The Sun. — London, England, 1844-05-04 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 4, 1844. Would be, the manufacturing capitalists of the country. It was the manufacturing knowledge, to tenuity, and power, . I !hich h a d made England what she was row, and however en:l ung it might be to th e ag r i cu l tur i st ., h owever pa i n f u l it iniuht be to hear about the ignorance of country genthenen—( Liu, h ter)—however disagreeable it might be to him to be bearded his fertune and in his country by the once peer 111 far turer, who had applied his mind to his usines-, a::d h had milli ons b y his energy, whilst the laneowner Rad been dreaming away Isis life—however painful st might be to hear all these things, it was not the less erne, that to the enanufacturiree capitahst, and to him alone, was ow ing the greatness and the g ran d eur o f thi s countr y.—( [fear, h ear.) It Ives the knowledge and power of that greet cemmu laity that had esi , ed England above a 1 other communities.— (Hear, hear ) We shou.d have been mere Nimrods— a petty isla n d in th e Ocean, instead of governing the woad—had not it been fur the manufacturing capitalists. Our fleets were on every sea __ou r (fig was floating upon every breeze—but this Ras nut ow i ng to the lezy lendlords, but to the &erre, energe- Vt ic, enterprising, menufacturine capita ists.—( Hear, hear ) Eet wondereet and pointed at us, and asked how it was that cwhieh was but a speck on the gl o b e o f thi s ear th, was nighty power that held the balance amongst all other Petters, and influenced every quarter of the civilised world. 4 had no hesitation in saying that the majority made up on the late occasion was no honour to that House. —( Hear, hear .) How many votes had been given on that side of the et tu•e.iii c• nsequence of the course pursued by the lion. lember for Stockport? They said the manufacturers had g e ne against them, and they would put a torch among them.— ( Hear, hear.) It behoved the other side to show that the co urse they hail taken was the right one , an d why, after being twelve years in office, why after being kept in darkness for so M ane years the light at last broke in upon them Now he wa nted to know what was the Noble Lord's panacea., and eheth.er it would be worth anything? It was to prevent the s heoure r f rom labouring more than ten hours ; whet would be the consequence? The consequence would be an immediate m"weriew wages—(Cries of " ")—when lion. Members cry Are, no , " they should prove how this " no " will happen, an ' t he would then bow down to their opinion. The number of labourers would remain the same, the demand for work I ' ool3 be the same, but each individual labourer would be de. terivesi o ,ra f wr.tain . p'oriion of his hours, and would thus in reality les s e cient labourer. When he, therefore, came into the nitnaursket he would come as a person who, being less efficient, fact t ask, a s he could only ask, less wages. 'rake the menu eLihm e r he had a large portion of his capital invested in ma 4et.erY,,,and mills ; that was the larger portion of his pro.. the r ew ers ; but a smaller portion of it was contained in f_c.nr:rtions of a labourer, acting as a labourer. The menu nriworking twelve hours a day produced a certain quen the can • Worki ng ten hours he would produce less. But ) , ,_ _pital of the manufacturer remained the same. His fixed Lcat !en, a s be would call it, remained the same ; but his floating a s t:nal on the form df • g would differ, and would produce bapp• teen, retier tthese circumstances ore of three things would diesee n , Either prices must rise, or profits upon stock must , ' wages must fall. Which would take place . t •,. es could not rise, for they had foreign compe l'i"o on every s id e o f them.—(flear. ) At the pres e nt In e e ' aM nt, it was as muc h as th e manu f ac t urer cou ld d o m aintain his , " footing in the foreign market, and, by a mere ( -11 '"f th e scale, he would be driven out of one-half of it.— no," from Mr. Ainsworth.) The Hon. Alernber said e . He . wished he would get vp by-arid-bye, and state ho w it Weill,' be " No, no." The lion. Gentleman should e re tn al lY tek • more care how he expressed his opinions, for he had - P n iged thern all round.—( Hear, hear.) There was a class e ," leessoris who claimed infallibility for themselves, though t s :eY were the most changeable of men. In every change they th e elwaes infallible, and always intolerant ; and, e:ange as h a g it never suggested itself to them th tt they might e -t ' e neen wrong throughout. But he was about to show that elheehf three things must happen—either prices must rise, ; 0 7ts , must diminish, or wages must fall. It was im e,* `Le that prices could rise while they were ta"ed to sursh foreign competition. There was Sod Crated States, Germany, Switzerand, and France, of thi s he wanted to know how were the manufacturers ens.. kingdom, who, within the last few years, had lost some 7_ n rr e l e ri tt of their markets in every quarter of the globe, either in e __ , ea, Germany, France, or Switzerland to stand up l _hh!•st an increase of that competition ? In ev‘ry case a turn scale would drive them from the market. In that branch shtattle for which the constituents of the Hon. Member for w ere d were celebrated, and in which the people of England a t_ eeesidered to be supreme above all the people of the world, market " in the scale at this mornest would drive them from the co re e e t ess - ( Rear, hear. ) 'fake America. America would rui, p te with them in every mat ket. She had a sagacious po paw,4"th who were possesed of a peculiar knowledge of the s ake : of tnaehinery, and by whom all the changes that had teaee flare in machinery for the last thirty years have been e e ie n r and wh o h ad therefore substituted the power of ma te'JVor handi cra f t . If they tampered with the trade of let th e a, and with the capital employed in labour, ever so little, tijri.m take care lest America and France would not outsell e in the markets of the world, when they would be obliged has -me hom e and tell the manufacturing labourers that they i t 0 ter7e°rl.emhocre ( e ._ markets, for which th e y m i g ht th an k th e i r own 0 tn Hear, he ar .) H e saw th ose w h o on l y l oo k e d sawo tt hist Operation of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He et Par.._ couritry _gentlemen, who exulted that Consols were to tes e h - 5 . ,( Hear, hear. ) That was one of the most fatal symp- NeL st 7.naet evor seen of the state of the country.—( Cheers.) tern G ced It show? It showed this, that so small was the re- Per c, n , capital, that it was an advantage to buy in the Three Percent!ts'( Hear, hear.) Go to America, and ask for 3 w ere ,• (![ear, Capital there.—(Load laughter) So sensitive fa c t s ,`"eY of the loss of their cap, that even with all the wsw:trhe cgerf•e,arte2l(lem, which showed that in America the returns Continued laughter)—they were overwhelmed tal 4 the recollection that they bad cheated them out of cer euesran of money.—( Hear, hear.) But that was not the te rn e "- The question was; whether in this country the re eyteecapital was not exceedingly small. He said that was Ame r et from the state of the Consols--from the fact that they Aelrerteilling to lend their money to such bad payers as the tr a y le aLs, which showed that there was no adventure so ex re,ui gant—no danger of loss so great—that they were not (Hear to undergo, in the hope of enlarging their profits.— stas ed hear.) The consequence was that which he had just th e , that the profits of stock employed in manufactures at te,alireseet moment were greatly diminished, and the w r '' for carrying on commercial enterprise was lessened. gap :: at that point that if they reduced it lower, the conse the w ould be that he would have no more means to engage ee n i aun urer with. Each succeeding year wou ld bring a sue tee',,;',,e of losses, and instead of being a manufacturer who bi te go on employing labouring persons every year, he would th e ; e a less number of labourers in his establishment, because pr q 'l: 44 for de d him into a condition in which he could not re lbeZee• If prices were low, would they cut down the th e tt e -4 who was least able to protect himself, and who% raa; o .F m nd not protect by a Ten Hours' Bill, namely, the st er , i aeinhitig labourer, who came its side by side with his lboun e"n Petitor, who would take less for his ten hours fin* en ho n n" wh , "wn they were now deceiving with the idea tliat (Hear, ti e - e r e s. ,` a b e eitir he would get twelve hours' wages ? would fall hear Let them not deceive themselves On him o fl him , o . e , av ilY the weight of the Noble Lord's humanity. Its h e %Iliad fall the consequences of it. For he would be want p r „ • 3 now, numerous in his. kind—every day's say to hirn s ing him to demand labour, aad the capitalist would tne e e . the n. as he said to him now, your labour worth to 1 . 10 - ' li and more, that you must take, or you will " n l arese se n g• It was a most important and most awful eon ‘ 4 enti c Ind he addressed himself now to the Right Hon. lte he n i a a ,k le the h e of` State for the Herne Department, "cry r Mai why he meddled with the question ? With hhy Le e _''Pect for the Bight Hon. Gentlemen, he asked him NyeaLl age` un.fortunately meddled with this affair Every man th e Ril ts e , with him, when he said that it must be clear to N on. Gentleman's sagacious mind that the conse evils t e Pne6 w nich he ( Mr. depicting were the necessary nat .g ", a e t a w gitil follow from' that inierference. He asked him thi he could obtain in this race of mock humanity— Pte lehtitnl struggle for eminence in ignorance. ?—( Cheers ePeet e e e er .) What good then could be derived from se careelit us a po s i t i on?—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. IL) had hate, t a bstained f rom any remark upon the labour of chit. the ee l. Th, de pen e ed upon a totally disti nc t set of 'rcum -7 were not ca p a bl e o f judging for themselves: te m , / w and de subject to the power of others. But the full-grown t'k w w ° ll lan, who had arrived at that age at which ele th Aided they could judge for themselves—why tio Right Hon. Gentlemen intet fe e in their concern• ? g a j re the best judges of their own private interests. ; l ite iiitiTde these remarks without any feeling of hostility t' h e je ade eete l l e nth e . ntlemat . l ; but lie did entreat of him, before t eeself aga.in into this abyss of legislation, to settie with "At Principles upon as hich ha undertook a measure n al ;In hiC,7lPtion--not to halt between two opinions, and, witn ersee4R3 thrown overboard altogether the doctrine of inter . - *l t.9lr' r i. A n lake a mighty fuss about the extent to which it Z'he """e( Hear, hear.) ee.oedsquestion having been put by the SPRAKER, several Ven d s elailaed without any Hon. Member rising, and there 41.. t1 1 .1 . 4 , d o r ries of' g ottld d.`".nAHAM said he was unwilling that the House Pride on that querion until he had previously offered ol°• 3s.ervations in reference to the speech which had just eeZressed to them by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. the ST entat he had rather anticipated that some advocate - Peecl3. Hours' Bill would rise to reply to that vtl t i q,,ea th e ( ti ar, hear.) Many of the principles . for 'anat e ) " o e. and Learned Gentleman contended, he (Sir J. ,l)o s i ti had on a former occasion urged upon the House, in ! i n to l the Noble Lord the Member for Dorsetshire. ie r e , t et a e t Peet to his argument as to the reduction of the zi l uilleg il.,)nrotaottreaguring labour, it was for the advocates of that ) He was extremely un thick i t o refer te " the somewhat exaggerated expressions o e4 rned lit he heat of debate, had fallen from the Hml. and ra▪ of lag n tleman. He was sorry to say that, without the g P "guage of that description, too much exasperation t Y lie Pri vailed on that subject--( Hear, hear)—and there le bid 03 few observations which he was about to make, he Qerthe rttatri from using language of an irritating nature. in t ee.:ts n that st P l ace, he agreed with the Hon. and Learned a just, wise, and enlightened view of the best (. 1 the working classes ought to form the basis of their th"'oe. o initthrratesnnot for him to look at the motives of Hon. Gen -INh th H ouse. But, speaking generally, he believed that Clietoe ere was ntto dee , g . eat difference of opinion, they were all el,, to ed __ Lae this matter in that manner which would . be th v l lys. / ..'elve to the comfort and welfare of the working in Brame sir he it from him •( Sir J. Graham) to depreciate e :e value of the machinery that was now employed s et '. 11 0 ,h u _ nt rY• lie fully agreed with the Hon. Gentleman r , l , ek) in what he had said of its value and import l!llY agreed in the eulogy he had passed upon the foe rlhg capitalistsof this country. He believed they tit „ cd heir e employment for a large mass of people, tha t . with k dt. uterprise and talent would have been left in the erahl Il e 4 rt th e se condition. And he bad not one word to say ofAan, th Prlnc'ple laid down by the Hon. and Learned Gen g4o,l at the minimu m of interference was the greatest t 4 111 this question. But he must be permitted to I); 4 ;. (l a..t 4 th ! h e House that th e argument now brought for 14Z; -"tlitZi'dlovanced s tage of the Bill was an arg ument . much dincivkneinn a mo ti on for a repeal of the existing law than ttle-ntisi tha ejzted t' the Particular object which they had proposed to b night Hear, hear.) The principle now 1 4 _ te st y the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was identical te c i e settipshltich was before the House in 1833, and which was wh aby the wisdom of the Legislature. All the argu eb7sloe,t on been urged to-night, were urged upon that 41' had thoughou certainly not with greater ability. The prin. cityemeet, been most carefully weighed, both by the Go tio sauided by Mr. Poulett Thomson (no ordinary autho 111,*rati9uttert1), and by the Legislature, and after much f e d b ed e _ it had been placed as it now stOod. But what t a _e_ the douse,n siponsider was, the nature of the Bill then be aop sent th t the principle at issue. He (Sir J.. Gra tt.ti,of eiaeuiatit was the regula , ion of the labour of children, and en _Pa.ted young peso:is, in collection with fac abstinence from interfererce with the labour of 4. a tiear, hear.) 'T h at t •ge,, ( Neste" r at was the principle. He thought this descriptio n it was not the best way of on brought. forward by the Hon. and Boost bee n Zilietnan*--( Hear, hear.) He did think it would tin :zit reeZrevenient to have taken the discussion of the ," the by the. Honourable and Learned Gen ,e ‘erd th discuss i on of the proposition of the . P, i ould , th e Member for Dorsetshire —( Cheers. ) therefore Confine himself to the consideration ' of two rr,t ,i s l e lhe first of which' the °I nen-interfer "hY ' haying admitted te s was ell es m enee with , aclul-. labour, they interfered , ki th e I "Yrrient df labour whieh was not adult? He would. e hitt perrefole.ction of the House what had occurred in 1833. cu;rec • ollection that it had, at that period, bee ' admitted, on all hands, that the practical effect of limiting the hours of labour of children and young persons to twelve hours would be to limit the werking of machinery to that period. He hrl:eved that, generally, such had been, practically, the effect of the me' sure altogether ; ro doubt there had been ex ception,. A Bill on this subject bed been mtroduCed by the late Government. in k'a-11. That Bill hal been brought in by the Right ilotamraQe Gentleman the Member fcr Perth, whom he sow in his place, and by Mr. Shell, the Vice- Pre-ideat of the Board of Trade ; by that Bill it was pronosed to extend the limitation of young persons from 18 years of age to 21 years ()cage, so that if that Bill had pas.ed, no person between the ages of 13 and 21, of either sex, would have been allowed to work in factories for a longer period than twelve hours. and there could be no doubt but that, in the imijority of instances, the practical working of the ex7st ing law had been to limit the wo. king of machinery in the ma nufacturing districts to twelve hours a day. There were, how ever, exceptions, and he believed it had been found possible, in some few instances of competing manu act ores by the employ meattof female adult labour, to work the machinery for a longer time. This was certainly contrary to the intention of the Le gi4ature, and was giving these manufacturers an unfair advantage over their competitors—an advantage which was obtained beyond the ordinary power, and in a man ner fatal to the health of the female adults so employed. He had received several delegations from the marinfacturers himself, and he could state to the Howe positively that several of the manufacturers paying the largest amount of wages were favourable to the clause limiting the hours of female labour in factories to twelve hours. The lion. Gentleman asked, why continue legislation to interfere with machinery? In the first. place, he had frequently stated to the House that the inter ference was contrary to principle. He admitted that the de parture from the principle led them into greater difficulty ; but then it most be remembered, that in labour conoected wish machinery, the Legislature had a power to interfere which it had not in other eases. Upon the more important point, whe ther they were justified in that interference, he could not state his opinion more succinctly than in the words of the report of Monsieur C. Dupin, in the French Chamber. (The Right lion. Baronet then quoted the words from the pamphlet of M. Dupin, but in so low a tone of voice that it was impossible to catch more than its import, which we under stood to be in advocacy of the restriction of machinery labour to twelve hours.) Since the last discussion he had received a report from Mr. Horner who had inspected several of the most extensive of the factories. In nine factories 697 persons were on an average employed in each. Of these more than fifty per cent. were females, and of the females seventy per cent. were above eighteen years of age. 27i per cent. were married women. It av , s important that restriction should be placed upon the labour of children and young persons and females, tut this principle should not be carried to too great an extent or else it would create a greater evil than it pro posed to remedy. The concluding words of the Right Hon. Baronet were spoken in so law a tone that they were altogether I inaudible itt the gallery. Mr. LABOUCHERE rose amid loud cries of " divide." He said the question before the House was a very plain one— whether it. was fitting for the House to assent to a restriction on asiult labour which existed in no other country.—( Hear. ) He felt bound to record his opinion that it was most unwise, inexpedient, and highly injurious to embark in this course. The speech he had just heard only confirmed his former views, and he only regretted that her Majesty's Government had in the first instance introduced a principle so dangerous and inex pedient.—(Hear. ) He frankly admitted that he would not him self have brought torward the motion the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had submitted to the House ; but that Hon. and Learned Member having done so, he felt bound to give it his nio.t cordial sepAirt. The Government had firmly and creditably resisted thMproposition of a ten hours' clause, which he thougiit was fraught with the most imminent danger to the most important interests of this country. He had been unwilling to take any course which might increase their difficulty, but he must now say that he entirely agreed with the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, that the Government had introduced into legislation a most dangerous, vague, novel, and unprecedented principle.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman had endeavoured to make out a special case, but in that he had failed. If we interfered and restricted the hours with regard to adult females, there was no sufficient reason why we should not restrict the hours regarding males. Why, if this principle were carried out, they must ex clude male labour in factories altogether, and stop machinery. Was factory labour worse than the average of emoloyinents ? He thought not. So far from the factory labour being a worse species of employment, he thought it was vastly preferable to others, and there were many favonrable circumstances exclu sively connected with it. There was one fact which struck him very forcibly—the immense number of females employed in factory labour in the manufacturing districts, and the pre ference these female hail for such labour, so much so in act that females could hot be obtained for domestic employment. In fact, a woman servant could not be got there.--( Hear, hear.) He thought that was a practical answer to those who talked of the unwholesomeness, and the disagreeableness. and the danger of factory labour.—( Hear, hear.) A very clever pamphlet had lately come into his hands, written by Mr. Gudby, on factory labour in America, and that intelligent writer stated that in the factory of the Messrs. Lawrence in New York, there were 7uo persons employed, many of whom were females, and the hours of labour in this factory were from five A. Si. until seven r. at., allowing only the intermission of half an hour for meals. Now, there was the freest country in the world with females working from five in the morning until seven at night.—( Hear.) He very much feared that if they interfered much further with women's labour in fac tories they would drive them into other modes of employment, less wholesome, and less profitable. If interference could be at all sanctioned, it was in protecting little children—there protection might be necessary. He was very much struck by the evidence of one of the factory inspectors at Warrington. He said there were three kinds of employment there—fustian cutters, factory labourers, and pin-head makers. The last was an employment of a most revolting description, and he would not harrow the feelings of Hon. Members, by going into detail upon it. By the restrictions the Legislature had imposed upon the labours of women and children, they were driven into this pin-making and fustian cutting, and at these unwholesome and dangerous employments children con tinued until when ? —until they were of an age at which the law permitted them to go into factories.—( Hear, hear.) He mentioned that as showing how restriction, even when best intended, had done harm. H 3 was not one of those who said that they should not modify the principle of free labour ; but chat he did say was that, when widely departed from, it did more' harm than good.—( Hear, hear.) He had never given a vote with g rea t er con fid ence i n t h e j ust i ce of the prin ciple he was supporting, or with a firmer belief that he was supporting the best interests of the working classes, and the general good of the count r y a t l arge , t h an the vote he would that night give in support of the motion of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman.—(Cheers.) Captain RODS was against all manner of interference with labour, and thought the Government should nut have intro duced the Bill. hey had no right to dictate to the master manufacturers as to who they should employ, or how ling they would employ them Why, if they once sanctioned the principle, it would be extended so that merchants would have inspectors getting into their counting-houses, and bankers would have their accounts overhauled by these prying functionaries. There was another reason why he felt warmly excited upon this subject. It was this :—Having broken through a pi -Ip they would have to carry out their ne e sv ,y -fainhgey had new ledtheorres by a whole host of new functionaries. Already police in almost every town, county police, factory inspectors, and sub-inspectors, and new they would be compelled to have an enormous addition to the list of their salaried servants. Thus would their expenses increase as they limited the hours 'of labour and diminished the means of meeting those expenses. The consequence wauld be pressure beyond endurance, bank ruptcy, and the best of their capitalists flying with their money, their industry, and their skill, to other lands.—( Hear, hear.) In conclusion, he begged leave to say it was easy to be free with other people's money—( Hear, hear)—easy to make them -elves popular at other people's expense. —( Hear, hear.) He should, therefore, support the amendment of the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, and he only wished he had gone to the extent of moving that the Bill be proceeded with that day six months. Mr. S. CRAWFORD said it appeared to him that many Hon. Members were too apt to forget that the operatives of this country were not free agents, and that they were not in a eonlition to protect themselves.—( Hear, hear.) Such was the helpless condition both of the working man and the working woman, and, therefore, it was the duty of the Legislature to step in, the same as it had before stepped in, to shield those who were not able to protect themselves. The cause of the present state of things was to be found in this. that the labour market was overcharged. The present 8.11 before the House would materi lly diminish this ev,l; and it it were for this alone, he should hold it to be a good and useful measure. The House, also, in considering this question, ought to bear in mind that the poor man had lost his claim, his vested right, to suc (lour in the hour of trouble by the poor-law, and this without regaining his hold upon the land, so that he never would be in a condition to maintain his own rights or position, or to make a good fight with his em ployers. It was said that waives would fall if a Bill restricting the hours of labour passed that House. He ( Mr. Crawford) had always understood that wages were regulated by supply and demand. That had hi therto always been the argument there. He would ask then Of the manufacturers, it they would enter into an engagement that wages should hereafter continue as now if there was no in terference with the hours of labour, and if they would not con sent to do that, how could they assert that wages would fall ? Under such circumstances he did feel that both humanity and justice demanded that protection should be extended to the working classes. The Hon. and Learned Member (Mr. Roe buck) had said, if they really wished to serve the working classes—if they were sincere in their desire to alleviate their sufferings—let them be invested with power to come into that House and legislate for themselves. He (Mr. Crawford) heartily echoed that sentiment ; and he would add, that if it were carried out into practice, he had not a doubt on his own mind that the Bill of the Noble Lord (Ashley) would instan taneously pass. For these reasons he should support the Bill of that Noble Lot d, and oppose the motion of the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, and in doing this he was satisfied he should be acting in perfect accordance with the feelings and wishes of those whom he had the honour to represent in that House. Mr. ROSS (fielfast) said the delusion which had prevailed tt on this aubject amongst the work-people of the town he had the honour to represent, had now passed away. The masters had not lett the matter to their overseers, but had gone amongst their work-people in person, and talked the matter over fairly with them. He had explained'the whole mat ter to them, anti the consequence was, that whilst the men had declared that they should be glad to have more time to themselves, they had ex pressed their conviction that a limitation of hours must lead to a reduction of wages, and to this they were not prepared to submit. They wished things to remain as they were, and ho therefore felt it his duty to oppose the Bill of the Noble Lord the Member for Dorset shire. Lord HOWICK said he did not rise to discuss the ten or twelve-hour question ; in common fairness to the Noble Lord ( Ashley ) that should be deferred until the time arrived for taking his amendment into consideration. The Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had urged arguments which, though specious, he could easily show to he shallow. But he would refrain from doing so a t t h at moment, and confine him.elf strictly to the question befOre the House. He was anxious to know how the Right Hon. B aronet oppos i te would reconcile his opposition with the argument which he used in the House on the late debate, because in that debate the Right Hon. Baronet objected to the amendment of his Noble Friend as being against all principle. Now it had never occurred to him ( Lord Howick) that he would have taken the course he had done, namely, that of stating that his measure was a violation of principle as well as that of the Noble Lord. He must confess that he was unprepared for such a statement from a Minister of the Crown. Were they, he would ask, to be told this, and yet be advised to pass the measure,? Nos what was understood by a general principle? It was some . conclusion drawn from a multitude of facts, upon which was founded what was considered the wise mode of legislation. Now he (Lord Howick) was prepared to go further in defame of the Govern ment measure than the Right Hon. Baronet himself. He con sidered that it involved the violation of no sound principle of legislation. Now what was the principle which it was said had been violated? He would state it in language far better than his own, namely, in the word , of the author of the " Wealth of Nations :"—" The property of every man is in his own labour ; it is sacred and inviolate. The property of a poor man lies in the strength and dexterity of his hands; a nd if any one : interfere with it it is a violation of every just and right princiiole." He agreed that the principle was I . t just one, and 6ne that could not be perverted. Men could judge for themselves better than any Government, as to the employ. merit of their labour and capital, and the wisest thing to lead to the wealth of a nation was to give every individual full scope for his own exertions. The power of the production of a nation was developed by giving the most unlimited freedom to individual exertions.—( Hear, hear.) All restrictions im posed upon industry impaired its efficiency, and from this it was most properly argued that these restrictions, when the wealth of the nation was considered,vvere most. unjust.. If they deprived a man of turnin g his industry to the best account, they in flicted the greatest injury they could upon him. For instance, if they prevented a man from taking Dentate corn, of which he could get twenty quarters for the price he could get fifteen in this country, that inflicted a great injury upon him.— (Hear, hear.) To increase the wealth was not the only object ' of a Government.—( Hear, hear.) The morel and physical welfare of the great body of the people was the true object for which Governments were formed. Industry was most pro ductive when least trammelled by the law. And he wished the House would agree with that, or discuss the monopoly of corn, coffee, and other things.—( Hear, hear.) It was only two or three years ago that the House passed a Bill prohibiting the labour of women in mines, without any opposition.—(Cries of "No.") An Hon. Member cried " No;' he believed he stood alone in that opinion ; for his own part, he ( Lord Howick) never saw a Bill go through the House with more unanimous , assent. If that measure was right and well-founded there was an I end of the principle that had been said so much about. Now, if they were prepared to maintain that principle, if they were really prepared to carry it out, they must go this length—that if a man was inclined to sell himself for a slave, he should be allowed to do so.—( Hear, hear.) He was persuaded, if the law allowed it, such bargains would be made ; as he was per fectly convinced that in times of great distress many persons would be persuaded by capitalists to go to the colonies in no o'her character, and that would doubtless have been advan tageous to both patties; but to sow into society the elements of slavery, would far outweigh any good that could be obtained. If any principle had been violated on this subject it was first violated in 1833.—(Hear.) His Hon. Friend agreed to this, and that reduced the question to a small compass; because the question then was, whether the the measure of 1833 was useful or not ; it was well known it was so, and now the Right lion. Baronet had stated that the Government were prepared to go still farther, and put an end to the general principle. le this country the Government: had been conducted for a long series of years, much upon this Isystem. He had acted almost entirely upon the principle that it was safe to trust to the unaided and undirected efforts of in- ' dividuals. But looking at the actual state of society, he thought!" they should see the result of this mistaken policy on the part of the Government. There were around them alarming proofs that something more was required. He did not blame the ma nufacturieg classes particularly. There were equal evils among other classes. There was much also in the condition of the ;neat masses of the agricultural classes which required the active attention of the House. But among them the danger was , not so pressing ; for various reasons to which he need net then advert, the danger was not so pressing in these districts as among the manufacturing population. But when he looked at these immense masses of population, gathered—he might say heaped— together, without any adequate preparations for their physical or moral welfare, and the utter absence of any regu lations for securing them—when he learned the extent of the abuses which prevailed there, and of the wretchedness that existed, he thought it would have been well, had Parliament earlier interfered, even at the expense of something of the pro ductive power of the country—eeen at the expense of some sacrifice of its wealth—and have taken some measures to check the vast increase of population in particular districts, which were without a corresponding extension of machinery, or regulations for insuring decency, morality, or the blessings of education.— ( Hear, hear.) He had heard it stated by the most strenuous advocates of restriction, that it would have been well if Parlia ment had, at the commencement of the manufacturing system, prohibited women and children from working in manufactories at all. He did not share that opinion. On the contrary, he thought that the labour of women and children was an advantage, if its abuses were prevented. The Right Hon. Baronet had concurred in that opinion. It was absolutely ne cessaey that they should do something to restrain the competi tion of labour, which was driving females and young persons to an amount of work totally inconsistent with the due discharge of their domestic duties. He believedit was absolutely neces sary that they should so act. If they did not so prevent it, he feared that at no distant day some frightful catastrophe would occur, and he trusted they should no longer go on in a course of passive helplessness. The Government must take the lead in this matter. It was a duty incumbent on them ; it being the duty of Parliament to point out the necessity. The other evening, when the Right Hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Treasury argued against the motion of his Noble Friend, that it would be i mpossible to apply this principle in consequence of the immense number of trades in which labour would require interference, he confessed that so far from this being an objec tion it only confirmed him in the opinion that such interference was necessary. He therefore rejoiced that this discussion had taken place, as it brought forwar,t more prominently the abso lute necessity of looking into the condition of the people.— ( Cheers.) He trusted that this Bill was but the begitning of a wiser, a bolder, and more manly course of policy than they had hitherto pursued. It was a feeble and hesitating beginning, but still it was a commencement, be cause in whatever shape the House adopted the Bill, it recognised the principle that the House ought to impose a limitation of the number of hours during which females ought to labour. He therefore hailed the measure with satisfaction, not that he regarded it as a perfect measure, but because he approved of the principle of defining by law a limitation of labour. They could not expect that this measure would extirpate the evils arising from competition. They were too deeply rooted to be remedied by it. All that the House could do was to deal with the intensity of the struggle for employment. He believed that the true remedy for the evil would be to throw open the field of labour by breaking down the artificial restrictions and barriers which the present system imposed upon it. He should, therefore, entertaining these views, support the measure, whether in the shape it now stood, or in the shape which he still hoped it would ultimately assume. He believed that it would ultimately, if not imme diately, mitigate the evils which grew out of this intense com petition of labour, and hold out a hope that by degrees it would lead to what he thought would be the only complete and effec tual improvement, and that they would shortly be driven by it to the abolition of those monopolies which, he believed, were at the bottom of the whole question. Sir ROBERT PEEL said that it was necessary, in the first place, clearly to urelerstand what was meant by the word principles.—( Hear.) There certainly were prin ciples which ought not to be violated by any Legislature. They were founded on moral and s o c i a l f ee li ngs . They were the principles enjoined by religion. They were principles which the heart and conscience of every man told him were concurrent with the dictates of justice and humanity, and by these principles, as he understood them, legislation ought to be conducted. Th, re were certain other rules which were occasionally called principles, which were not founded either upon morality or religion, but which had a binding force upon legislation, because long experience and observance o facts told them they were rules concurrent with the dictates of prudence, and therefore ought to be the guides of a Legisla ture. He admitted that these principles, as the Noble Lord called them, but which he rather thought were general rules of legislation, were determined not by any innate and intuitive sense of what was right, but were determined by the observ acee of facts, and the conclusions of wisdom, drawn from long experience. When they said, therefore, that any enactment was conformable with certain principles, all they meant was this, that their general experience told them that such was the general rule to which their general legislation ought to conform ; and the question in these cases was always this— Will the practical good derived from any particular enactment, in a particular case, countervail the evils of that enactment? Now, he contended, that it was a good general rule fur them to observe, to leave persons to judge for themselves what was the most profitable mode of employing their labour. He thought there was another general rule re commended, not merely by religion, but by the strong dictates of prudence and experience, namely, that they should leave parents to judge what was the hest mode bath of educating and employi g their children. That was a rule which he ap tphreehaednvralenitlagtheeoyf m th u e st ri r c e b sp m ec a t n . se T n h d e tu y g m h i t g s h s t ori be to c s o u n h v o i o r l ic_ed thu o t f it was very wrong he should he allowed to waste his time without receiving at least the rudiments of science and learn ing. wh • not pass a law compelling the rich man to y did his should not educate beli that see ? legislationThey did mightn o not legislate, g nn i sl p a r t o e ; , , on the condition because t theyeoyfthe butrchild, espect tn e becausegrea great p rtheynt principles ples thoughtotlt liberty, t b y e , t andter tthrauts t f h 'r e tshtaeteedeeitrust to the parents parents •a t t h io o n w a o n rk d in c g ont e r la o s l i o o v s er wa th s agree ll d e tha ad mitted that the Legislature had not. sufficiently attended to their moral condition. He admitted that the accumulation eehil unsatisfactory. d. li e of wealth was not the only subject for the consideration of the Legi'lature. He admitted that the moral strength and power of the country did not depend entirely upon its wealth. Wn But ho he thought he must always ask himself this question. t y .u o l u es be ; e b i u n t l h e o gi , s v l o a u ti l o d n as n k o , t ference with the rights and liberties of the people be likely to h w ie o g ul i d s e th as e i i e r r conduce, not merely to their wealth, but to their social comfort i t t h it a r n rin to od l lay ndgowann and inter and happiness? He admitted that the social happiness and comforts of the people ought to be regarded. Looking at the manufacturing population, and seeing that they had no means of amusement, no means of relaxation—seeing that what once were villages were become immense towns, and were yet sub ject merely to the same discipline as they possessed when they were mere villages ; when ne saw spaces overcrowded, yet with no portion of that space appropriated to amusement and recreation ; that they had nothing to divert them from con stant labour except indulgence in sensual habits, he thought the Legislature might, with great advantage, apply the public wealth to the means of promoting the recreations and amuse ments of the people. That would be a perfectly legitimate in terference on the part of the Government. But that was a perfectly different question, from the present. —(llear.) For he must ask himself, should he improve their moral condition, should be to elevate them in the social scale, if, by any enactment, he controlled their own applica tion to their labour? He conceded to the Noble Lord, if he asked him whether he should prefer that a child should work ten hours instead of twelve, he would tell the Noble Lord at once that he should infinitely prefer his working ten. If the Noble Lord asked him whether he should wish to see mothers work ing eight hours a day instead of ten, and able to devote some portion of their time to attendance to domestic cares and the superintendence of their families, he would tell the Noble Lord that he perfectly admitted he should prefer the shorter period of labour, and the increased attendance on their domes tic duties, to their present state; but, after having made that admission, did it necessarily follow that it would be for the advantage of that woman to say to her that she should not work more than ten hours a day, and prescribe to her by en actment, the exact mode in which she should dispose of her labour ? It was true, they might apply the principle in the case of factories ; but the Noble Lord opposite rejoiced in this limited apply ation of the principle, because he saw that it must be much further extended. He (Sir Robert Peel) said the other night that there were count less trades and occupations imposing heavier burdens upon the labourer than the work in mills and factories imposed upon the factory labourers. If the Noble Lord's prin ciple were good, and if it could be effected, the Noble Lord ought to extend his interference to them also. He (Sir R. Peel), therefore, said; beware how they applied it too precipi tately to factory labour, because, if they did so, they must, at the same tim, take care not to give a permission to restrictions on other kinds of labour more onerous, and - more beyond their control. And how was he (Sir R. Peel) met? The Noble Lord wished them to go on to extend their principle beyond the twenty kinds of labour to which it might be applied, to the two hundred others to which it ought to be applied. The Noble I ord said the present measure only showed him the greater necessity for Parliament to act riot only in controlling factory labour, but all other kinds of labour. only (Sir R. Peel) said that was impossib'e. He said, that thotieh they might apply it to great buildings and large works which were comparatively under control, yet, to go into any house, to go to the workshop of any tailor, who worked his hundreds of men for 15 hours a day, to go to the room of the sempstress, who worked her three or four females for 16 hours a day—if they sought to establish such interference in individual cases, they were about to establish a system of individual inquisition and individual tyranny. Some good might be produced by effect me and n would ti t h e y would then a red uction of labour from sixteen hours to twelve; b ut i n Eng lish Government, Theyntn, the end th e y wou ld entirely change the character of the Eng iliegth t em e n have todepe indeed nd to entirely support upea the an army of domestic inspectors and sub-inspectors, and the only protection against such interference and tyranny, would be that it would become so odious to the whole mass of society, that it would be impossible. Then, when were they to make the exception, for on that, which was a general rule, they were bound not merely to consider the policy of limiting the labour to twelve hours, but whether they would by doing so really promote the social charcter and happiness of the people? He would admit that it might be a good thing to limit the hours of factory labour. But there were other trades, such as fustian cutting and pin-heading. If he was not to restrict them, then it e as perfectly open to him to consider whether the ad vantage gained by interference in particular instances, would ' countervail the disadvantage of giving a premium and en couragement to employments that were still more unhealthy. Let him in that case suppose they interfered with those em ployed to render their condition better, would they be adding to their comforts?—(Hear, hear.) His object and desire to promote ;heir happiness would be countervailed by his inter , terence, and therefore he was bound to consider whether a de parture from the general rule was one which wisdom and expe rience sanctioned ; and if it was proved to him that an excep tion to the rule would increase the moral comforts of the peo ple, he thought such exception would be justified ; but they must show him it would have this effect.--( Hear, hear.) Then with regard to the Ten Hours' Bill, he admitted that if he took a narrow and limited view of it, it would in certain times and in certain localities, have a good effect; but would they cora -1 pel other nations to follow their example, and if they did not, what would be the consequence?__( Hear, hear.) Why, was it possible to suppose that persons whose labour was restricted I would receive the wages of more lengthened employment ? I ( Hear, hear.) Was it not common sense, that if they re duced the time from ten to twelve hours, the wages would be reduced in proportion Suppose that by this measure they stimulated the manufactures of ether nations—of France and the United States; suppose they raised up great manufacturing establishments in those countries and by that means diminished the power of employing labour at home suppose such a mea sure could take away that which constituted the independence, the moral character of the labourers (Hear, hear. ) namely, the desire to earn a subsistence by honest and inde pendent labour ; suppose it drove them to the workhouse— ( Hear, hear)—suppose the means of employment failed, by being admitted into a third market, in consequence of others working longer, with a greater command of the raw material —( Hear, hear)—suppose they diminished the means of emplo3rnent and lessened the power of the individual to earn his subsistence by honest industry—did he then promote the moral character or social comforts of the people ?—( Loud cheers.) He had no doubt about their intentions.—( Hear, hear.) He admitted the general principle, that their object ought not to be to increase wealth, but to improve the moral character of the people ; but if he was able to show that, by their unwise legislation—by supplying the place of parental authority—(Cheers)—by forcing morality on the people by . law--( Loud cheers)—he only showed they were running the hazard of defeating their own objects, and of diminishing the physical comforts and lowering the moral character of the people. The Noble Lord opposite said the tithe was come for inter ference.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lcrd seemed to him to be more desirous of making a justification of his vote in favour of the ten hours' clause than of establishing the principle of interference as one which ought to govern the legislation of the country.—( Hear, hear.) He agreed with the Noble Lord in the opinion that it would be desirable to increase the volun tary amusements of the people, but when the Noble Lord said that the Government ought to interfere in all trades, it would be better if, instead of dealing in-generalities—(Hear, hear) —and coming down full of them, after reading Adam Smith— (Cheers and laughter)—he told them in what particular mode this was to be effected.—( Hear, hear.) Lord HOWICK—I would increase the sphere of employ ment.—( Cheers. ) Sir R. PEEL—But the Noble Lord said more. He said he rejoiced in the limitation of the hours of labour in factories, because he said it must then be; extended further. He said that the masters ought not to be allowed to make money out of the industry of the people, and he would therefate compel them to work their labourers less. The Noble Lord would introduce this into every employment—( Hear, hears—to pro mote, as he said, the morals of the people. The principles which the Noble Lord held would lead to a compulsory attendance at Church.—( Loud cheers.) The, doctrine of the Noble Lord woul i lead to an inquisition in every employment throughout the country.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) The principle that shey were not to content themselves with the accumulation 01 wealth, but were to watch over the morals of the people would justify any former proposition of former times—there was no law which would not be justified by such a principle.—(" Hear, hear," from Lord Howick.) Hear ! hear !—(Cheers.) He wanted to know how they were to carry out such a principle as that proposed into every trade.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) That which constitutes the morality of the people was their feeling of independence—( Hear, hear)—their sense of honour —( Hear, hear) —their hatred of oppression.—(Hear, hear.) ' This had grown up with perfect independence and freedom of action, anti if they attempted to substitute legislative enactments or that freedom of action, it would change the whole character of the people.—(Hear, hear.) There was one poi n t w i t h regar d r t t y. which tha t h thoughtewas thea case ey of might interfere with parenta l authoe education.—( H ear , h ear.) He thought they would be justified in interfering at least with ' the instruction of children employed in factories. He thought they were entitled to give the elements of instruction to children employed in factories, and that be cause the labour there was excess!ve , and they had the means of enforcing it in the case of those children. He doubted whether it would be wise to interfere in other cases, but where 'OO or 300 were brought together, and where they had an op portunity of giving them instruction, he thought they we r e justified in interfering.—( Hear , hear.) With regard to women he was quite aware that the law made a distinction in their case. 1 here were circumstances with regard to the female sex which rendered it desirable that their labour should'be re stricted. But still, so high was the principle of non:inter ference with labour that it was said they ought not to inter fere in this case, where the parties determined for themselves what should be the nature of their occupation. He con fessed that a departure from the great principle of non-inter ference he acquiesced in with great doubt and hesitation. They curtailed the hours of labour in cases of females to twelve hours ; but this arose from the effect of the law, which they passed, limiting the hours of labour of children. Men could not work alone in cotton factories. They were anxious to work, but it was impossible for them to do so long, as the em ployment of children was restricted ; they would work 15 hours a day, but could not do so, because the children were prevented from working. The consequence was, that women were employed as a sustitute for children ; brit that was in consequence of the law which they had made en the subject.— ( Hear, hear.) They imposed upon the master the necessity of employing females, and they gave inducements to the females to labour which they would not have if not for their enact ments. New that was an argument against their interference even with the labour of children.—( Hear, bear.) But he was inclined to think the reports of the Factory Inspectors showed that the evils of legislation had been less than usual in these cases: but he• thought the mischief of interfe rence should be limited to there cases. Few mills worked more than twelve hours, and all that Iris Right Hon. Friend proposed was to prevent women from working more than twelve hours. The master-manufacturers were not ad verse to that.—( Hear, hear.) The great body of them were in favour of it. The factory inspectors were in favour of it. It was an exception from what ought to be the general rule, and the advantages of it in certain cases would be great; but he thought it was an exception, and almost the only one, and it grew out of their former legislation. These were the reasons which induced him to give the proposition his full and cordial support. He regretted that the Noble Lord had anticipated the discussion, which would more properly arise when the Proposition of the Noble Lord came before the House ; taut believing that the principle of the Noble Lord, if carried out, would diminish the comforts of the people and impair their moral character, and thinking a nopinions tic , b w u a ts at d es a i n ro y u r s at o e f a not si n e delaying e r e repi that it was due to the r espect an d i ntegr i ty o f t h e N o bl e Lord, and to the just wei g h t w hi ch generally attached to hi s y in to g t i vi e ng a , rg p u e na rh e a n p t s s which he brought forwa r d .--( Cheers.) b , Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Right Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down reminded him of a speech made by Mr. Wyndham, who talked for some time on one side of a question and then on the other, and at last turned round to a friend who sat behind him and asked h wh' le way he should vote.—(Much laughter and cheers.) lie thought that some of the arguments used by the Hight Hon. Gentleman against his Noble Friend (Lord Howick) would be spared if he kept before his mind the vote which he was prepared to give.—( ear, ea . could not see how the tight Hon. Gentleman could speak as he did in favour of non-interference with labour, and still vote for a new principle which interfered with labour, and even adult labour. If the Right Hon. Gentleman meant to vote not only with the Hon. and Learned Member for Beth, but, if, having succeeded by a majority, he gave notice of a motion to repeal the Act of 1833, then he could understand all the former part of the speech. The arguments of the Right Hon. Gen tleman were very eloquent for the purpose of shaking the Act of le3l, but he (Lord J. Russell) did not agree in the conclu sion of the Right Hon. Gentleman. But he did not see how the Right Hon. Gentleman could reproach his Noble Friend, because he thought it was time to interfere with labour, and even parental care, when he himself interfered with the labour and industry of the country. The Right Hon. Gentleman asked his Noble Friend whether he was in favour of a law which would compel attendance at church. He (Lord Jobn Russell) thought he knew of an interference proposed, not by his Noble Friend, brit by the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, in the course of last year —an inteference which could not be carried into effect without violating liberty of conscience, and which would place the education of the whole of the factory children under the Bishops, and clergy of the Established Church.—( Hear, hear.) The : Right Hon. Gentleman said if they interfered in this case, how could they carry their in terference into those tradela, with regard to which the labour was more irksome and the confinement more unwhole some than it was with regard to factory labour. In the first place, he thought there was nothing to show that the Act of 1833 had been mischievous, he 'thought it was beneficial, and till lately it was thought to be of advantage to the working_ classes and their children. He had seen two arguments against the proposition of his Noble Friend (Lord Ashley). The first was that they ought not to interfere with labour at all. The second was, that their interference had been so very useful that everything they wished had been effected. With regard to those employments to which the Right Hon. Gentleman alluded, the " fustian-cutters," and " pin - makers," and with whi c h they had not interfered by A c ts of Parliament, the hours of labour were more protracted ; while in those cases which they had regulated by Act of Parliament, they found, con currently with sufficient wages, wholesome employment. Why that was not an instance to quote as conclusive against interference by Act of Parliament. That was not an instance to show how injurious all interference was. But in the next place, 'ne said he limited interference in this case —as all legislation was limited—by the principle that you might interfere where more good than harm was effected by such interference.-- ( Hear hear.) He thought that the Secretary of State had taken that principle that night. The Right Hon. Gentleman had said that they naturally interfered in factories —that they were large establishments, where the inspectors could enter and make their investigations without any exercise of tyranny —without any interference with the professional business ; whereas there were some employments in which it was im possible to interfere without inconvenience and without great tyranny, and, in short, without much greater evil than good being produced. What was their principle of criminal law? They transported a person, or sent him to prison, because he had stolen a loaf. Why, there were persons who committed acts of ingratitude, and who brought their benefactors to an untimely grave by their persecutions and ill conduct, and who were far more guilty--far more criminal—than the poor man who stele the loaf. Yet they did not proceed by law to punish him as they did the other; and why so? Bec ause if they attempted such interference, and went through all the transac tions of private life—though they would find more guilt, more real criminality—their interference would do more harm than good ; and, because, in the other case they could easily point their finger to the man who stole the loaf. There was an overt act. Whereas, if they went into the various relations of private life, though they would find more criminality of con duct, yet their interference would destroy the peace and har mony of social life, and be productive of greater evil.—( Hear, hear.) The same principle they should apply in this case. Whenever he thought he could see that he would do good then he would interfere; but when he did not see that good would result from interference then he would stop.—(Hear, hear.) The same rules which were adopted with regard to criminal legislation, he would apply to the present case. In the year 1833, the first question was, whether they would interfere at all. Looking back to that period, he thought he had then said that Govern ment were quite agreed as to the appointment of a Commission to investigate the subject. That Commission reported certain propositions, which, in the Bill which was then passed on the subject, were carried much farther. Among other things, they advised the Government not to beeleterred by the saying that the thing was impracticable and impossible, because it was the custom to apply' those words to whatever was considered in convenient to certain parties, and contrary to usual custom. Now, chat was the statement col that Commission with regard to the employment of young children ?—what faults did they observe ? First, the common, grneral deterioration of the physical cerestitution, and the product ion of general disease ; secondly, the exclusion from the means of obtaining education, moral and religious, or the means of enablieg them to profit by elementary instruction, by reason of the exces,ire fatieue they underwent in the factories during the day. These were t wo reasons which appeared to him (Lord J. Russell) sufficient for iiiterference. They were not reasons founded upon an economical question of the pro duction of wealth—but one was founded on the physical evils produced to the persons employed; the other upon the priva tion of the means of education and moral and religious in struction. He (Lord J. Russel) said both those questions— the physical deterioration of the people of this country, and their moral and religious education—were questions in which the State had an interest, and the State having seen that it could interfere in that instance with advantage, a law had been proposed en the subject by the then Government, and that law had been carried—he forgot by what divisions--but at all events i by the general assent of Parliament. He believed that that law had produced good and useful effects in its operation ; and when 1. e saw such principles accompanied by such results in experience and in practice he did refuse his consent to the general principle of non-interference, to the principle that they were never to intermedcile, and that they were only doing harm by attempting to control the natural authority of parents over their children, and the freedom of adults in the disposal of their labour. Ile said that when a sound principle showed in practice good results, he would rather proceed than be de terred from proceeding. With regard to the question of the in troduction of adult labour, he owned he did not think the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State far the Home Department had that night made a greater advance in showing seasons for the introduction of that part of the Bill than he had 1 on a former occasion. lie (Lord John Russell) had already said that he had certainly heard as much as made him believe more strongly on that point, that the best course would have l been to have introduced a Bill which did not apply to the j labour of persons who were more than eighteen or twenty-one ' years of age. He thought. that twenty-one, as in the Bill of heel, would have been the better limit, and with that proposal there should be the proposal of the Noble Lord the Member for Dorsetshire, to limit the time of labour, first to eleven hours, end next to ten. That. would have been a better principle than that. of immediate interference with adult labour. Let them recollect 1 there were two principles in the present Bill—one was i n t er . I ferencewith the control of a parent over his child ; th e o th er l was interference with the rule which gave to every' adult per son the free power to choose his own occupation, to employ his labour in the manner he chose. Now, he thought it would ' have been better to have only interfered with one of those • principles, arid to have left the other as beyond the scope of legislation. As the evil they proposed to remedy was hardly worth interference by legislation, seeing that the Right Hon. Gentleman stated that that evil •hal been produced by the le gislation regardinie ' children, that in the mill s w h ere th e y em ploy young peoplebut twelve hours, they would not be worked beyond that time, and that that evil might be remedied by this Bill, he (Lord John Russell) owned that he thought the House, having already assented to the principle, there would be a far greater evil in now refusing its assent to the proposition of the Noble Lord, than in rejecting the proposal of the Hon. and Learned Member " for Bath ; therefore, he (Lord John Russell) agreed with the Government to-night. At the same time, with regard to the proposal of the Hun. and Learned Member for Bath, he must say the Hun. and Learned Gentleman had not gone very deeply into the argument. He had ranked all those who had voted for the proposition of the Noble Lord the Member for Dersetshire in one class—those belonging to the other side of the House, who, he said, were much annoyed by the Hon. Member for Stockport going into the agricultural districts, and these on that side of the House who were much dis appointed at finding themselves in the cold regions of Opposi- I tion, and would gladly seize an opportunity to embarrass elinisters.—( Hear, hear.) Why, the Hon. and Learned Member had better not have interfered in that matter. If he could give a good season for showing that that vote was wrong, or that adult labour should be free, let him use his arguments to convince them of that ; but that he should set himself up as containing the whole of the wisdom of the House, and as supposing that there ceuld he no purity of motive except in his possession—( Hear, hear)—he ( Lord John Russell) really thought, without taking any pains to vindicate himself or those who voted with him, that it was taking a station which he believed the Hon. and Learned. Gentleman was hardly entitled to.—( Hear, and cheers.) -They might have been exceedingly-mistaken in voting for theltirohle Lord's proposition. At the same time what he had heard since had not induced him to think they were so , far wrong; and particularly as it was only a ITnoights ago that he had beard th e H on . Mem ber for Sto ': et e(e.clargpat the time aapresent w hich was given to labour i it4 l .: tkil,noreaeorsebleo:-.( Hear, hear.) Why, t surely if th%.4o4.Satte;its - Senaploybil Was unreasonable, there was nothinkleefar-wrong or irrational in his Noble Friend at tempting to 'alter that unreasonable time? Then, it was skid, and he (Lord J. Russell) had heard manufacturers de clare the same thing, that it was their opinion that if the corn-laws were totally repealed, the consequence would be that labouring persons would declare they would not remain in factories longer than for ten hours a day. Why, if that was the case, those ten hours' labour would only produce the same quantity of manufactured articles Which would be pro duced if the Noble Lord's proposal took place. And they stated that increased demand for the articles, and consequent enhancement of the price, would take place under that state of things. Without going the whole length of that proposi tion, lie (Lord J. Russell) took it, that a great altera tion of the corn-laws, by which a larger quantity of food would be introduced into the country, would promote the welfare of the manufacturing classes, as well as the general prosperity of the country. That was his opinion, but he owned he thought that if they were entirely to take away the corn-laws, it was doubtful that those conse quences would follow, and that there would be an immediate reduction to ten hours' labour. He much doubted whether the anxiety of parents to send their children to obtain more wages would not in many cases lead to a greater employment than now took place. At all events, having those opinions, he did not think that his Noble Friend was making a proposi tion extremely injurious to the country in proposing a 'fen Hours' Bill. He (Lord John Russell) had not meant to have entered upon this subject at all. The question, as stated by his Noble Friend, was rather an abstract question, and the reply of the Right Hon. Gentleman was rather to the abstract • parts of that question. But at the same time it was extremely difficult to enter upon that abstract discussion, without alluding to those practical propositions which had been made to the House. He should content himself, then, with declaring that he could not vote with the lion. Gentleman (Mr. Roebuck), and that he thought the best law that could he made upon this subject would lee one confining interference to persons under twenty-one years of age working ten hours a day. Mr. WARD thought he was perfectly right in giving notice of his intention to divide on the 32d clause, which contemplaeed the interference he so much dreaded. He agreed with the Noble Lord the Member for London, that when he interfered he should like to see his way. lie (Mr. Ward) would like very much to see his way, but that was a thing he could not do if he followed the Noble Lord, nor did he believe that the Noble Lord himself clearly saw his way.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh. ) He (Mr. Ward) could not see any good result that woeld fol low from those new principles laid down by his Hon. Friend Dear him. Although they might make out a case to a certain extent fur protecting children—and in granting that he granted a great deal—yet he was not sure that in the Act of 1533 it was all plain sailing. They had ascertained, from the reports of the inspectors, that the first operation of that Act was to drive 10,000 children from good to worse employment—from the factories to the coal mines—and many of the statements on which that mea sure was rounded had been since ascertained to be exaggerated. He could not but feel surprised that the Noble Lord, alai those who supported him, so loquacious out of the House, were so i silent in it, after the speech of the Hun. and Learned Member for Bath.—( Hear, hear.) Some of the charges of the Noble Lord had recently been proved to be utterly unfounded. He held in his hand a paper containing the results of inquiries as to no less than 412. of the principal factories in this country. I The Noble Lord had stated that, out of 61,000 females who were employed in factories, there were only 10,000 married women whose husbands worked in some factories. Now out of 10,C•00 married females included in this statement, there were 5,000 husbands who were employed in the same factories as their wives; 3,400 more were employed in other branches of manufacture all connected with factories, and all were contributing their share towards the support of their families. Well, then, the Noble Lord talked of ill health arising from constant standing, privation of pure air, and other causes ; but it might be shown that this argument would apply equally to other branches of industry. He spoke of accidents. Why this paper proved that the accidents arising out of factory labour were beyond all comparison fewer than those which oc curred in any other employment. He ' said that the married women were preferred, not because the labour was more suited to them, or because they would work for the least wages, but because they were more attentive and docile than unmarried females, and thus, he said, the virtues of the female were made the means of her injury. The mistake was, that the Noble Lord said they hail a choice. It was his peculiar error that the matter depended on that House.--( Hear, hear.) In no branch of industry was female labour excluded. In agricultural pur suits, and in every other branch of industry, women were com pelled to do something for the support of their families; and he declared it to be his conscientious belief, that the women and young people employed in factories were infinitely better off, as regarded wages, and morals, and comfort, than almost any other class.—( Hear, hear.) A gentleman who had recently visited the factory of Mr. Ashton, expressed his astonishment on leaving it, that the Noble Lord should wish to interfere with such a system He had never listened to a speech with more curiosity than he had felt on hearing that of the Noble Lord, the Member for Sunderland. He had thought that if the matter could be made intelligible, it would be made so by that Noble Lord. • But he seemed to him only to have made darker that which was dark enough before.—(Hear, hear.) He could • not possibly comprehend the grounds on which they were to interfere with the present system. The working men had been asked if they would chance it. The heads of families were too prudent he hoped to do that. No man could answer for the result of adopting the Noble Lord's proposal. That education and religion had not been properly attended to, and that efforts should be made to secure a better system of drainage and police, they all admitted; but the only question was, whether it was certain that they would improve the condition of the working swan by restricting the hours of labour. It seemed to him that this was the most singular, cruel, and unwise experiment, which had ever sug gested itself to the minds of practical legislators.—(Hear, hear.) Even documents on which the Noble Lord had relied did not bear out his views. The Noble Lord had quoted, on several occasions, the evidence of Mr. Horner. The Hen. Member then quoted a reprint of Mr. Horner, who said that he had visited a great number of factories within the last four years, and he considered it his duty to say that the statements of oppression and ill health were greatly exagge rator!. The mass of persons employed in factories were well clothed, well fed, and healthy. He had voted with the Noble Lord last year against the employment of women in mines, because that was a question of morality ; bu t because h i e thought the interference in this case would be attended with in jurious results, he should give it his decided opposition. Lord ASHLEY said that an Hon. Member had made so direct a challenge to him that it was indispensably necessary for him to take up the time of the House with some observa tions. lie would not now travel into the part of the question which he lied already discussed upon the 15th of last month. He hoped that in the few observations which he had to make, he should trot be provoked to imitate the language which had been used towards him. He thought the question was too im portant, tent t o o mighty, to be interrupted by poor and miserable personalities. In referring to the authorities produced before the Committee of the House of Commons in 1837, he found it stated. without contradiction, that the employment of women 1 in the factories was detri mental to health, and often destruct ive ' of morals. ( The Noble Lord then read extracts from the evi dence taken before the Committee, but in a tone so rapid and indistinct that it was impossible to follow him. ) He had had communications with Mr. Henry Ashworth, and the reply of that gentleman was not of a nature to satisfy hum that his state ments were erroneous. In a further correspondence with Mr. I Ashworth, he stated that, upon all inquiries, he had found that his former statements were borne out. Upon the most careful examination that he could give t o a ll t h e statements, written and verbal, which had been ma d e to hi m, Ire had ar: rived at the conclusion that his representations in the House j had been understated rather than overstated. The statement which he had . made respecting the employment o f women Was fully borne out by all the evidence, an d it 1 was clearly proved that the proportion of women i and young persons employed had been greatly ir.- creased since the year 1839. With respect to the difference of age of those employed in the manufacturing and , those employed in the agricultural districts, it should be recol lected that' only 8 per cent. of the working people in the ma nufacturirg distrie:s were above 40 years of age, whilst of those employed in the agricultural districts there were 50 ' per cent. above it. To be sure, if the statements made by the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bright) were correct, this calculation was not correct, yet he had taken the greatest pains to inform himself on the subject. His (Lord Ashley's) statements re ferred to the spinning and manufacturing of cotton, and in sup port of what he advaneed he would refer to Inspector Horner 's reports. lie craved the indulgence of the House whilst he re butted certain charges that had gone forth, throwing aspersions of a very grave nature on his character. He held in his hand a letter, signed by Mr. Ashworth, on behalf of himself and 200 other manufacturers, that put forward statements which re flected upon his (Lord Ashley's) veracity, and which he felt bound to answer. The letter of Mr. Ashworth stated that the ; only witness that Lord Ashley had quoted by name in his speech on the recent debate, was thoroughly discrc dited and was finally abandoned even by the Noble Lord himself. Mr. Ashworth said he could not say how many of " the facts," which the Noble Lord had stated were furnished by Dodd. Why, he (Lord Ashley) had during his speech, in the most distinct manner disavowed and disclaimed having re ceived any of the information he stated to the House from Dodd, and so far from having mentioned his name, he never did ; so during the whole debate. Again to far from not quoting any witness by name, but William Dodd, he had quoted 29 se parate and distinct witnesses, and mentioned their names ; as also the evidence of several factory inspect ers.—(Hear, hear.) It was really unpardonable that a document should be pub lished in all the newspapers, containing such gross aspersions on his veracity, and such unfounded mis-statements. —( Hear.) I This letter, signed by Mr. Ashworth, on behalf of those 200 mill-owners, further set forth, that be (Lord Ashley) had, in his speech, quoted only those portion of M. Villerme's pamphlet which were for his own argument, and exempted those por tions of it which were against. his position. He (Lord Ashler ) t had quoted that passage in the pamphlet which stated " that ' the sacrifice of human life, consequent upon factory l a bou r , was hardly mitre deplorable than the developement of scrofula, which took place in the masses of our working people engaged in manufactures." Mr. Ashworth writes, that " the Noble Lord had not quoted that part of Al.Villerree's pamphlet which referred to the e•tablishing of a maximum of labour as unwise and inexpedient." After much search, lie (Lord Ashley) had certainly found such a passage. But he would read for the House the sentences with which M. Villernee concluded his pamphlet : • if there had been one argument necessary for putting, manufactures under the restriction of law, and deter ; mining the maximum of daily toil, surely it shauld be applied in the case of children—those creatures who were sacrificed in the laborious employments of factory labour. Twelve years ago a measure on this subject had been propounded and rejected, but the principle of restriction had made great progress since that time. In many foreign countries the restrictive principle had been adopted and pursued. The negro had been emancipated, and the public mind had taken up the question, and, sooner or later, the result would be favourable to the cause of humanity, but that result they should hasten by all possible means." Such were the words of M. Villerme ; and yet he (Lord Ashley) had been so grossly aspersed for quoting the opinions of this writer; and the country were told by this Ale. Ashworth, and the 200 master-manufacturers, that no confidence could be placed in Lord Ashley's statements, who hail so perverted N. Villermes meaning. Ile had been charged with gross exaggeration, and with painting the evils of the factory system in too strong colours. Now he would read to the licuse a letter trom Mr. William Kenworthy, the member of an eminent commercial firm, and he would remind the House that Mr. Kenworthy's testimony, as regarded cotton-spinning, was the very best that could be had, for Mr. Kenworthy had been an operative himself, and passed through all the various degrees of factory labour until he became the principal of a great firm. He said that "the occupations of the factory labourers cried loudly for relief and relaxation, and for a re stricted term of labour. Let the British nation be degraded no longer by tolerating such a eystem—a system exercising a most baneful influence over the unhappy people employed in it. Let them relieve those weakly arid emaciated creatures, and curtail the time of their remaining in an atmosphere in which they breathed nothing but noxious gases, and detri mental, in a high degree, to human life. Thousands had their miseries protracted under the delusive belief that danger would come to their home manufactures from foreign com ' petition. He entreated all parties to go into the considera tion of this subject, and to snatch from the vortex of disease, and immorality, and crime the manufacturing popula tion who were involved in it." Why, in the speech whish he ( Lord Ashley) had made, he had said nothing so strong, nothing so conclusive and striking, as those expressions of Mr. Kenworthy, As he was dew put upon his defence he would, in addition to the authorities he had already quoted, refer the Hon. Member for Sheffield (Mr. Ward) to the language of the Rev. Mr. Hearn, the Roman Catholic priest of Manchester. It would hardly be supposed that that reverend gentleman had any sympathy with hire (Lord Ashley.) That reverend gen tleman, in a publication then in his (Lord Ashley's) hand, said, "'This was not the first time he had addressed the public on the subject of factory labour. W hen he reflected on the respon sible situation he held in that town, and that a whole mass of his people were engaged in that labour, he felt he should be warring against justice and against his own conscience if he did not stand forward to claim protec tion for the factory children and women." Now had lie (Lord Ashley) stated anything beyond that ?—(" Hear, hear,' loud cries of "Divide, divide," and confusion.) 'He was stating facts—quoting facts—and he only did so on compulsion—he only did so because the statements he had made had that night been questioned.—( Hear, hear.) He would now go to Halifax, where Air. Robert Sutton, as he understood a most highly respectable man, had publicly stated, " that the factory people could not stand such excessive and protracted labour, which incapacitated all of them for the proper duties of life, and more especially the women for those domestic duties which nature had specially awarded to them." Had he (Lord Ashley) stated anything bat this ?—( Hear, hear, and confusion.) He was ae are he was trespassing on the patience of the House, but when he commenced his address he stated that he had not in tended to have said one word upon the subject that night, but as he had been called to account so sharply for his conduct and his statements, he had felt called upon, in duty to the cause and to himself, to reply to the charges whlch had been made. —(Loud cries et " hear, hear." Amidst great con fusion the Noble Lord then le ad several extracts from speeches made by Mr. Samuel Smith, an eminent surgeon of the north, at a meeting (as we thought) at Chorley, and by Mr. John Moore, at a meeting at Bolton.) The latter gentleman, who had been a medical practitioner in Bolton for upwards of forty years, had declared publicly that the race was rapidly degenerating, and that unless something were done the most serious evils to society would take place.—(Great con fusion, and loud cries of " Divide.") lie (Lord Ashley) had never said more than this. As, however, the House was so impatient, many as were the authorities be had it in his power still to produce, he would not detain them. What lie had stated had been forced from him.—( Hear, hear.) Ile never intended to have said a word that night, but for the attack made upon him, and in addressing the House at all he had been forced into it in self-defence, to show that all he had stated in his speech upon a former occasion had been borne out by facts and statements that nothing could impugn.—( Hear, hear, and loud cries of " Divide.") Mr. C. WOOD rose with Mr. Bright, Mr. Ainsworth, and others, amidst a complete shout of "Divide, divide," " Oh, oh," and other discordant cries. The other Hon. Gentlemen succumbed to the storm, but Mr. Wood persevered, and after a struggle with the House, was permitted to address them, though amidst continued interruptions. The Hon. Gentleman was understood to say that no one in that House was more sa tisfied than he was that the Noble Lord who had just sat down was incapable of wilfully making any mis-statement in that House, or anywhere else. The statements, too, which he had matte, and which, no doubt, he thought himself compelled to Make, had nothing to do with the question before the House. —( Hear, hear.) The question of the Hon. and Learned diem • bee for Bath was simply this, whether they should or should not interfere with the labour of young people. For his (Mr. Wood's) part, he never in his life came to a conclusion more un hesitatingly than he did this night, that it was his duty to vote with the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath; for he knew nothing more unsafe or unwise than to interfere with that discretion which all persons had a right to exercise as regarded their own labour.—( Hear and confusion.) In his opinion the House ought not to interfere upon the subject at all ; but if it would do so, then the next best thing he and others could do was to persuade the House to interfere as little as possible. He could not acquit the Government of departing from a general rule and principle for the first time. 'They were now, for the first time, about setting the example of violating an other principle. The Government admitted that they had abandoned principles, ar.d now there was nothing to guide them but the caprice of Hon. Members, and where this was to stop it was impossible to tell. The First Lord of the Trea sury, and the Secretary of State for the Home Department, had stated that it was a necessary consequence of the Bill of 1833, which regulated the labour of children in factories. Ac cording to his (Mr. Wood's) opinion, that measure was founded upon a different principle, namely, protecting those who could not protect themselves.—(Cries of " Divide, divide.") That measure was not to restrict the labour of children alone, but factory labour altogether. If it was the object of the Government to restrict the hours of labour of all persons in factories to ten, eleven, or twelve hours, let that be stated ' --let there be no shuffling, but let the Government bring in a Bill on the subject.—(Cries of " Divide, divide.") lie be lieved it was most injurious to the workman himself toin terfere with his labour, and he for one was unwilling to do by legislations for any man what he could do for himself. He knew that a public meeting of his constituents had been held on this question, and that the opinion of that meeting was in favour of a Ten Hours' Bill. But that did not at all affect what he had stated in that House, that up to the time of hold ing that meeting no representation on the subject had reached him. The inference he drew from this was, that they did riot take much interest in the matter. He did not believe that the measure would improve either the morals, the religion, or the education of the working, classes, but any other measure that would better their condition he should be ready to support. Mr. P. AINSWORTH rose to complain of a matter some what personal to himself. At an early part of the evening, the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had accused him o_cin t. - 1 in tolerance, and this charge he denied was well foundeeeeNcleidl. respect to the Bill, he thought a limitation might n be effected. The tleartihbeeenaleadayndi htraoddeuffeeeedteidn masters,ll respect to the great good for the working classes; tally neglected. the itci cleanliness i also nes d a o n n d e NlTl.ellnCtihlaftoior nthoef e districts, which heretofore had been e t d h n e ca m n i e l mills this even e th f i t s he hadeh children the n in case it had also done m uch for the education of the children in thes leg e ielation ; and when the propo sition be prepared to support Government would proceed whiselsyhaondlodjudiciously, he thought m u ch g e o n o pa d e m b i e g f h e r t e b t e h e done ll e House, the plan which th e Houser ten hours hadoalrr: and w already sanctioned, hours, ct v i o n e d b the rejectingp both the proposal f of lan Afiixri.ngnetl)eEverintihcouKrs the s a a s id h e limit ha d of nleavberroir. made any charge o f ar ticular nature against the lion. M ember, of intoleran ce . Wile speaking, he heard a running commentary behind him, and he made a general observation that those who had changed very often themselves were often the most intolerant to change in others. EN and Mr. C. BULLER rose to ge th er , b ut t h e oitFtArh. e Eun vit i l e ggi b v y en re " f • e a r y ;ing, to a statement of N t latter Hon. FE L D Gentleman E N co having commenced the Hon. Member for Halif ax (M r. C. Wooe ' l) that the workers of that place were not in favour of a Ten Hours' Bill. Ile went I amongst the constituency of the H on that fact. Ile att en d e d a meeting the . G re, and,en t t a t n e t r r o ea a d s i c n e g r t aithen the words of the lion. Gentleman he put this question to them—" Has Air. Wood fairly re resented you when he made this statement? "— cr i es of " No, p no."—(Laughter.) Then he put trtt tobe question to them—" Do you wish a T en H ours ' passed without delay? "—cries of " Yes, yes."—( Loud laughter.) He then put a third question to them — (Laughter)—" Are you willing to run the risk of wages being reduced if a Ten Hours' Factory Bill be passed?"—loud cries of " We are, we are." Ile then put a fourth question to them.—( A laugh.) " Do you autho rise me to state this in the House of Commons ?"—cries of " Yes, yes." lie knew the lion. Member had as kind a feeling towards the people of Halifax as anybody, but he did not repre sent their feelings fairly on this subject; and if he went to Ha lifax—( Laughter)—to the Odd Fellows Hall—(Loud laughter) —he was convinced he would come from the meeting as well Persuaded as he (Mr. Fielden) was, that they had not properly represented their feelings on this subject. He had no such fears as those entertained by the Hon. and Learned Member for andrßath, with regard to legislation on this, subject. The ln Learned Gentleman said that the 'factory labourers had the power to protect themselves, and had thrown out hints that if they held out for a short time they would accomplish their ob ject. Did they wish, then, to have a. turn-out in Yorkshire g y we H ae;,l_l,wa:rrrte,e.l:ariadt protect fr e om eralageoierrrnattia'n'yesi):sei, principle i l aa l o e 'e oar a s u t rgrt hs e : la. l p l etoi tinttfg3osw. against believed. 4 , c s rt i a e t t ti e ; l o b e i gn e u i p t' s s o i e th r t i io a i e e orar i e c s ivr in ' t c s g, : t c : no ec lo t i h f i tl : rhd ri t n a : e h yt g a y h e n te e i : de o i L i, l a u do s e frt g : g : ch ir i td s h h t a o t anaa t oa t succeed. u orr. ii.rttdnethb(i interfere. a T fr s e e h? eh r a hadeeeato.): ne o he practice.— inspectors ehara d, aht onerser recommended timemm l a , e nded it, o ( T f i n i e e y ar s ' htt ledarr maintenanceo) t uponf o rge tt Theirthat, he ~t w n hnde.They claim deprived of that right. 'I he Hon. and Learned Gentleman assisted in depriving them of it. That was protection from lawyers.—(Laughter.) No humane man in the country would agree with the lion. and Learned Gentleman. He believed the Hon. and Learned Gentleman knew nothing of the effect of shortening the duration of the hours of labour. —(Laughter. ) (The Hon. Gentleman went on making allusions to the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, who sat exactly under him, which excited considerable merriment in the House, but from the low tone of voice in which the Hon. Member spoke, and the laughter of the House, their import did not reach us.) H e denied that a curtailment of the hours of labour would have the effect ascribed to it. He appealed to the Hon. Member for Sheffield on the point. The period of the labour of some of j the constituents of the Hon. Member was reduced to i hours a day, and they got more wages for those hours labour than when they worked twelve hours. He thought it would be 1 hard to convince the people of Sheffield that they were not b a y nd se a u la r u al gh lio ) n. He say that e fi l t l ed which b) t h hbe s.—( en a a advanced , this House was contrary to the interests of the working classes. Ile thought that if the hours of labour were restricted to ten hours instead of twelve, it would tend much to improve the moral and physical condition of the people. Mr. PHILIPS could say that he seldom had heard a speech more strongly marked by an anti-national spirit than that of the Hon. Member for Oldham. With respect to the town of Sheffield, he (%ir. M. Philips) could assure the House that the system of combination lately adopted in that town, by which the duration of the hour of labour was diminished, had driven many of the principal manufacturers out of the country. He himself tad been engaged in the foreign trade of this country, and he understood that there was no town throughout England had suffered more than Sheffield from those cif cuna;- stances. If in extending the operation of these prin ciples to other towns, they thought they would secure higher wages, he could assure them they were much mistaken ; for the result would be, that they would be planing the interests of those trades in jeopardy. He had the interests of the ope ratives of the country too much at heart to adopt this mea sure, and he should, consequently, vote for the motion of his Hon. and Learned Friend tee Member for Bath, for he cer tainly could not reconcile with his conscience the justice of in terfering, in the slightest degree, with the application of adult labour. The Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department had stated that many of his (Mr. P.'s) constituents were in favour of a limitation of labour, or at least regarded the matter with indifference. Now, the fact was, that property had been so considerably diminished in many parts of Lancashire, that many of the manufacturers looked with apparent indifference upon the whole matter. In the tosen of Manchester there was not more than twelve mills which worked more than twelve hours. He, for one. was most anxious that the artisan should not lee obliged to work more than ten hours ; but he thought, in the the present state of the country, this could not be done. It they worked more than twelve hours a day, those doing so of course received the higher wages for it. The Hon. Member sat down amidst much confusion and cries of "divide, divides" Mr. PARKER thought, after what had been stated con cerning Sheffield, they must feel convinced of the propriety of: allowing the labourers to be perfectly free agents in this matter. He was also very much opposed to any inter ference with employment of adult labour, because he th :ueht any such interference would be fraught with the utmost danger, and have a decided tendency to destroy the prosperity of the country. He felt convinced, therefore, that the only plan for this House to adopt was a plain and gible proposition ; and instead of talking of ten or twelve hours, declare that they would not interfere with adult labour, but that all labourers who had arrived at the years of discretion, should exercise their labour as they liked; and that the House had no right to interfere with their free-will in the slightest degree. With respect to infant labour, he considered it to be a different question, but this was a question upon which he should not then speak, but leave it to others better acquainted with the matter.—The House then divided— For going into Committee For Mr. Roebuck's amendment ... 76 Majority against the amendment ...-206 The nouse then went into Committee pro . forma on the Bill, and immediately resumed, Monday next being the day fixed for proceeding with the Committee. ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS BILL. On the motion of Dr. NICHOLL for going into Commit- Lee on this Bill, Mr. P. BORTHWICK objected to tho motion, on account of the lateness of the hour. After a short conversation strangers were ordered to with draw, but no division t oo k pl ace . The Bill then went through Committee pro forma. POOR LAWS (IRELAND. Sir DEN HAM,NORREYS moved for the appointment of a Committee on Poor-laws (Ireland), to consist of Sir Denham Norreys, Lord Eliot, Mr. Moro O'Ferrall, Mr. Young, Mr. French, Viscount Bernard, Mr. John O'Connell, Lord Claud Hamilton, Mr. Tuite, Mr. Shaw, Lord Courtenay, Mr. Vesey, Sir Edmund Hay es , Sir Arthur Brooke, and Mr. E. P. Shirley. Mr. SHAW was decidedly averse to the appointment of the Committee as tending to unsettle men's minds in Ireland on the question of poor-laws. Lord JOCELYN opposed the appointment of the Comb mittee for the same reasons. After a few words from Sir DENHAM NORREYS the motion was withdrawn by consent, with an understood inten tion of being renewed on Monday. Sir GEORGE CLERK obtained leave to bring in a Bill to regulate and secure the debt due by the City of Edinburgh to the public; to confirm an agreement between the said city and its creditors ; and to effect a settlement of the affairs of the said city and the town of Leith. The House then, at a few minutes after One o'clock, ad journed until Monday. COURT CIRCULAR. THE QUEEN DOWAGER.—Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Gloucester, and other members of the Royal Family, sent yesterday to Marlborough House, to learn the state of their august relative. Many of the Nobility and Gentry also. called yesterday at Marlborough House, to make inquiry after the health of her Irtjesty. The following was the bulletin issued : " The Queen Dowager still suffers pain in the hand and arm, but her Majesty is altogether going on very favourably. " Marlborough HolLie, "DAVID DAVIES, M.D. " May 3, 1844. " R. MOTH." TILE DUCHESS OF GLOUCI:STER.—The answer given yes terday at Gloucester House to the numerous inquiries after the state of her Royal Highness, made by the Diplomatic Corps, and also by the Nobility and Gentry, were, " Her Royal Highness is going on very favourably." The Queen and Prince Albert honoured the exhibition of the Royal Academy, in Trafalgar-square with a visit yester day. Her Majesty and his Royal Highness arrived at the Academy from Buckingham Palace, shortly before 1 o'clock, attended by the Duchess of Buccleuch, Mistress of the Robes, and the Marchioness of Douro, Lady in Waiting. The Ho nourable Miss Hamilton and the Honourable Miss Stanley, Maids of Honour in Waiting, and the Earl of Hardwicke, Lord in Waiting, followed in a second royal carriage; and the Equerries in Waiting, Colonels Buckley and Wylde, oc cupied another royal carriage. Sir Martin Archer Shee, President of the Royal Academy, received the Illustrious 'Visitors on their arrival and conducted her Majesty and his Royal Highness through the different schools. The Lord Chamberlain, the Master the Horge, and the Groom of the Stole to Prince Albert, were in attendance at the Academy, and attended her Majesty and the Prince through the exhibition. At two o'clock the Queen and Prince Albert, attended by the Royal suite, left the Academy, and returned to Bucking ham Palace. Ins 'loyal Highness Prince Albert presided yesterday after noon, at a meeting of the Commission for promoting and en couraging the Fine Arts in the re-building the Palace of Westminster. His Royal Highness, attended by Colonel Wylde ' arrived at Gwydyr House, at three o'clock. The Commissioners present were the Duke of Sutherland, the Marquis of Lansdowne, Viscount Palmerston, Lord Col-- borne, Sir Robert Peel, Sir James Graham, Sir Robert Harry Inglis, Mr. 11. Gaily Knight, M.P., Mr. Benjamin Hawes, M.P., Mr. Henry Hallam, Mr. George Vivian, and Mr. Thomas Wvse. The meeting broke up at a quarter before six o'clock, when Prince Albert, attended by Col. \Vylde, returned to Bucking-, ham Palace. The Royal Family were taken carriage airings yesterday in the Royal Gardens of Buckingham Palace. His hovthe D k of Cambridge left town yes . a Highness u e terday morning for his residence at Kew. The Governor of the Bank of England, and the Deputy g s with Governor, had an interview with the Chancellor •f . the . Ex chequercaptaiy;iesstierrdraL,nalast residence had Douglas, M.P , had Lord Sandon, M.P., and Sir Howard Lord Stanley yesterday, at the Colonial-otlice. n a n D interviewv nm The mess of her Majesty's honourable corps of an interview with the Chancellor of the Exchequeryesterday. Gentlemen at-Arms dined together yesterday evening. ' Mr. John Wood,Ch a i r man of the Excise had an inter v i ew Chancellor of the Exchequ er ye st erday. with the Sir Edward and Lady Kerrison have arrived at their reei deuce. in Great Stanhope-street. Lord Portman has left nuance's Hotel, Belgrave• street, for Brighton. Dispatches were sent off yesterday even i ng from the Col o nial-office, for Sir Charles 11Ietcalfe, Governor of Canada ' a nd the Governors of the other North A mer i can colonial. IN SPOR O T II I :s N TE G R TRACEs3EII4'I4IiuIRGspEAsyI.%I CE. The Cup settling commenced this morning at the Roval. Hotel, and, with occasional interruptions from the ligbt fingered gentry, who were numerous, active, and successful, was brought to a partial termination about two o'clock. The accounts were heavy, and, owing to the alAsence of several persons interested, either as winners or losers, t6hannot be finally adjusted before the next Newmarket meeting. Tho Red Deer party are said to have netted, in the aggregate, about, 10,0001., a large sum to take out of the ring previous to the" Derby, and not at all calculated to facilitate the settling on the Tuesday after Epsom, if either of the favourites should . happen to win. The racing this afternoon commenced about the usual time, and, thanks to the heats, was spun out until eight o 'clock! —one more heat, and there would not have been l ight i to " _ distinguish the colours. The principal event was the Derby. y. Stakes; it brought out several horses engaged in vrl-11) Oaks, and St. Leger ; amongst them The Cure, a good public - i winner last year, and Ithuriel, a dark horse in Scotts stable both strongly fancied; the result proved how ti their ccuratel avin pretensions had been weighed. _ Lancet did.. the stable; the not run, g ng h wet with an accident on Tuesday, in prevent his and not likely to injury be received is slight, running for the Derby. Mr. George Robins is again waving his wand in our advertising columns, and its flourishes clothe at once our fields and homesteads in all the gorgeousness of pastern dra pery. - Wherever he plants his foo t crops spring up ripe and ready for the sickle, and we almost hear tke tenants groan b en eath the 'weight of their money bags. T he very scent of " the little host of dunghills" is "quite refreshing" when . - turned over by his pen; here " an army of thorns contrasted with an infinity of evergreen oaks, are seen contending for , the ascendancy"—or rather we should say for the first notice in the advertisement, but this Mr. Robins's modesty forbade him to add ; there we behold " hill and dale, and dells and - precipices, without termination ;" flowers (of rhetoric) spring . . . up everywhere as if indigenous to the soil; and if we do not s actually see fairies" dancing on the green sward, it is because they are rather old fashioned folk, and 'night frighten afar timid purchasers if found lurking about the premises. Verify Mr: Robins is one of the first landscape painters of the day. Pity his sketches are not struck out on canvass to adorn dm walls of the new Houses of Parliament. How they would make the Members' hearts yearn to protect the rural die. tricts.—Essex Herald. e ha a ;bed w