m r 1 amountad d , e while,thes e oo mostf Scotland, nn n dd utinclement greatest amount o f wea l t h, and the greatest amount of happi- Dutchman that made Holland, and the advantages of those countries could not be traced to the fertility of the soil or the superiority of climate.—( Cheers.) To what did the United States owe their great prosperity? Large as that country was, a century ago it was a perfect wildernessie tenanted by buffalos and wild animals. See what it was now. No change had taken place in its physical properties, for its rivers, and valleys, and ferthe lands, were as numerous now as they were a century ago; nor was its present prosperity attributable to the transfer of capital from this country. It was simply be. cause the country was tenanted by the Englishman instead of the red man—it was simply because the intelligence of the Englishman had snit down the forests and hewn them into fleets, and built cities upon their sites.—( Cheers. ; The greatest instrument, then, in the production of wealth, was, man, and they found the greatest amount of wealth where ti e greatest amount of moral and intellectual culture prevailed ; while they found the greatest amount of wretchedness and misery where there existed physical, moral, and intellectual degene racy. The wealth of a country could never be diminished by ample opportunity being afforded to the people for education and amusement It was true the operations of the mechanical machine were suspended on a Sunday in this country, but it must be remembered that the great machine of all—the mind of man, was still at work. The operative spent the day ii, winding up his concerns of the past and preparing himself for the coming week, and on the followingr its l commercial a returnedAonodoamymhee ,pe to t his labour with renewed energy,eo o and renewed rene ao w d ed io v t i e g li n e u o r t . o — al u (Cheers.) He for one believed then, that the wea l t h of this c eeho l au t nn u gt r r e eyd of the wbyouildm p p e nr oP t le i ,be g nor diminished, was inpihsysi hd, a he alarmed at any anticipated competition with nations whose labourers worked seventeen hours a day; for in those cwuntries the vigour and health of the mechanic was so diminished by his labour, that even their own public authorities complained that they could not find a man amongst them of sufficient stature to make a sol dier. No ; England could only be deprived of its superiority by the energy, the industry, and the enterprise of a population superior to the English. For these reasons he was satisfied that the principle of this measure was good. He was con vinced, that this being a question relating for the most part to the health and to public morals, the Legi s l a t ure oug h t to in- , terfere ; and so far he approved of the Bill. But the ques tion of degree was another matter, and he agreed with his Noble Friend who sat beside him, who said that they ought to move in this matter with the most cautious steps; they ought to do so, in his opinion, for the sake of the principle itself, because he conceivefl—indeed there could not be a doubt about it—that if they made the change suddenly it might fail, and a considerable time would have to elapse before a reaction could take place in favour of the principle, or before the Legis lature could be induced again to take it up.—( Hear, hear.) For these reasons he agreed with his Noble Friend near him, and should not be prepared to vote for a reduction of more than eleven hours.—(Hear, hear.) He considered that they stood in the situation of a physician who had satisfied himself of the fact that there was a disease—that there. was a remedy —but who had not satisfied himself of the degree in which the patient's constitution would at present bear the application of the remedy. The physician, In a case like this, proceeded cautiously. lie applied the dose in small quantities, and watched its operation ; and, in his opinion, this was the course which they themselves had to adopt.—(Cheers. ) The present appeared to him to be the most favourable time for making the change, for in this session they would be cor recting two great deficiencies of the Legislature. They had done that which they ought not to have done, and left undone that which they ought to have done—they had afforded relief to those who ought not to have been relieved, and they had left unrelieved those who ought to have been relieved. They had afforded protection to the landed interest while the public health, and the public morality, they had left entirely without triat protection which it was their duty to give.—(Cheers.) They prevented the labourer from getting his loaf where he could get it the cheapest, but they did not prevent him from prematurely destroying the health of his body and of his mind. —(Cheers.) He felt rejoiced at finding that they were ap proaching the end of a pernicious system of interference, and the end of a pernicious system of non-interference. They were repairing while they had the power the greatest of all errors of commission, while also they were repairing the greatest of all errors of omission.—( Cheers. ) Sir JOHN HANNIER said, that as regarded this question, they were obliged step by step to feel their sway, and they must all feel that they were treading on very delicate ground. They had already i n t er f ere d with factory labour, as h ad been ad mitted by the Ri g h t Hon. Gentleman himself. Formerly they might work you ng Thoat t kthem m personswasafi very yr n e hours a day;new,ours a however,d ay and ._ ( H, , ar, har. he was very far f rom saying that h theyeoueldn)ot we e Lh s a h 4in o d u et l rw i l; notll'ee reduction, h like to see that principle carried nut still further; but g.vat difficulties lay in the way of the Legislature on this subject. When they first proposed to interfere with this kind of labour, the sort of in terference proposed was such as to induce even its very advo cates to shrink front the measure ; even the Hon Member for Finsbury himself, although lie voted for its principle, frankly declared that he could not vote for its details. He did not believe that the question to be decided at this moment was that of interference, but of time and degree. He had heard many Hon. Gentlem en say that it might r be very desirable that arrangements should be made between masters and men as to the hours of labour, and he certainly agreed with them as to the desirableness of such an arrangement. But this Bill was not for that purpose. The Bill, he believed, proposed in one of its (-lames that they should restrict the hours of labour to ten hours per day. He believed that the measures which hail been sent up by that House to the other House of Parliament a few days ago, would receive the assent of the Legislature; but he thought it might impose a very considerable difficulty as to the final and beneficial settlement and arrangement of these great measures, if they raised at the present moment qtrestions which might tend to disturb the present relations between the employer and the employed, upon the question of the value of labour And with regard to this question, he thought that considerable stress ought to be laid upon the sort of mills in which the manufac turing classes were now employed. If they disturbed the pre sent state of things in the manufacturing districts, they might compel manufacturers to construct such mills as were constructed some years ago. He had seen himself a very great difference as to the building of mills in the present, compared with former years. Dlills that were built now-a-days were well built, filled with the best machines, and well ventilated. The old mills were quite the reverse. Now, he thought that if this measure were passed, the mills to be constructed hereafter would have the same faults as those erected years ago. He did not retract the opinions that he had expressed on former occasions in sup port of a restriction of the hours of labour ; but he thought that, looking at this Bill, he could not give it his support, because he did not believe that it would effect its object of elevating the condition of the wording classes, and he did sincerely believe that he was better a mdischargingdsto loud dh cries his du t o y fi to those fD t a h ci o i s i e dhe f e o , rdhwiavdhi donese,e,v,beseraniiedn-, fit the measure was introduced A d. bt he s y h votinghhoapdej just sht aagainsttbethe been t House eolthanuivsee delivered.-_ giving do.u_id it his support. f , ih (apb o f ie aHu rs t e rere t d i - gr ii ao i f h n r ee nt,. t h— e h h p eh r e i ufe(maemral i r r p r d eof. o enos) s a a tcr e r n e o a y wb ft b h l ee; speech trespassing e) m c e h r e h o d elusive. For what a o rg f l m ot e l n k e businessnlitnd, whom thallirhe'VV:vAasKleEligYhted with oo th i e aargttuomoteinootatfiov: aanfedwconelusive speech of the Right Hon. Gentlemane.e the Member for Edine of the they • 0 1 n2.. n n ' s s t the strong,_ momentse The Right Hon. Genktlemaai conclusive, t ho v ea the s argument bad s t u the or was legislature constttute if they were not to interfere ature. power of protecting, were to be left to the mercy oppression ? Why every Act they passed fatty • avarice and with the rights of some class or other e (W Hear, d h h e e b a e r • t d Thata: protection he most i fa t interference Was it to be said that the legislature must protest commnity. thatweak infants employed in the manufactories of trade, and must be left unprotected ? Why, during the last t f his country under the system of protection the manufactures of this years, try had been continually increasing—( Loud laughtierenun cheering from the protectionists) —and he confessed it did e r and boldly and chillingly upon his ear, tvh?.n he heard the Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State for the Ho merit, the other night, in the debate on th• .. me Depart le subject, s n er , that the English labourer was now to enter into the " no— toil without armour, and in a naked state. was arena of that, with free trade in commerce, ne • he to be to protection was to be allowed to the labo firing classes of this county to to be so, he was very sorry that he voted fo r - - • h If that were (Protectionist, cheersj—f e r it would give hithe at measure-- he had felt a lore , time. But he believed tmha greatest pain which he alluded was calculated to improv e th t the meesure to working classes of this country. The Hoen"allition of the Member for Dorsetshire ( Mr. Bankes), in the' and Learned edebate, seemed to take a very g reat i nterest in the welfare of this e fare of the manfacturing population of this country; h e Hon. and Learned Member for his goodfeelings the that class of the people, but he hoped the l'Hs towards and Learned Member would pardon him if he venturedonou t Honourable ex press a hope that he would extend his benevolent intentionso lt labourers of his an o wn L . bourhood.—( Hear, hear. ) He could ,in hi s • • neigh cute than that of i opinion, exe cute a more agreeable dutyimproving the condition of his fellow man.—( Hear, hear.) But the . er for Sheffield had delivered to the House a , Hon pretty le Memb lecture that evening. That lecture was, in his (Mr. Waliley's) opinion, what Hudibras would have called the greatest piece of rigmarole he had ever heard.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) The Hon. Gentleman had (he believed unintentionally) misrepresented his (Mr. Wokley's) opinions on this question, for he had stated that because certain of his constituents of the labouring classes required the Bid, he would be compelled to give it his support. Now he (Mr. Wakley) could assure the Honourable Member that he was not so much troubled by his constituents as the gentleman himself.—( Hear, hear, and latighter. ) The Hon. Member for Sheffield stated that he had ' learned more from the working classes of Sheffield than he had learned' during all the in.riod which he had sat in the House. He thought the Hon. Member took an extraordinary mode of showing the knowledge which he had thus obtained.—( t Hear, hear.) He stated that he had read the pamphlet written by his Hon. Friend the Member for Okihare over and over again, but was snit alile to understand it in the least. The Hon. Member for Oldham was not answerable for that. He 'did not undertak e w h en he wrote his pamphlet to give the Hon. Mem bere the fa cu l ty of understanding.—(Cheers and laughter.) t T e h ne . d liou. M em b er for Sheffield also stated, that he had lis- H with ple asure to the speeches which had been made by on. Members on his side of the House, but could not for the life of him understand them. He (Mr. Wakley) was at a less to know what sort of a mind that was which could listen to an argument with pleasure, but which did not for the life of it ur.- derstand it.—( Cheers and laughter.) And then his Hon. Friend the M. tube r for Sheffield turned round to the Hon. Member for Oldham and his supporters, and called this move ment merely p o pularity-hunting, and upon such a subject could be easily obtained;(iksir'taied that popularity upon concluded his observations to his Hoe. Friend ing that there WAS nothing which heh7no:lnetheeadt (Mr. Ward) en ) cl by say s() much as amateur legislation. Now, it strip k he ( Mr. Ward) was the amateur legislator. The flori n) ber for Oldham was an amateur, who for a period of Jay . years had been eng tged in spinning, and who gave employ ment to two or three mill ions of hands --( Laughter, occs sioned by the mistake with reference to the nmuber of hands employed by the Hon. Member for Oldham.) At that Mo ment he (Mr. Wakley) was thinking of the millions which he had created by the exercise of his skill. He was, however, a man of experience of nearly half a century's standing. This was the person whom the Hon. Member for Sheffield had called an amateur legislator. It seems a most extraordinary course for the Hon. Member to pursue. He wondered how he could have had the boldness so to have designated the la bours of his Hon. Friend, In his experience, however, he (Mr. Wakley) confided his judgment. He believed the Hon. Member for Oldham was one who knew more upon the sub ject than almost any man in that House--a gentleman who, in stead of having his mind governed and controlled by the perse cuting and insatiable spirit of avarice, was ornamented and adorned by the highest feelings of humanity, and which ever swayed, undirected, his consistent conduct. His Hon. Friend, to whom he had just alluded, had stated in his pamphlet, that there might be a rise in the price of a shirt or a gown to the extent of a halfpenny or a penny. "Ah said his Hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, like a second Cocker, "a halfpenny or a penny—these are no light considerations." No, put a child in one scale and a halfpenny and a penny in the other, and see which will weigh the lightest.—(Laughter.) His Hon. Friend had further stated in his pamphlet that, during the forty years which they had been interfering, an in crease had taken place in the consumption of cotton goods five-fold, and challenged the accuracy of his statement; and that wages were as high as the present time. "tell, then, had they arrived precisely at that point where they should stop ? had they just discovered tl.e point of perfection ? 'Would the House refuse to interfere in the protection of infantine life? Were Hon. Members who opposed the Bill prepared to repeal the existing law? No. Then let them go on with their righteous interference till they had given an efficient protec tion to these wretched and helpless beings. They had the 'abouring classes themselves, in Yorkshire, and, indeed, in all parts of the kingdom, praying for the Bill. Great ss eeping and wailing would tbeir be in the West Division of Yorkshire when the speech was read there which the Noble Lord the Member for the West Riding had delivered that night. That speech, he must say, was one which he did not expect to hear from a Noble Lord after the speeches which he had read as having been delivered by the Noble Lord at the last session. There was one portion of this subject which had not been, in his opinion, sufficiently stated in the course of this debate. He alluded to the subject of mortality occasioned by this overworking of the p liulation. From the report of Mr. Chadwick, it appeared that in the whole of England and Wales, our of a population of one thousand, one hundred and forty-five had died at the age of seventy, while in Manchester out of the same p pulation but sixty persons arrived at the age of seventy. Out of 4,629 deaths which occurred in the labouring classes at Manchester in the year 184' , it appeared that 2,649 had died under the age of five years. ' From five to ten years of age.the proportion of deaths had been as one to twenty-two. From the ages of 10 to 15 the proportion had been one to forty, and above the age of fifteen }ears it was as one to thirty-fivs. The average age of deaths in Manchester among the labouring classes was seventeen years, while in Rutlandshire the average was thirty.eight years —( Cheers. ) The Hon. Member for Edinburgh particularly dwelt upon the circumstance that there were many and higher considerations than those of commercial prosperity. He (Mr. Wakley) thought if there were not they might soon cease their duty. There was another point which he would not at that late period of the night press upon the attention of the House. It was the dreadful effect which they were producing upon the manufacturing population by withdrawing from the homes of the operatives the natural orotectors of their children—their wives ; and by not inter fering with this case they made a dreary and desolate place of the poor man's home when they took from that home his wife, the natural protector of his home. After his work was over, the poor man, instead of going home and finding there a smiling wife to receive him in a cheerful and comfortable home, to spread before him a well-laid board, he takes with him to his home his weary and exhausted partner, and in a state of wretched debility they retire to rest, and, in the morning, when they leave for their accustomed toil and drud gery, their children are left at home to the protec tion of some wretched and withered harridan.—( Hear.) By pursuing a system of non-interference, they were striking at the very root of all society in the country. Its effects were frightful. Would the House believe it, that out of every 4,600 individuals, 2,400 died yearly • and could any worse misfortune happen to a f am il y t h an the Beath of its mother?—( Hear, hear.) He had no desire to create an unpleasant feeling in the minds of any person, but he could not help appealing to their knowledge of the benefit conferred upon a family by the mother. Whenever they saw a thrifty family governed by good conduct, and industrious, they might be sure that a good mother and father were there. The mother had every motive for making her home comfortable. She could not, like the man, enjoy herself from home, the forms of society prevented her; So, therefore, it was her interest to make her home as happy as possible. Now, by their present system, they de stroyed the mother, by requiring that she should perform the labours of a man. He did trust that these reflections would have their due weight. He was sorry to press them into so small a compass, but he did so, as he was aware of a desire which generally existed, that there should be a division on the sub ject. The Hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh, who made so able a speech upon the subject, stated that in going into Committe on the Bill he would not approve of more than one hour. Well, one hour was better than nothing; if they could not get the ten hours, he should vote for the eleven, as he considered that it was a step in the right direction. It was a most important question, and involved the :feelings of thousands and hundreds of thousands of their fellow creatures, and he trusted that the decision of the House would be such as to give them future encouragement. Mr. BRIGHT said he cordially concurred in one thing that had fallen from the last speaker, and that was, that the present was a most important subject; and it was because he had that opinion that he had ventured to offer some few observa'ions to the House, for the purpose of setting it right with regard to some statements made to it. He must say that he had listened to the speech of the Hon. Member for Edinburgh with consi. derable astonishment—( Hear, hear)—And he never had heard is Member get up to address the House upon any subject, and keep so tar wide of it.—( Cries of "Oh, oh.") They had ancient and modern history quoted to them ; they had religious considerations urged upon them—(Oh, oh)—they hail a lecture to the institution of the Sabbath ; they had heard free trade caricatured as they might expect it to be by a man who had not dared to open his mouth (luring the th7ee months it had been under discussion.—( Cloipr:.) And with respect to the Sabbath, it was a day en which people doi not ordinarily work. There was no mill in any part cf the world which worked on a Sabbath; but because petiole did not work upon the Sabbath, it did not satisfactorily follow that a Ten Hours' Bill was requisite. The question before the House was whether they thought it advisable to limit the hours of labour? But they should recollect that they could only limit it in one country, and it was a mater of deep concern what would be the amount of competition which they would meet with in other countries. The Hon. Member for Edinburgh did allude to what he c nsidered to be the effect of manufacturing operations upon the inhabitants, and the Member for Finsbury had gone into statistical researches to show the prevalence of mortality in manufactories, but had the Hon. Member compared Man chester with Liverpool he would have found it was much greater—( Hear, hear)—and if he compared Liver pool with Bristol he would have discovered it to be greater. So therefore his argument was not worth a straw for the case under considera tion; and if he looked into statistics, he would have found that longevity had been increasing for the last fifteen years, and the average rate of mortality was less now than it was in 1801. The statement of Lord Ashley in reference to the kind of la bour done at manufactories were very much contrary to fact, and he was surprised that he had made them. The Hon. Member for Oldham said, that if they limited their production to what it was twenty years ago, the result would be more beneficial both at home and abroad. With respect to this diminution, he weuld say that several experiments we re ma d e , and the whole of these went to show that no injury was sus tained by the workman from the continuance of the hours of labour at what they were at present. Mr. Horner also showed the same thing. He would not dwell upon the subject at all, but that many gentlemen opposite knew nothing whatever of the nature of the work in cotton-mills. ( Hear, hear.) He maintained that, by working ten hours, the machine would only turn out ten-twelfths of the quantity which they would do if they worked twelve hours.—(Cheers.) The quantity turned out at present was 532,000,0001b5. of cotton, but by the proposed reduction in the hours of labour, the quantity would be reduced 76,000,0001bs—the whole quantity manufactured in this country at the close of the late war. Was there a }Member of that House, who would vote for the passing of a measure which would do away with this annual consumption ? It was said by the Right Hon. Member for Edinburgh, and other Hon. Members in that House, that experiments had been made in the reduction of the hours of labour, hnt that no injury had resulted.—( Hear, hear.) The concern which he was connected with had been in exis tence for more than forty years, and never worked on an ave rage more than twelve hours a day, but the Hon. Member for Oldham had been in the habit of working for many years for fourteen hours a day, and it was certainly rather strange that he had not fou n d out t h e i nhumanity of the system beore. It was, however, much better to have a late repentance than none at all.—( Hear, hear.) It was really too bad for the Hon. Member to state in that House as a fact, that which any one acquaint e d w i t h t h e cotton-sp i nn i ng trade could at on ce contra dint with the greatest confidence. He could assure the House that there were many establishments paving more wages now than they had for years before, and at the same time they were' receiving not a farthing of profit.—(" Oh, oh," from Colonel Sibthorp.) The Honourable and Gallant Mem ber for Lincoln was well acquainted with the the spinning trade; the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman had many things to be thankful for, and this acquisition smongst all the rest.—( Laughter, during which the Hn. and Gallant Colonel ruse, and bowed most gracefully.) If was said that many of those in the cotton spinning trade had made large for. tunes; he hoped it was not a crime fora cotton spinner to make a fortune.—( Hear, hear.) Some years ago, they had limited the hours of labour to twelve hours a day, but the injury was not so great as it would be under the present Bill, for at that period machinery had not been brought to such perfection as at the present day. Now, however, machinery was as improved as it could be, and the injury which must attend so great a re striction as that proposed must be all the More felt by the em ployer and the employed. The improvements in machinery had taken place since the change had enabled them to meet it, but there was no room now for additional improvement. He had in his own employment about eight hundred persons, and he was satisfied that they would rather work ten hours a day than twelve, but he was certain they would not rather do so, if they were only to have the wages of ten hours. If be were to offer them the price of twelve hours labour for ten hours, they would all accept it, but he was very sure that if they were to be restricted to ten hours labour, and ten hours wages, not one of them would accept it. There never was an instance of where the offer was made to reduce th e men to ten hour 3 wow and ten hours remuneration, it - was accepted—it was invariably refused. He should be glad for his own part to have the hours of labour reduced, but when it could nest be done with advantage to either party, but on the contrary when it would be attended with injury to all, he could not support such a change.--( Hear. ) If It was true, as the Hon. Member for Oldham had said. that this plan would not be less productive, why did not he try it ? That Hon. Member he (Mr. Bright) well knew exported his goods to all parts of the esorldt hut he need not tell the Hon. Member that at present America was able to meet the English manufacturers with the very same goods on the same counter. No doubt the Nrhle Lord (the Member for Newark) said a good many things which he could not help admiring; he' said that he would like to see the men play at cricket, and in dulge in other recreations. Why, so should he; but let him ask any man in that House engaged in any honest employment, whether he would take ten briefs instead of twelve, and ten fees instead of twelve ?—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) He begged to tell ibe House that workmen liked money as well as their masters, and would do their best to earn it; and the House might rest assured that the workmen would consider this House their greatest enemies, if they tied one of their hands, and thus prevented them from earning it, which this Bill would certainly effect. But there could be no doubt about it, the men were not in favour of ten hours' time for which they were to get only ten hours' wages ; and the Legislature did not propose to give it to them ; and if they did, it would result in a fatal mistake. The Honourable Member for Ashton proposed a compromise of eleven hours, and he certainly was the man for compromise. But the result of all this would he to convince the workmen that the House had the power to fix a limit to the hours of labour without being able to interfere with the amount of wages, and if they went on this way, it might be that the men would eventually look for eight hours, and perhaps for six. He maintained that if a voluntary arrange smare;,t,baesfoiraerthaes y such e a fi n v e a r years a e a n r g e e o m l d e n e r t t w h a e s y p w o o s u s d b l h e , a v w e a s i t n e v e e c r e y s -- where. What was the reason of the closing of the shops in Manchester on the S aturday h a a f l t f e;- , nr n ? After some strenuous efforts on both sides, the Sabbkth. The early closing oftshooldpsa,y well and as scrupulously observed ionnsteSaadtuordfateynboercaemieeveais, o'clock, was going on in manyg as the whole holiday on the arraowns in this kingdom, it was, arrangement should be come to. therefore, desirable that some Let their decision on this subject be once and or ever, and_ let them not indulge in any such uncertaince speculation. It was merely legislation for persons above thirteen years but let them avoid an y i nter f erence, and they would°fifndage, an entirely different channel fo r th e endeavours of the workin g classes. The manuf ac t urer h a d become more civilised durng the last thirty or forty ye ars , an d t h ere had been an improve ment in all classes of society. That was not the effect of any legislation, it was a more kindly, a more gentle feeling, that had sprung up amongst all classes. He was sorry to appear to set his opinion against those of the Hon. Gentlemen opposite, but he would state, that no master of any mill would now dare to perpetrate the cruelties, or inflict the hardships, which were formerly attempted to be put forward in that House. There was an esprit de corps amongst all the people that would effec tually resist such an attempt. He had said that, two years since, he advocated the same side that he did at present, and he believed that he took the side best for the interest of the working classes. Further consideration confirmed him in the opinion that a great portion of the miseries of that class had arisen from the interference of that House. That was the reason they did not take measures to assist themselves, because they looked to the interference of that House- He was sorry to hear Hon. Members get up on the opposite side, stating facts which at best were mischievous delusions, and misled the working classes. The Hon. Member had spoken as if they were not the friends of the working classes. Could anything be more absurd than to suppose that it was his interest to be opposed to so large a body of the population. His Hon. Friend had pointed to the strike in 1842, and had opposed it. He ( Mr. Bright) thought that it was one of the greatest triumphs in - modern times. Had not the manufacturers ob tained vast wealth, and yet the people scorned the idea of raising a hand to a capitalist? It was a scandal to the Government of the country that the manufacturers should have amassed such immense fortunes, leaving their labourers unproviderl for. He would tell the Hon. Member that he opposed the Ten Hours' Bill, and he would do it with the conviction that the present measure was founded on a principle on which the House ought not to legislate. Free trade %%mild soon pass, and it was not wrong to suppose that the people would increase in intelligence and wealth—for their was wealth amongst the poorer Classes. The manufacturers would become more kindly and gentle to their labourers, and they would both feel the conviction that they could gain by a voluntary arrangement all they could gain by legislation. Such a state of things would materially benefit trade and the condition of the labourers of all classes. Mr. B. DENISON hoped that the Hou s e wou ld permit him to say a few words on this subject, on which the House had legislated on valious occasions. He had thought it to be its duty to interfere, and the question then before it was, whether they should proceed in their legislation, or whether they should not go one step further ? The proposition was to go into Com mittee to take into consideration whether the hours of labour of children between the ages of thirteen and eighteen ears of age sbould or should not be shortened? The case had been ton much argued, and the Hon. Member had proposed that the hours of labour should be shortened to ten hours. He must with all respect say that that course was premature. The question was whether the time should be shortened or not. and that question was to be considered on going into Committee. If they went into Committee he was not prepared to vote for ten hours, as he thought it would be much too large a step in the reduction of the hours of labour which the manufacturing and working people ought to give to their employers. What most pressed on his consideration, was the females working in the mills from thirteen to eighteen hours a day. He put it to the House whether females of this tender age should be compelled to work twelve hours a day. He thought the hours of labour in respect to females ought to be reduced. He regretted his Noble colleague (Lord Morpeth) had inti mated that he would vote against the Bill, though he must say that with the exception of the speech of the Hon. Member for Edinburgh, it was the best speech delivered in favour of the Bill. His Noble Colleague said he was willing to consent to some alteration in the hours of labour, providing the Corn Bill was carried. Now, that Bill had been sent to another House, having been passed by a large majority of the present House, and they had a right to assume that it would be carried there. —( Hear, hear.) He thought, therefore, they ought to legis late independent of such considerations, and he regretted the course which the Noble Lord proposed to take. He (Mr. B. Denison) would vote for the second reading of the Bill. Sir R. REEL rose and said, I have listened with great attentionto the speech of the Right Hon. Member for Edin • burgh, and feel highly satisfied with it as a rhetorical composi tion, but as it respects the part of it consisting of argument against the Bill, I think it exceedingly limited. The greater part of the argument he has put forward is that the principle of free trade should not control the Legislature to prevent it interfering to promote the social comforts and health of the country. But who contradicts this proposition ? That argu ment was addressed to about ten gentlemen in the House (for there was not more, if so many) who think that the pure prin ciple of free trade should be rigidly carried out, and that the Legislature should not interfere to regulate such matters. I admit, with the Hon. Member, the truth of the principle that the Legislature should interfere in matters involving the health and moral improvement of the people. But because I concede this position, it does not follow that I must admit the present Bill to be one that claims our special consideration and interference. The Right Hoti. Gentleman has made a great impression on the House; in beautiful lan guage he has enforced the argument to which I have referred. He had gone among the hackney cabs, in order to satisfy every Hon. Member who might not have been previously convinced of the necessity of the Legislature to interfere. He has re ferred to draining and sanatory regulations sanctioned, as evi dence in support of interfering in the present case. '1 he over loading of omnibuses and hackney cabs, the regulations for draining have all been brought forward by the Right Hon. Geetleman in order to strengthen his case; and, as if these were not enough, in order that there may not be a loop-hole for escape, he has told us that if a young boy of thirteen years of age was to sign away his inheritance, that the Legis lature would step in and interfere. The whole of that part of the Hon. Gentleman's argument I admit to be perfectly con elusive ; hut is it politic to impose a tax indirectly to prevent him from employing his labourer more than ten hours a day? Let. me establish the weakness of the position which the Right Hon. Gentleman has taken by reminding him of what is the state of the law at present. It is too late to contest the principle now, though I will admit that, thirty years ago, I took an active part in co-operating with one for whose character and whose memory I must ever en tertain the deepest respect, in violating the principle of free trade.- 1 , Hear, hear.) But what is the state of legislation upon this subjec ? No child under eight years can be employed in a factory at all. No child, under eighteen years of age, can work by night. No female can work by night at ail. No child, between the age of eight and thirteen can work for more than six and a half hours, and the child between eight and thirteen must bring a certificate that three hours' instruc tion had been given to it previously on the same day. That is the state of our legislation at present. I must, therefore, admit the force of the whole of the Right Hon. Gentleman's preliminary principle, but then came another and a far less conclusive part of the Right Honourable Gentleman's speech, namely, that which considered whether it be for the advantage of the working classes, that there should be a further reduc tion in the hours of labour. I admit that merely . commercial considerations ought not to determine our policy m that res pect. I admit that th ere are hi g h er cons • terations than those u of a commercial character. I admit that the principle that ought to guide us in the consideration of:th whether or no the f ur ther restri ct ionse question is intion the hours of labour, will promote the health—will promote the morality, or be conducive to the interests of the working classes. I admit that these great considerations are far superior to the mere commercial question. 'fhe Right Hon. Gentleman said he would not interf ire with adult labour, he was unwilling to prevent the adult whose capital was his labour, and who was of sane mind, from using, it as he thought proper—he would not commit towards him the insult of restrict- Now what are we a b out to do ? Although the hls ° R w i g nhhealth.t Hon. ing his discretion on a point connected with Gentleman ad m it s t h e injustice of the interference, he was supporting a Bill which indirectly established regula tions with resp ec t t o adult labour. - We are about to impose what is equivalent to an income tax of fifte€n per cent. upon the labour of the operative. You are going to tell him that he shall not have an opportunity of work ing for more than a certain number of hours per day. Now do you really believe that in establishing that restriction —do you concur with him in his belief that for ten hours' labour, he can receive twelve hours' pay ?—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gen tleman says, " See of what importance it is to the community that the workman should have some command over his time— see what the Dutchman has done —see what the Englishman has done—see how the inhabitants of the United States, with Anglo-Saxon blood, have cleared the forest, and reclaimed the sterile land. See what the Dutchman has done in reclaiming from the dominion of the ocean that which was once overwhelmed, by waves." See how he has done all this—but did you restrict him to ten hours' labour ?—( Cheers.) Did you tell the Dutchman, who has reclaimed his dominions from the sea, that he should only work ten hours ? Did you tell the Englishman oho has supplanted the red man, that by legisla • tive restrictions he could only work ten hours a day.— ( Cheers.) See, said the Right Hon. Gentleman, how much you are indebted to the ingenuity of the working man for im provements in machinery. It is not, he says, by the great mathematicians or the philosopher that these discoveries were made, but only by the ingenuity of the working man. He, says Mr. Adam Smith, in the commencement of his work, mentions the wonderful improvements for which this country is indebted to the ingenuity of the working man. But were they made under a state of restrictive labour? In the time of Arkwright was there a law passed to prevent t h e wor ki ng man labouring more than ten hours a day ? No, there were no restrictions then, and I for: one believe, that if you wish to preserve the ingenuity of the working clessses— employ your time and your labour as you please—if you wish to work fourteen hours a day, you are at liberty to do so. We hive all experienced the advantages of the nonerestrictive sys tem • it is said, however, that we ought to consult the wishes of the working classes; nor can there be a doubt that it is their impression that you can secure to them the same amount of re saiuneration in the event of a reduction of the hours of labour a they receive at present. Why, Mr. Greg proposed to his men that they should work his machinery for eleven hours, and he would pay them at the rate of eleven and a half hours a day, the proposition was unanimously rejected by the men, who insi-ted upon working twelve hours and receiving twelve hours' pay. In my opinion it would be infinitely preferable to a legislative enactment if an arnicanle arrangement between the masters and men could be come to in this matter. Well, then, the experiment was made by men in favour of the eleven hours, but they found they only turned a pi oportionate paztity of work, and they pave the men notice beforehand. They said to there, we wish, 'Tor your, sakes, that the experiment should succeed to enable us to insure the work, formerly accomplished in twelve hijurs, in e:even, and, then, let us consen t to an El even H ours ' Bi ll. But th e?esult of the experiment was, that they could do no more in the eleven hours than they had done fotmerly. lam against all interference, and particularly against interference at the present time; and I would be concealing the troth if I did not state to you that I think we have gone•as far as we can safely go in the matter of interference. lam inclined to give a full and fair triul to the experiment, but if you do interfere don't suppose that you will give general satisfaction,- don't believe that there are other parties who will seek to apply the same principle to you. They will -till you not to talk to them of manufactories, that they will show without undue interference, or depending on the aid of the common informer, the principle is not carried out. 'Here is a letter that I have received with respect to the state of the operative papers. (The Right Hon. Baronet then read a letter of their unparalleled diteress, in consequence of the present low state of wages and high'price of provisions.) That they laboured eighteen hours out of the twenty-four, and that their average weekly earnings was about 9e., a sum totally inade tacietuedat they , e ,n t . o I t st h t a e wt a s e u sd p at I t i v o ew r r t ay, o s f at a br osmonlgaante,ealbleu and e nc s ed s s is f ta o r r wy a otua m i dar be er a , di n me d rp h soo i s s ta. i f be a mily, lep t r w foo o r the Legislat ure t o i nterfere, and to divide the labour between - men, and prevent attacks upon the human frame. But, are we quite sure that the restriction in factory labour will not add to the labour in other Occupations. Why, the Hon. Gen tleman who spoke last, made an impression upon the feeling of the House, (which is not a very difficult matter) by describing the importance and the happiness which a wife produced in a man's home. He says truly, that the wife should be kept at home, and that she should be prepared with the well-spread board, to welcome her husband on his return home.—(Hear. Why, who can doubt it ? But what is the remedy for the pre sent evil ?—( Hear, hear.) Why, it is to prevent wives work ing in factories.—( Hear, hear.) But eleven-twelfths of all the evils of the present system will exist even after this Bill shall have passed. Who can doubt the importance of the wile being enabled to devote her attention to domestic comforts but admitting the very principle that you promote the morality and the comforts of the great manufacturing districts by the passing of the Bill, will you prevent women, mother, and children from working in factories?—( Hear, hear.) Can you insure the attendance of the wife of the manufacturing opera tive at home? And does it not more conduce to the comfort of a family, that they should have large wages than that the wife y sh ob o fe u nt l ie d l h to a iße v o e ih m mis o o r nt e time to attend to domestic duties. We Ipheuazdoenian instance of this lately ; there was the Hon. Gentleman the e e f Membe rien. Ge Gentleman o Finsbur y, teihvteelsocst:tet came forward the other day from actuated by nothing forward h oaf i mo tiveshe was i bringing d t ab h i put o a t hn m ebhy e di a mpe s su u —er r re e i eans : I das d rhs, o o hlr h i eo o bau p r hope thathear.) vlele tth giv e th e lace factories. We had domiciliary visit, and the sys t em and with respect to all those ein t r ipon the subject of the omation, and are you t respect to labour in q to ui t t i e le s h ur a e nd th -l a o t o s m om w e e t a h v i e n rg, description with respec t manu factures that are connected with factory labour —are you quite sure that while you establish these strict regulations with re spect to adult factory labour—are you quite sure that you are st measure discussionthe sam e sa om with not giving a direct premium and encouragement to those sys tems of labour which are beyond your control, and that you are nor. defeating your own benevolent ends by your own unwise legislation ?—( Hear, hear.) Now on this . ground I must resist the second reading of this Bill. I sincerely believe that we have carried interference as far as it.. is desirable. But there may be others who do not agree with me—( Hear, hear)—but there mast at the same time be many who must feel that this is not the moment when it is wise to make this great experiment.—( Hear, hear.) It is an experi.. meet with the four great branches of our manufactures, which enter into competition with the manufactures of other countries, and if you pass this law, it will have the effect okiettingoff one sixth of the labour, and as. I believe, of.s . .the prekee and remuneration of the manufactures;.' . country.—(Hear, hear.) Well, is this the exact time? -Irteuh permitted the export of machinery, not upon the principhe of free-trade, but because in point of fact, there was no use whatsoever in continuing poor-laws which prevented that exportation.—(Hear, bear.) The plans of the machines were taken, and there was no use in continuing the law which prevented the exportation of machinery. It was better ue encourage art in the manufacture of machinery than to have which y la o w a s haveto would lead to the smuggli n g o f mac hi ne s. B u t give foreign countries opportunities of benefitting by your skill in respect to these machines.—( Hear, hear.) You have also passed a law, the object of which is to enable the working classes to insure permanence, and to give them a guarantee against sudden and extraordinary rises in the neces saries of life.--(Hear, hear.) Well, hut observe, that that. law is not to come into full effect for three years hence.—. (Hear, hear.) Suppose the law passes in its present form ire the House of Lords, there will not, until February, 1849, be a free trade in corn. During the intervening period, the same restrictions will still extst, at the same time you have removed protection from agriculture, and en that ground I think that it would be politic_ to give a longer trial to this experiment, which you have already sanctioned; and I intreat the House to refuse to give its assent to the Bill of the Hon. Gentleman, and to permit them to have a fair opportunity to effect this desirable ar rangement as to labour by a voluntary agreement between the masters and the employed, and, above all, to postpone taking this irrevocable step—for irrevocable I think it will be—anti[ you have better ground than you have at the present moment tor drawing safe conclusions as to the effect of this measure.— (Cheers and cries of " Divide.") Lord J. RUSSELL did not wish, at that late period of thee night to trespass upon the attention of the House, but he, should be sorry to go to a division without taking some notice , of the answer which the Rio.ht Hon. Gentleman had given to. he argument of his Right Hon. Friend the Member for &lin burgh, because a more powerful argument he thought he had heard.—(Cheers.) There were already on the statute-e book Acts authorising any interference with factory labour,- and unless they were prepared to repeal those Acts, they were preveuted from using the argument the-, the Legislature had no right to interfere with labour.-4Hear.) The present Bill would not interfere in any way in the hour's. of labour, the principles of which had not already been esta blished before by other Acts ; they already interfered in the labour of children from eight to thirteen, and from thirteen to eighteen, and the last Ad that was passed interfered with the labour of women in factories. The Right Hon Baronet al luded to the arguments of his Right Hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, and stated that his rhetoric was very beautiful, but altogether unnecessary, and proceeded himself immediately. to argue precisely in the same manner.—(Hear, hear.) The, great question then was, whether they would sanction any. further interference in the hours of labour. Before the House gave its sanction to the measure they should be convirced of two propositions. Ist. That the measure was desirable for the safety of the health, morals, and the good conduct of the class to whom you propose to give a further limitation of the hours of labour. The second proposition was, that the House must have good reason to suppose that this might be done without any mischievous interference with the labour of parties employed in factories, and whether by de priving their masters of the profits of their labour they would not be inflicting a great injury upon the labouring classes. The first proposition required little or no argument from him to recommend it to the notice of the House. Ti.kr Hon. Member for Durham had said that it had been the cus. torn for the last thirty years, in most factories of the country' s to confine the labour to twelve hours a day. Then they went told that, in other countries, the labour was extended to eighter and ninety hours a week. He thought that the libouring classes of this country could not contend with the present Itgla price of provisions, against such serious odds. Notwithstand-. hag these disadvantages, what had been the result in thii country, as to the amount of exports in the year 1824. The exports, in round numbers, were 33,000,00 e in 1834, 70,000,000 ; and, in 1845, 135,000,000.—(Hear. When the question was formerly before the House, the menu.. facturers stated• that the tax on the raw cotton preened vet y heavily upon them. It was stated to him, as well as to matt e r other Members in that House, that the tax amounted to almost eight per cent. on the raw material. One house alone pat I. 4,5001. in .the cotton tax alone. Another house with a fixel capital of 100,000/. paid 20,()001. alone in the cotton tax. They had been relieved from that tax, and they were relieved fret: no less a sum than I,boo/. a year with this, but the wages wehe only effected to the amount of tenpence a week, whilst.ti - e amount saved by the cott on t ax was no l ess t h an t hi rteen pe• cent., but he believed that the repeal of the corn-laws won J. effect great advantage to the working classes. Ashford stated that the tax on ean imposed eft, less than two hours a day, and whatever might be the effect the repeal, it would sur e ly m a k e th em more able to compo t e with foreign natio n s. H e never b e li eve d that the saracim e l r twel te ; but he consid ere d th a t the question o of wages would be g i ven f or e l even h ou rs as there w o ul d b wages would mainly dep e nd upon the demand f the fr ttedb, u a on • . such was his confidence in the measure witch bad -receiy . 41ricrti, ar l their sanction, that ne believed there would b e a greater mend of labour effectuated by it , and a consequen tincrease z . ; the comforts of life enjoyed by the working man; and believe. ins the Bill would induce happiness of the* people, d eople he was resolved to g P Mr. P COBDEN said he would not wish Hon. Gentlemen to be give e e it gr b e i a s t s e a r r socia l part. under any misapprehension with respect to his vote, and that they bad placed him in the position of being ohiged to give an unpopular vote. He was satisfied that no greater delusion had ever been practised on the working classes than had hem done in the " short-time agitation." He would not sip it was done designedly, but gentlemen had some particular notion* of their own that the legislation of that House could limit quantity yet maintain the price. The originator Of this agi-s -tation was Mr. Oastler, who followed in the wake of Mr. Sad. dler ; and he would just show, by an extract from evidence taken before him, what the delusions of this agitation were (The Hon. Gentlemak read some extracts from the evident in proof of his assertion.) The parties who agitated 131 r short time were not free traders. They attended free-trade meetings and denounced them. He did not meant' to speak disparagingly of them, for he believed they were honest in their endeavours. But he showed that their exertions had a very different effect from what they contemplated, and that the consequence of a diminution in the hours of labour would be a diminution in the wages of labour.—(Oh, ob.fr He maintained that by dimninishing the quantity of work would have the effect of diminishing wages. He was nut favour of legislating for short hours in the case of infanta, ant( he did so on the same principles as the Lord Chancellor woull take the guardianship of children who were improperly treatel by their parents. But with regard to large bodies and adn is the case was very different. If it was proposed to treat tha question on a philosophical point of view he could understan I. it. But it was not rested upon those ground. The supporters of the present system bad been accused of want of benevolence, and that they had no bowels of compassio=n for their fe;low-men. He begged to say that he had done hie best in his own sphere to reduce the hours of labour, and ht Alanchester he was a vice-patron of an institution for the: purpose. He wished Hon. Members would haree their heads along with their hearts to this question, for if they did thew would come to a very different conclusion. He had a petition to present from the parish of Gilmington in Somersetsbire,t hs object of which was to petition the House to compel the farmer to give the labourers their due. He wished to know, therefore. from Honourable Members what their feelings would be he brought in a Bill to give the labourers of Dorsetshire ant?. Soinersetshire les. a week. He would ask the Noble Lord. the Member for Newark if be would refuse to comply witie such a Bill ? He believed he would not, on the ground of benevolence tadaso ontohreongrtahae ground ground ti f political nhountiyh.e oeulwth d i pre e p d t os:e l, ask the Hon. Me En Iltaveser doctors,haa r o s s a a , i tt d ha ty. t y, h a ‘, : he t e h r et e h y cear s i l h teh o de u ny l eg d w riot not h e i n n g p o e c Wilvt thin? ielnenmethneyw_hoettken:4e°llaccdkin'site:::-da':oae:t:- thaletgislawtiethfor wsuhcihch was to s employ the them sam e a t m m e e d n ic m in o e re st t a h r a te n d t u w i e t to cope. He hoped they were approaching that period whsl t g h is e l y at s e voul f d or onl y they were unable things as they were cat. ' eulated to understand. Re objected to all interference wit h labour, and b e h oped to see the time when Parliament seou'lel not interfere at all, for it was well known that that House ree presented the employers and not the employed. If they logic lated at all they would do greater injury to the working classen than good. They would force the men to combine for keepiner up the price of labour, and he had heard it whispered that thse combination laws were about to be revived. The men were paid by the piece, and if they restricted the amount of labour, they would force the men to strike to maintain a remunerative, price. The manfacturers had made all their arrangements out ' the present system—they were paying thousands of pounds iy rent for their mills, and it was now proposed to reduce their interests one-sixth.—(Hear, hear, from the protectionists.) but he opposed this meant. 'upon the part of the worlds: