The Sun. — London, England, 1847-02-10 00:00:00

- . that they ought not to interfere, and to allow the labourers to remain at the mercy of tCcit. employers; but were du tiotiiir t i.: I; , - t,, interfere, he was at a loss to understand why they had in terfered with various things,and were continuing to interfere. If the interference proposed by the Bill be not satisfactory, let them point out to him, if they could, a more advisable, a more safe, a less objectionable mode of intervention, or which had more noble or more glorious reasons for interference. tireless the factory operatives came before them and declared that all their past legislation ou the subject had been pro ductive of the desired good, and that there was no need of the propo;:cd interference, or that lieger would result to them funs it, they were bound to pes , the Bill. Ile on e lit almost to apologise for touching this part of the subject after the eloquent speech of the Honourable Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh last year.—(Hear, hear.) De was glad that that city had, by its representative, spoken in favour of the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) In a late number of the Edinburgh Review he found an article, from which he would read two or three passages which appeared to him " germane to the matter." It stated that the question,like others, must be argued upon its own merits, and that the time had arrived when the argument in favour of the reduction of the hours of labour in factories to ten hours, could not be answered by mere general doctrines. Now, he put it to the candour of the House whether- that proof had; not been furnished? The Honourable Gentleman talked of Russia, and Germany, and America, but since 1639 no person under sixteen years of age, in Germany or Prussia, was allowed to work more than ten hours.—(Hear.) Throughout Prussia the average hours of work of all classes was 11 ; and then the case in America to which he referred was not a good example in favour of his argument, as the committee came to the opinion they did owing to the pressure of circumstances which could not be Controlled.—(Hear.) What country entered most into competition with us. Was it not America? They compelled the Americans, against their wills, to employ their labourers longer than they desired, by enforcing their competition. He considered that the statements which he heal taken the liberty to read must satisfy every gentleman that their foreign trade had not suffered from a reduction in the hours of labour, and no case had been made out to show that their foreign trade would suffer. He would there fore submit that the time had arrived, for the sake of the working men, and for the sake of the working women of the north of England, and also for the sake of the master manu facturers themselves, that this great question should be finally set at rest. He would ask that House of Commons was it prepared to throw back to another Parliament the settle ment of the question which had enlisted in its favour the affec tions of the working men and women—which came to them supported by the opinions of the clergy, the medical profession, and all the enlightened and impartial, which was based upon the experience of the past, and which appealed to past results for future beneficial effects? Would the House of Commons reject such a measure as the present, because some Honourable Gentlemen are pleased to assert that it does not altogether steer with their notions of political economy ? He trusted not ; but should it be so, and should the House come to a conclusion adverse to the second reading of the Bill, the Gentlemen on his side of the House would retire from the contest undismayed and undeterred, cheered and encouraged by the reflection that they had done their duty, and that the Tory gentlemen of England had maintained their historical position—(Laughter)—and had, consistently with it, fought the battle of the poor" against the rich, of their poorer fellow-subjects against the mighty and the strong.— (Hear, hear.) He trusted that the Bill would pass into a law, and that this protracted struggle would now be terminated ; and if such was the case, he could assure the House the measure would be received by a grateful and loyal people amidst the accla mations of millions. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that if the Noble Lord had abstained from those allusions which he had deprecated in the commencement of his speech, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would not have addressed the House. He had been willing to believe that the question might have been discussed without any party feeling being expressed. And if the Noble Lord did take credit for his party, he would surely allow him to claim, for the Gentle men with whom he acted, the merit of a measure which gave to the mass of the people the main article of subsistence at the cheapest possible rate. lie did not wish to lursue the subject further, or to say much upon the present question, which had been so repeatedly before the House. On the last occasion that the Bill was isetore the House, it was opposed by the Governmeut as a Government measure. His Noble Friend near him, and the Right Hon. Baronet near him, would support the measure under certain modifica tions, but lie supported the same opinion upon the present as upon former occasions. And he considered himself bound to stand up and declare himself, so that the question might not go forth with the weight of Government authority. He was as much a friend to the poor man as any Gentleman in that House, and if he were disposed to overlook the immense interests which were involved, and to consult those only of the working man, he would not give his consent to such a measure, as he believed it would be most injurious in its resuls. He had no hesitation in granting a limitation to the hours of labour for children, but he would oppose any interference with those of adults. By such a measure they would take away one-sixth part of the earnings of the labourer. By diminishing the hours for labour they would increase the coat of production, and that cost would either fall upon the profits of the manufacturer or the wages of the artizan. He would take the cases of the different mills. In the first mill all the operatives signed in favour of long hours; in the second mill, 169 signed in favour of long hours, and 75 against it; in the third, 59 only signed for long hours, and al though an announcement was made by the masters, that in the month of October following they should commence working short time, before that day of working short time came the workmen sent a deputation to the owners request ing that they should work for long hours. In the fourth mill it was agreed also to work for long hours; for in consequence of working short hours the wages of the people would have been reduced. In one mill many of the operatives were so anxious to earn high wages, that they continued working at tea tinte when their hours were re duced. These parties worked by piece work, and in their anxiety: they worked during the half-hour allotted for tea, thus working the same time as before, only in a smaller compass. In these instances the experiment had been fairly tried, and the question had been fairly .put to the workmen, and they preferred long hours with high wages. If any of the operatives were anxious for. short hours it was in the full belief, and in which belief they would be disappointed, that they would continue to receive the same amount of wages. In another mill which he would mention 400 hands all signed in favour of long hours, and in another a majority of 50, in a third a majority of 40, in a fourth a majority of 50, and in a fifth a majority of 103, signed in favour of long hours. In a sixth mill 276 signed for long hours, and 125 against them. It was long hours were preferred by and they workmen , oo rf ki were moe wa s err nek t when their lohdu enitwould atbht eet followed od; they demurred conviction mwd iueddr r that nebdoyt tca a oo narseimadreduc tion measure tiuohrnee fo r e r i tsnokh, of the nhen b t elief, that his f interest hsew awi means erein ac f acevdoeurtoo of the h t h e i s r e m q u e e a s s t u r o e! f ra t h e e c h wor km moree g n e , which would inflict an injury. He wou ld, t h ere f ore , by no n ev er e a n lly if-t th h wa ey n he believed them to be. He was really so little able to ad dress the House, that he would not venture to make many further remarks. The question concerned not only the interest of the artizans in the mills, the interest of the manufacturers, and the large interests of all persons dependent on the cotton mills, and of all dependent on the production of the raw ma terial consumed in the mills, and of all persons who were en gaged in the prep trati ,, n of the material : it affected also all those employed in the after processes, and if they reduced the raw material consumed in the mills, and there became in consequence a deficiency in the production of the manufactured produce, the various stages it had to go through subsequently they would affect the interest, not only of the manufacturers themselves, but the interest of large bodies of men on either side, who had no opportunity of expressing their opinions, but whose interest, nevertheless, was ma terially injured. He thought that these were con siderations of vast importance, which ought not to be left out of the question. lie had taken it upon the mix , rowest grounds—those grounds upon which they generally agreed, viz., that the interest of the workmen was materially atlected, and it was upon those grounds that he felt it to be his duty to oppose the measure. The Marquis of GRANBY said that the patient endurance of the operatives, and at the same time the conciliating tone they adopted towards their masters, would naturally cause a desire to grant their wish. The Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said that the wages of the opera tives would be reduced. He was ready to admit that, if they reducer' the number of hours the operative had to work, the master manufacturers would find it neces sary to make up the deficiency by employing more hands. He thought, likewise, that if they did employ more hands, the number of workpeople, as an inevitable conse quence of the principle of competition between the masters would be benefited. He thought that this measure would be conferring a great boon on the operatives in the manufacturing districts, and it would not at the same time materially re duce their wages. He: was for some time per plexed by the argument, that if they did not reduce the wages there would be no ether means of raising the same quantity of manufactured produce as they did at present. He thought that with regard to the women who v. ere now labouring twelve hours per day in , those factories, the reduction of their hours of labour would not be followed by so material a reduction in the , produce as was anticipated. The labour and wages would be more L equally distributed over the surface of the manufacturing I population, who would thereby be materially benefited. On there grounds he should give his support to the Bill. Dr. BOWRING said that he acknowledged the philan thropy of the Noble Lord, but it would not be what was called philanthropy to suppport that which would bring misfortune upon the labouring community. The discussion was one which should be entered upon free from all:prejudice, and with minds inaccessible to all facts likely to prejudice the judgment. He did not approve of the present measure, for he felt convinced that it would not be of any practical utility to the poor.—(Hear, hear.) He had heard one of the princip a l manu f ac t urer s in the boroughs he d the honour to re p resen t o ff er t o his workmen to ha engage them foz eleven hours a day, but he did not attempt to disguise from them what the result of the altera tion would be. He told them that if they did not produce the same amount of work as in the twelve hours he could not be expected to pay them th e same amount od He (Dr. Bowring) understood that a large influential, the most intelligent, and the loat wealthy of theealthymmanou st manu facturers bad been testing the consequences of th e Bill s h ou ld it become the law of the land , and they all agreed on this point, that it would occasion a general reduction in the value of produce in the cotton manufactures. He spoke not of the silk nor of the flax manufacture, but confined his attention to cotton alone, and the return showed a di minution in the value of production to the extent of 121 per cent. Now he might just inform Hon. Members that the value of the cotton manufactured in this country exceeded 30,000,000/. ; the number of bales required fur working up amounted to a million and a halt; representing in value 15,000,000/. sterling , and before it left the manufactory the united cost of labour a nd ci 'p ital would increase the sum to 30,000,000/. sterling. The statement added, as the result of a limitation of the hours of labour, that the annual loss would be from 1 t hi s 1 0 , 8 would fall. It ap peared would inquire on whom ,Boo,ool to 2,000,000/. sterling. Now he and three parties. The first was the . consumer, perhaps distributed in this way at the to him that it could only be borne one of it might be more generally distr _ least amount of individual sacrifice; but the question was them. be charged con tented with the extra price which would of last year, taught would the consumer pay . this loss—would they rest They had already, by their measures p Th • had buy in the cheapest and sell in the dearest market. e 3 the people of the country that the only true princi le was to decided that thee were entitled to the benefits of that principle, and the people had a right to require that they should give effect to it.—(Hear.) The consum therefore would pay no portion of the 2,000,000/. sterling. But then they might sav, 'The manufacturers are gorged with enormous profits, the manufacturers must pay, and they are affluent and successful men, wrest, therefore , from them a portion of their ill-gotten gains ." But was it the fact that the gains of the master manufac turers were so large as to enable them to continue manufacturing, when they by their legislation ex acted from them an amount of 2,000,0004 sterling liesulted. With regard to children between eight and tw e e„ ; 1 ,1 .1,. ell tie- tit 1 be leg a ll y requ i re d to do, and the result was that those children who laboured for six hours during the day had their education attended to, while the means of education, and the character of the education U se% had greatly increased. He must admit the many in stances of liberality, on the part of the owners of factories, 11 1 providing the means of education for the children ern- Ployed. And it would be unfair, unjust, and untrue to at tribute any want of feeling to those who opposed the Bill, on the green'Chet it would not promote that end. He (sil 'G. Grey) thought that while the children between eight and twelve years of age only worked for a certain time, while those from thirteen to eighteen worked the full period of adults, the transition from a state of partial inacti vity to a state of labour was injurious, and a practice that ought to be remedied if it were possible.—(Hear.) With reference to adult labour, he could not concur in:the View taken by the Hon. Gentleman as to the mortality oc casioned in the manufacturing districts by the present hours of labour. He adverted to documents already before the public to prove his statements, but there were also statistics to prove incontestably that in large towns, where there Were no manufactories, there existed an equal amount of mortality. He considered, however, that an advantage would be derived from a decrease of the hours of labour, by allowing some time at least to the labourers—not to say a word about recreation—but for receiving mental and reli gious instruction, which was". virtually denied to them by the Present system. With regard to women, he considered there was a great disadvantage in their being brought away from their homes; as, in his opinion, it was destructive of domestic and social economy. With regard to health, he did not consider that the Hon. Member was justified in stating that the hours of employseent were so very pernicious as he stated before. The mortality in large crowded towns, as compared With extensive rural districts, did not present any such difference. (The Right Honourable Gentleman then read a number of documents to prove his statements, and showing that in Maidstone, York, Northampton, Wolverhampton, Coventry, and Nottingham, there was no difference in the bills of mortality, as compared with Mac clesfield, Preston, and Chester and Liverpool. The increase of mortality was solely owing to crowded lodgings and per sonal uncleanliness. Facts certainly existed which demanded the serious attention of the Government, and called upon, ;them for remedial measures. He had stated that the opinions which he had expressed were his own individual opinions. The Noble Lord, in his answer to certain questions, stated what he thought to be essential for the general agreement of a Govern ment, but he at the same time claimed for the Members of his Government freedom of opinion as to matters of detail. Now, the present question Was one which was essentially a matter of detail. lie had given his vote on former occasions for shortening the hours of factory labour, and he would have no objection to an eleven hours' Bill. 'He did not doubt that a difference of opinion between the members of the Government might exist upon the present question. He maintained his opinion, which he had never shrunk from avowing. He was not insensible to the difficulties and the magnitude of the interests involved. They should proceed with caution, and with great deliberation, if they attempted to touch them. He should vote for a second reading of the Bill, but he should vote against the prospective clause, to limit' at the end of a year the period of labour to ten hours. He was not prepared to go further than what he stated, or to agree to any Bill which would not be modified according to the manner he proposed. Mr. BANKES said he did not advocate the present Bill for the purpose of giving any opposition to the Government. He was rejoiced that acme members of the Government were in favour cf a modification of the present system. Although they were not prepared to go the whole extent which the Hon. Member for Oldham required, he was authorised to state that those who sought for a ten hours' Bill, would not be coatented with an eleven hours' Bill, but if it Was the pleasure of the Government to pass such a measure it would be a matter of satisfaction to them, as it was a step in a right direction ; and with reference to e success cf au experiment it might not be unsatisfactory to have a trial for a year or two of such a measure before the public. He concurred in the regret expressed by the Right• Hon. Baronet, that this matter had not been made a subject of private regulation, but he could not say that he, for one, was disappointed. But he had high authority for saying that such a result had been expected by one of the principal opponents of the measure. He did not then see the Hon. Gentleman in his place, but he believed him to be in an adjoining chamber; he alluded to the Member for Dur ham. (At this moment Mr. Bright entered the House, and took his seat amid considerable laughter.) On the 23d of May the Hon. Member for Durham stated in his place that the proper mode of proceeding would be for the operatives to seek a private arrangement with the em ployers ; and he admitted that they ought to have by some means or another an alteration in the present sys tem, which he said they would have had had other means been taken to procure them. Now, would the Hon. Member for Durham say that those means had failed? Had there been even a proposal from the manufac turers to the operatives? The Lion. Member had been the subject of many questions by reason of the high and prominent position in which he had placed himself as candidate for one of the great manufacturing cities of the empire. Amongst other tions which were put to him, as lately as the month of December last there was this—" Do you consider that time should be allowed for education with regard to young persons employed in manufactories? " In answer to this question, the lion. Member said—" Well, I am quite certain that men who work ten hours are more likely to be educated than those who work twelve hours. I only differ as to the means of effecting such an arrangement. If it were the fact that no effort had been made for this pur pose what chance was there that that arrangement would be made now. There had been time for making the experiment, and since the Hon. Member said that it ought to have been done, what chance he again asked remained that it would be done at all? The Hon. Member for Durham was now a candidate —undoubtedly he had every right to be so—for the representation of one of the largest and most commercial cities in the country, the city of Manchester. He might not have been in the House when a petition was presented, signed by 200,000 persons residing there, and with the leave of the House he would read the prayer of that petition. The petitioners said that they deeply s ympathised with the factory workers in that large and important manufacturing city, many of whom were of tender years, shut up in a close room for a period in each day that was quite incompatible with their nature, and they added that, owing to the long hours of labour, these young Persons were debarred from all means of enjoying the bene fits of religious or secular education ; that, in consequence of the long hours of which the petitioners complained, the fac tory operatives were in a worse position than any other artizans, by which their physical frame was deteriorated, and if no relaxation were afforded, they would be mere representatives of the human body, without any of the vigour which should accompany it. They prayed therefore that the Legislature would pass a ten hours' Bill without further delay. These sentiments emanated from 200,000 persons, whom the Hon. Member for Durham sought to represent in Parliament. True, they had no votes, but they were still the persons whose opinions and feelings he would represent. If the Hon. Member would, therefore, wish to please his future constituents, let him vote for this Bill, and thus render himself a more worthy candidate for their suffrages than he was at present.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) The Hon. Member said last year that this was a fit and proper measure, which ought to be by some means adopted. There might be persons in Manchester, perhaps, mere powerful than the individuals whose names were appended to this petition, but he would not for a moment suppose that this consideration would influence his conduct now. He had, however, to recollect that it was the expressed opinion of the Hon. Member that this measure ought to pass ; and, as it could not pass in the way of adjust ment and regulation between the employers and the operatives, he (Mr. Bankes) called upon the Hon. Member now to fulfil the pledge which he gave, and to carry out the measure by the only means left open, namely, a legislative enactment.— (Hear, hear.) There had been circulated a pamphlet, which, although published two years before, had only been sent to him that day. That pamphlet contained grave charges against a most honourable person, and containing such charges, he thought that it ought to have been circulated earlier, if at all. It was entitled " A Report of the Central Committee of the Association of Millowners engaged in the cotton trade." Now, he (Mr. Bankes) would not allude to the personal charges which that circular contained against this honour able person, but he would to one passage which he happened to glance at, for he had had no time to examine carefully the contents of the document. That passage stated, " It is useless to discuss whether the present arrangement of twelve hours for five days, and nine hours on Satur day, is precisely the best limitation for labour; it is the limit which Parliament has long since established," &c. Now, the House would permit him to ask why it was " use less to discuss?" Could there be a better occupation of their time than to discuss whether that which was found a benefit to the people to a certain extent should not be further ex tended, if any further additional benefit could be conferred? Could they be better employed than extending a measure which had been already found good still further ? The quotation went on, " Usage and habit has accommodated itself to this period." Why that was said of the slave trade, " usage and habit" had existed there for a long time, but that was no reason why that habit and usage should be permitted to continue.—(Hear, hear.) "On the continued certainty of this limitation, the master manufac turer had based his calculation of profitable returns." Why what right had the master manufacturer to base his calcu lations on this limitation ? Had not this been a constant subject of inquiry, of proper inquiry year after year ? Had it not been constantly agitated in that House, and most justly agitated? Was there any reason why the master manufacturers, when the former law was passed, should speculate upon no further alteration of the law in all time coming? The Honourable Mem ber for Montrose had been pleased to say that he had got one besetting sin, and that was his universal advocacy of all reductions in taxation and retrenchments b in expenditure. But the Hon. Member had an o th er sin, and that was his determination to look with such ti i n n g tensity on one side of a luestion, that he omitted altogetheren. Member to look at the other.—(Hear, hear.) Now, when e n Mon t ros e supported the form er Bill of ; r dou b t l es s thought it the concentration of all human he w i s d o m—(Hear, hear. and laughter)—b u t h e forgot that these Acts limiting factory labour had been passed—passed with complete triumph—Acts reducing the labour of these under thirteen years of age from 74 hours a week to 36, and persons above that age from 74 to 69. All these concessions had been universally admitted, by every one but the Hon. Member for Montrose, to be attended with the happiest suc cess, without any counterbalancing inconvenience to any of the parties interested. But, said the Hon. Member for Mon trose, these persons are blind to their own interests; but if they were ignorant it was the duty of the Hon. member to educate and prepare them properly. At that time, when an extended measure of education was being in troduced into the other House of Parliament, surely some arrangement should be made by which the artizan in com mon with all classes in the country might be benefited. The measure (as far as the factory workman was con cerned) was an insult to him, for they provided a large fund for educational purposes, from the benefits of which he would be altogether debarred. The Honour able Member for Durham bad admitted that the man who worked ten hours bad more time for the purposes or education than the man who worked twelve hours. Had the man who worked twelve hours any time for education at all? He was compelled to devote twelve hours to work, and he required two heurs for meals—where then could the time for education be found? The Hon. Member for Montrose bad put a hypothetical case. " you cannot," said he, " pass an equal law for the limitation of labour, because the labourers are of different conditions in life. One has a father and mother, and another is not burdened with either." He ( Mr. Bankes) said, give them all the advantage of the same law. lie could see no distinction that could be safely made between the one labourer and the other. The House would remember that when this measure: was first brought before them they were shocked at the recital of the cruelties perpetrated in the factories; they had heard of the physical deformities which resulted from the nature of the employment. He (Mr. Bankes) had always heard and read those statements with much pain, and with a belief that, while the manufac turers were not guilty of the cruelties imputed to them, the offences themselves were greatly exaggerated ; but reithee could be shut his pyPq to the c,141 - mem-es which would follow the wadi et esasatis... Ise essts ss, a SS.s. to the physical, as well as the moral deterioration which would result from this course; and if Government did not apply the remedy, to whom were they to look for it ? He was of opinion that this was the fitting opportunity for the enactment of such a measure. If they passed the Bill at this period it would entail no inconvenience en the manufacturer. The Hon. Member for Durham had been unable to carry into effect a measure which he himself declared was fit and proper, and therefore it behoved the Government to interpose and rectify the grievance. He would give his cordial atsetit to the second reading of the Bill. Mr. MARK PHILIPS said that the lion. Member for Durham had had a speech made at him as candidate for Manchester, perhaps tue House would allow him as repre sentative for Manchester, in esse, to say a few words for him. He trusted it would not be considered he did not sympathise with the workmen in factories if he did not coincide in the opinions of the Hon. Member who had last spoken, but he (Mr. Philips), as the representative of a vast commercial interest, could not let his feelings run away with his better judgment. He thought that any interference between capital and labour would tend to the most mischievous consequences, for the House might depend upon it that one-tenth of the manufacturing power of this country could not be repressed without the workmen's wages suffering in the same proportion. Why was the Government to stop short with reference to agricultural labours? He believed the present was such a departure from proper legislative interference, that he could not but augur the most serious results from the adoption of the measure.—(Hear, hear.) He did not like the proposed "nibbling," piece by piece, of the measure, such as that alluded to by the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State fer the Home Department, to reduce the hours to eleven in stead of ten. If the experiment were to be made, let it be made at once, upon a bold scale; he would much rather at once give his support to the ten hours' measure than to such a meddling system of legis lation proposed by those who had not the courage to go at once to the completion of the full measure, but who stopped at a sort of half-way house.—(Cheers.) He believed that great ignorance existed on the part of Hon. Members with reference to the subject of factory labour. It was not for him to catechise Hon. Members on the subject; if he did so, he might, in all probability, be told " that he had better mind his own business, and give them credit for the knowledge they possessed upon subjects which even the most experienced manufacturers and inhabitants of the district were unable to obtain." It was quite true that the measures which had been passed for the purpose of re stricting labour in some factories had been attended with some success ; but he begged most earnestly to protest against the arguments urged by the Right Hon. Baronet the Secre tary of State for the Home Department, that because partial success had attended the measures passed for the protection of women and children, that therefore future legislation for adults should be equally successful. SS ith those views, seeing nothing but mischief attendant upon the passing of these measures, and not at all underrating the comforts of the working classes, or being one whit less desirous than the Hon. Gentleman who had last addressed the. House to see educas tion afforded to the people, still he was obliged to weigh carefully both sides of the question, and he had come to the conclusion that nothing but mischief would result from the interference by the Legislature in the large manufacturing districts of the country. Lord JOHN MANNERS was quite surprised to hear the Hon. Member for Montrose say that the present measure was advocated upon party grounds. He did not think such a charge ought to have been made. The slightest reflection upon the history of the question would suffice to show that such a charge was totally unfounded. No one could look upon the past history of the question without seeing that never was any question of great national polity supported upon such dis interested and honourable grounds, and carried on in such a manner as to be in every way worthy of the great cause itself.—(Cheers.) The great cause had been going on for years, though warrior after warrior had fallen in the glorious struggle. Sir Hubert Peel first advocated the question, died, and left the cause to the care of Sir J. Hobhouse ; he carried it on for some time, until it was taken up by Mr. Stlaler. That great advocate of the cause died, and left the conduct of it to Mr. Oastler ; he, in his turn, gave place to Lord Ashley, who carried on the war to the very verge of victory, when circumstances oc curred which prevented his proceeding further with the measure, and he resigned hia glorious charge to the Honourable Member for Oldham (Mr. Fielden). Still they found the same resolute, indomitable persever ance in the great cause. And now, in this year, 1817, they found the great question again brought forward, and boldly advocated by its indefatigable supporter, the Hon. aiember tor Oldham (Mr. Fielden).—(Cheers.) Well did Lord Ashley say in that House, and truly, "that it was possible, nay, probable, that the efforts of her Majesty's Ministers would be successful, and that they would carry their motion, but for how long? If the Government would wish their victory to be complete, they must extinguish those senti ments which had given rise to his." In that sentiment was to be found the feeling which nurtured and fed the in domitable courage of the supporters of this measure. — (Cheers.) And so long as men had eyes to weep, souls to pray, hearts to feel, voices to raise, and hands to lift up, so long would the struggle be continued, until the arduous contest was consummated by the glory of a triumphant victory. The Right lion. Baronet, the Secretary of State for the Home Department,had used what he called am old arguments," those arguments were year by year becoming weaker and weaker, and he hoped those arguments, the fallacy of which had been so long exploded, would be consigned at once " to the tomb of all the Caputets."—(Cheers.) The present was the most favourable time for the passing of this law, in con sequence of the depressed state of trade in the manufacturing districts and the high prices of corn. The mills were now working short time. When, howeveNthe current set in the other way, if this measure were passed, then stability and security would be the result, instead of a wild, insane, and reckless re-action, which had before been the bane of the prosperity of our manufacturing districts. — (Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord then went on to quote from the circular of Messrs. Parkisson and Taylor, to the effect that stocks were daily accumulating, and would before long press heavily upon the market, even in the face of increasing prices in the raw material. This state of things would no doubt be followed by a serious de pression. What was the effect of these rapid alternations of prosperity and depression in the condition of the workman? —during one week he had nothing to do, and the next week he was torn and racked by fatigue. In such a state, was it possible for the working man to contract habits of sobriety or forethought, or to perform his duty to his country and the society in which he moved?—(Loud cheers.) It had been said by the opponents of this measure, that so much work could not be done in twelve hours as in ten ; even it' it were so, the greatpractical result would be, that if this Bill were passed it would spread a larger amount of labour over the working classes, and thereby equalise the amount to be performed. It had also been said that it was wrong to interfere in manufacturing speculations. Nothing could be a more decisive refutation of that argument than the declared official value of the exports of the country, as given in a work recently published by Mr. MCullock, from which it appeared that in 1831 the total value of the cotton exports amounted to 17,182,7361., in 1832 it amounted to 17,344,5761., but in the year 1842 the declared value of the cotton exported was 21,770,127/. This would . at once dispose of the argument of the mischief of legislative interference in manufacturing enterprise (for since the year 1832 the hours of labour had been reduced for all persons above 13 years of age from 74 to 69 hours, for all persons under 13 they had been reduced from 74 to 36, and in every case the best possible results had followed the adop tion of the measures. Looking then at the inevitable past, and relying upon practical experience for the future, they were justified in calling upon the opponents of this Bill to make out a most irresistible case, to demonstrate by facts and figures, which could admit of no dispute or cavil, that the wages of the workmen would fall in consequence of the passing of this measure, which was another of the arguments used by the opponents of the measure.—(Cheers.) But, even if this fall of wages were to take place, it would be in some sort compensated by giving to the workmen facilities for household economy, and for the mental and moral improvement of the inmates of the cottage.—(Hear, hear.) The people working in the fac tories were told that, with the repeal of the corn-laws the chief element of their expenses would be materially reduced. (Hear, hear.) How those promises had been fulfilled, the present prices would abundantly testify. If the corn-laws were to reduce the food of the people at least one-third, surely they were entitled to have their hours of labour relaxed. He was willing to leave this matter to be decided by the practical experience of the operatives themselves, but yet it was a difficult question, and one on which it would be difficult for them to deal with their employers. Fortunately, Lancashire and York shire were not exclusively populated by manufacturers; others lived in them who were competent to judge by their knowledge of the condition of the operatives. There were intelligent Dissenting ministers—there were the Dean of Manchester, the Vicar of Leeds, the Rector of Brad ford, all of whom were competent arbitrators, to whom he should feel satisfied to leave the decision of the matter. Now, when they came forward and told them that for the sake of their spiritual health it was necessary to pass this Bill, and when the surgeons in the large towns said it was necessary for the improvement of their physical condition, and when they and the landed proprie tors were unanimously of this opinion, lie considered it was incumbent on the House to comply with their wishes. He had been entrusted with a letter on the subject from Mr. Fletcher, the well-known surgeon of Bury, which set forth the great mortality that to k place amongst those employed in factories, compared with those engaged in other occupa tions. It stated that out of every 100 deaths a fraction over 61 were children under two years of age; that the mor tality amongst those employed 10 hours in fac varies was 33% per cent., whilst it was but 20 in other occupations. From a report which was presented to the House in 1834 he found that out of I,COO deaths in Man chester, 424 were children under two years of age ; that in Liverpool the number of children under two years of age, out of 1,000 deaths, was but 362 ; whilst in London, out of 1,000 deaths, only 308 were infants under that age. (Hear, hear.) This showed the great want of sanatory improvements, and that the mortality against these child ren would be less if they were taken more care of by their parents. The subject had been submitted to them in every possible way : they bad been shown how the homes of factory workers were left comfortless, in consequence of the protracted' hours' of labour—how the Saxon mother refused to be comforted because her children could not par- take of it—(Hear, hear)—but then when one died she t k h j hl e .ev w tehn_ul tte.riatiat had ceased to suffer from prolonged and sever e ea , and that it h a d gone to j o i n th e arm y o f i n nocents in e a ri:u sufficient ) case I e wouldhad notas k beenthem House made e . out for passing for the recreation and instruction in vain for them to f p t a h r e k s people,and s if t h t e h n e se y u d rn h a i of their advantages . P not at the same time irnosvmtirideuirascotvuioiedene?—(Hear, hear.) It was 'They r he them with a tew hours to par takewas the means only that were objectionable, w we aLa t r h ero m n as a t b e l r e s c a h a a d nc t e heir sv ere agreed butto i ft bethoughendt y to if r i e ' d h uce an labourers arra ng arrangement gUsing possiblyco th o e h r e e t alter ahire h: v s ou op id ini s o ig n a , e a sp ho ec a ia d ll manufacturers touorrearswi within h L i o an t c h a - e limit he thought necessary, a n d a million as the guarantee that theiyywouelwdnf o 7 fi iquarter of a the condi tions.—(Hear.) But he should think the acut e labourers dupes if they consented to any arrangement unles s thevli P ri e d s am ple security that it would be carried out. That - House was not in the habit of waiting until rival steamers in the Thames had agreed to regulate their speed in the pool, to adopt measures to compel them to do so, supposing such a step were necessary ; or until master builders agreed to improve the sanatory regula tions of the houses they build ; chimney-sweepers not to use climbing-boy's; proprietors of collieries and betties to prevent the harnessing o: naked women.—(Bear, hear.) They did not stop until the proprietors of slaves in the West Indies could make sonic arrangement with their slaves for their emancipation; in these and a thousand other instances they did not want for the parties to come forward, but brought the "imperial majesty of the law," to whom all were subject—the lowest as well as the greatest— and which has for its object the vindicatisn of the tights of those ordained by God." —(Hear.) It was all Nary well for the Hon. Member for Montrose to say, in accordance with the doctrines of that school Qf philosophy to which be belonged THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 10, 1841. annually. It was not likely they would do so, and therefore after all the loss would fall upon the opera proceeded to show by the evidence of Mr. Gregg that the profits of the manufacturer, after deducting the 5 per cent, interest on his money did not exceed 2% per cent. If the consumer and the capitalist would not pay, the burden must fall on the labour— ing population, and thus, instead of granting a boon, the House would, by passing this measure, take away from them the means of education and the ability to procure the comforts of existence. The workmen were, in effect, to be told that one-sixth of their earnings was to be witleirw.vn, and hewever willing they night be to work for the extra hour, the manufacturers would have no power to accede to their wishes by this enactment of the Government. He (Dr. Bow - ring) had during his whole lifetime been the advocate of the working man ; he had ever sought to obtain for him an influence in that House of which he was as yet de prived; his sympathies were all enlisted on his side, and it was for that_ reason, it was because he thought the present measure was calculated to lower his condition that he would oppose the further progress of it. Mr. P. HOWARD, in rising to support the measure said that he would not detain the House with any lengthened observations. He could perceive that they were desirous of testing the question by a division, and he should therefore, not trespass for any time on their attention. The House had already seen that any arrange ment between the employers and the employed was out of the question, and it was therefore necessary for the Government and that House to legislate upon the subject. He had hoped that the manufacturers of England would have copied the example of the agricultural party, who make a great sacrifice for the good of their country—(Laughter) —end he might yet ask them to make some little sacrifice, to offer some tribute on the altar of their country. He would give his most cordial support to the second reading of the Bill. Mr. MUNTZ took the trouble to go to Manchester to sa tisfy himself of the position of the working classes and the manufacturers, and the result of his in spection was, that all the changes which had been made were entirely tbr the benefit of the manufacturers, and not for the workmen.—(Cheers.) The alteration in the speed of the machinery, and the number of spindles had been in creased threefold, and the quantity of work done was of course double. Though the manual labour employed was rather less. It was therefore self-evident that a young girl attending to those spindles must have an increased amount of duty to perform. The question was, was this a sort of labour for such persons? It was said the labour was not hard;' granted. He would like to know how Hon. Members would like to be kept walk ing up and down a slippery floor for 13 hours, in an atmo' sphere ranging from 65 to 80 degrees? Why it would be bad enough to shut an Hon. Member up in a hothouse heated to 80 degrees, even if he had nothing to do.—(Cheers.) Why, the people of Birmingharenwould be ashamed to see such persons as these factory-girls in their town.—(Cheers.) Mr. BRIGHT—(Hear, hear.) Mr. MUNTZ—Did the Hon. Member suppose that none but a cotton-spinner could tell whether a girl looked healthy or unhealthy?—(Laughter.) The Hon. Member himself got up a petition in the year 1833 in favour of the Ten Hours' Bill, and paid all the expenses of it himself. If the Hon. Member had altered his opinions since that time, he ought to explain the reason of his change to the House.—(Cheers.) The manufacturers complained of being compelled to work only ten hours a day; why, upon an average for the last ten years, no mills had worked more than ten hours a day ; they could not,therefore, lose anything by 1 he eassing of the present measure. It had been said that if any difference was made in the hours of labour a difference would also be made in the rate of wages. Was that so? The Hon. Member for Dur ham (Mr. Bright) paid for wages to his card-loom hands, in the year 1820, Bs. per week ; in 1830, Bs. ; in 1844, Bs. 6d. ; in 1816, Os. Did this, then, bear out the assertions of those manufacturers? It was only fair to ask the Hon. Member, or some other Hon. Member, to explain to the House how it was that such an amazing alteration had taken place since the year 1815, when only 6,000 bales a week of cotton were spun, and in the present year the quantity spun was 30,000 a week, being an increase of five times the quantity. It seemed extraordinary that while there should' be this increase the value of the goods produced should have also been one-third less, contrary to the opinions of those ' feelosophers " who maintain that nothing but the application of the principles of political economy should be allowed, and that all in terference should be deprecated, and yet that, in spite of the interference of the Government, there had been an increase iei n p n ai l d yas— to the workmen.—(Cheers.) The In the year 1815 ... .. 6,000 bales. e tl o i n e su ra in te pt o io f 1846 The price of the raw materi al was— nmo'atgcurestt In 1815 ls. 7%d. per lb. 1846 ....... .. . The selling price in 1815 3s. 3d. per lb. 1846 lod. per lb. The number of revolutions per minute of the throstles of the machines was in the year 500 1815 1846 . The number of spindles to each mules was in 1815 lBO 1846 5OO These were facts demanding the most serious attention of the House.—(Cheers.) The rooms in which the operatives were of the most unhealthy nature, no current of fresh air was allowed, and it seemed to be necessary that the unfortunate creatures of factory labour should be kept in a state of continued perspiration, in order the better to perform their work.—(Cheers.) Since he had had a seat in that House, he had never given a vote against his conscience, but he never gave a vote in that House with more honesty of feeling than that which he should give upon the present occasion in support of the present mea sure.—(Cheers.) Mr. BRIGHT hoped, after the pointed allusions which had been made to him by the Hon. Members for Dorsetshire and Birmingham, and by several other Hon. Members, that the House would allow him to state the grounds on which he was compelled to differ from many Hon. Gentlemen on this important question. In addition to the means of judging, which many Honourable Members possessed from political economy and - from other sources, he possessed this additional ' knowledge. He had lived all his lifetime am on g st the population for whom they were legislating ; he was very largelycomrcted with this particular trade, and had not a farthing in the by no belief op position to the Bill he was actuated that it would injure his property or prospects, measure was world beyond what was invested in it; but in his because it was clear to him that if the I_o,oo really calculated to advance the interests of the co 0, 0 00 spinning and other textile employments, that his interests would favour of a would be consulted. The agitation in factories i persons more or less dependent for their support up . on: otton- Ten Hours' Bill had been conducted on the political economy of the Hon. Members for Birmingham and Oldham, and.?t the late Michael Thomas Sadler , on those pr inci p les of poll- tical economy which that House last session declared un sound and rotten, and which, if persevered in would injure the great interests of the country and de stroy the manufacturing and commercial supremacy of the kingdom.—(Hear, hear.) When it was first commenced it professed to have only the labour of children in view, and Lord Spencer brought in a Bill with that enew but last session. The late Secretary ,of State for the Home Department carried a Bill through the House, which limited the labour of children under thirteen years of age, to six hours a day • but not satisfied, those who pro fessed themselves the friends of the workers, now asked the house to interfere to prevent young persons from 13 to 18, and women of all ages, f rom wor ki ng more than ten hour s a day ; but their object r eally was to interfere with the hours of work of persons of all ages, and of whatever sex. engaged in labour in this country, in the belief that the pre sent rate of wages would be maintained—a higher rate than their labour cow d command in the free markets of the country.t Many. of the exaggerated statements which bad been I:r it ti e n rward by Lord Ashley had not been urged c) House on that occasion, but the Noble Lord, the M ember m f o r : Newark ( Lord J. Manners), had read a letter more worthy of belief than official documents ! fut'i;olm them Fletcher, physician, in Bury,which however he did ne f : l t . :c s ßid n e 3 r , persons appointed to make such investigations. ds was less it appeared that, in 1831, the mortality in Ilf?stol for the than in 1801, and less than the mortality in —r t iess t h an i ii same year. The mortality in Blanchester Liverpool, and, in short, themortality in larg:e Irilich there were towns was not larger than in other towns ie blished a book on no manufactories. Dr. Phillipps, who had Puthose engaged in " scrofula," had stated that the health of the rest of the factories was not worse than the health of ens. It was population employed in large manufacturing tos d was long an stated that the labour of women in factorieswomen being so severe, but lie considered the fact of the work was not asanufaczuring employed was conclusive evidence that laborious.—(ob.) If Hon. Gentlemen d oubted this, let them was correct. If make inquiries, and they would find that he did not women it was so severe as it was stated to be , whdywith spades ? forsake it, and work as stonemasons an to it. They was superior. They naturally - turlhere they were must turn to those employments —Oh, oh,) They did not, becaused d which were light. sheltered from the weather, baad been equally con- The experiments in France_ . injurious in factory elusive, that there was nothing ourable Member then labour for females. The Hon a report of the read a long extract f r 7 :3 1 1 1 11 a ppointed by the Con committee on the Ten Hours 12th of March, 1845, which gross of Massachusetts on the . e es did not injure the health of factory work went to show that manufadr fie d i report further stated, that those employed in them. And in these countries for labour far those IV° ° him not be misunderstood: lie textile exce e ded ae. Let lt'll Twelve our a our i, he was was not advocating a .e ad d arguing against the state in the town of Lowell the hours appointed for manufacturing only defending himself b e half of the present Bill ; and let merits put forward i 3 e is t fronl the s y stemy • now complained of. of age were exem nt to school after he Yoe fifteen information might be obtained He himself never Tee Held himself F. and beto be a proof years of ag, t!"" every person TO earn at fourteen the Hon. Member recoiled that ldren up to thirte s en 'a to thir teen system their forefathers cated and immoral, he would tell them used to put o i e employed ' f • * that t los ~, in menu act And to show . ones were domestic servants, and UUrmnder the old • up a:Bd most t the divided the community that Dr. Peirce had t n h o a t t ssyo.omw earsiet k n 1, ! : : cl an ef :e a r t n u f Worst of these were grooms, such : athe habit of e l gentlemen in that House were in In Number nineteen in that class persons. Now, when he (Mr. twenty werefemales engaged in factory la number twen la bour. There was not a magistrate in any manufacturing and amongst the town that could not bear witness to the sobriety and good conduct of these o peratives. The Hon. Blember said that 1 1. ti st ss a petition from Manchester, signed he presented by twenty-two thousand Bright) presentedpetition ' a in favour of the repeal of the Corn-laves, the same Honourable Member would not pa y the slightest regard to it. He was as much in favour of paying attention to the wishes of the poor as any man, and 1 e would go farther than the Hon. Member, for lie was prepared to give them votes, by which they would be enabled to send men to that House to represent their feelings and wishes. But it the short time was enforced, they would be obliged to receive , l ess wages. He could not conceive a guilt more dreadful than the prac tising of such a delusion on the working classes, a delusion likely to bring upon them the most serious disappointment, and greater evils than any other measure had ever inflicted upon them. He had in his hand a publication called "The Ten Hours's Advocate," dated December 5, and that publication asserted that it had, from its first con nexion yi ith the question, advocated the fact that the effect of the Ten Hours' Bill would be a diminution of wages in the same proportion as the reduction of time, as any circumstance that lessened the supply of article increased its value in the market, and that there wet e numerous instances where the hours had been teeluced and the rates of wages were advanced. Mr. Oastler said, in speaking of Mr. 3 Ackro •(.1 in Halifax, that if he were one of the ' operatives, and he were asked to sign for the Ten Hours Bill at the present rate of wages, he would not do so, as any re duction in the hours would be followed by an increase inn order to show hew these persons endeavoured to persuade the working clannsei that they would have the same wages. PETITIONS ON PRIVATE BILLS. (Room 22, before Mr. Examiner SMITH.) OPPOSED LIST. CALEDONIAN RAILWAY (CLYDESDALE BRANCH). In this opposed case, it was found that the standing orders had not been complied with in one or two unimportant instances. Liverpool, Manchester, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne Junction Railway (Alteration of Main Line and Hawes Branch, with power to purchase, rent, or use the Northern Counties Union ' Railway, and amendment of Acts). In this case the opposition was withdrawn, and the cus tomary formal proofs having been put in, the standing orders were declared to be complied with. .Caledonian Railway, Extension of the Motherwell Branch of the Clydesdale Junction Railway to Aberchenheath Mi neral Fields. In this case also the standing orders were found to have been complied with, except in one or two unimportant in stances. CALEDONIAN RAILWAY (BRANCHES TO CANOBIE, &c.) This case was then gone into. One allegation was sus tained, impugning the accuracy of the levels, and the case was adjourned. (Room 23, before Mr. Examiner MAT.) OP?OSED CASE. London and North. Western, Wolverhampton and Porto bello Branch, and Birmingham and Wolverhampton, and St o ur Valley Station, arrangement and purchase of branch from h E o x l m il i l n , e a r n i‘ d ia a 3 m , amendment of occupied v o Acts.lith this opposed case. It was memorialised against by several parties. In the course of the day several allegations were sustained, but none of them appeared to be of a fatal character. The case was adjourned. SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. Cur.— to 1 agst Mendicant (taken)-25 to 1 BETTING AT MANCHESTER. —TUESDAY. Lamb-27 to 1 agst Bedlam-30 to 1 agst Camera The Flitch-33 to 1 agst Punch-35 Obscura-30 to 1 agst ... to 1 agst Antler (taken) -40 to 1 agst The Duke of Rich mond-45 to 1 agst Bourton-45 to 1 agst Crim. Con.-50 to 1 agst Mickey Free-50 to 1 agst Fitzallen-50 to 1 agst Sting-50 to j . agst Inheritress -400 to 18 agst Sir Tatton Sykes and Bourton (taken) METROPOLITAN STAKES.-15 to 1 (Inca on the field. DERBY.-15 to 2 agst Van Tromp (taken)-1•? to 1 agst Epirote (cff,l) _a g C 3 s t 3 H T E t 0 1 8 i T e I E L t a 12 to 1 agst Planet (offd.)-16 to 1 agst a g mC st Sister to Cobweb colt-35 to 1 agst Wanota— Glentilt-25 to 1 apt Conyngham-33 to 1 agst Al!ertonian 40 to 1 agst Red Hart-40 to 1 agst Christopher-40 to 1 agst Projectile-1,200 to 200 agst Epirote and Planet (taken) —6 to 1 agst Jahn Day's lot (otld.) THE OAKS.-8 to 1 agst 4 lementina (offd.)-10 to 1 agst Slander k ofid.)-10 to 1 agst Farmer's Daughter-12 to I agst Ellerdale. PRIVY COUNCIL.-(THIS DAY.) The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council sat again to-day to hear appeals. The Lords present were Lord Brougham, Lord Campbell, the Master of the Rolls (Lord Langdale), and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Cornwall ( the Right lion. Thomas Pemberton Leigh). TILL HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY or GRENADA v. CHIEF JUSTICE The Ten Hours'Advocate said that when children were made end cross-examined at some, length, with the object of , the defendant was the Mr. Cc. to work only six_ hours, .their wafles had been increased. ; sho w ing that the adreilisements v - Pre ordered on behlilf 'of Ito the r esolution in the mpir• tJUCII Ws c • 1101 tl,O C• 1,:, 'Ol. 1 171 , 1% er.Y . • ll,l '' . - • ' ! 7 • 1;1 i :,,,. i:, S cererniftee,rie I! ~ , e . cr tb i . , e ,_,.. Oe iLe 1..:0111, i• , l't, t-I • were reduced in exactly the same pi °pore, a ,, t ee • visional directors- The evidence, I.ee evel, mild nut shuts was railed whether the evil time was reduced; and a child twelve years and eleven that any particular distinction was kept up between the two jury, to fix the defendant of months old, and working only six hours, received only half bodies. The only material point elicited was, that the five present at the meeting. or the wages that a child 13 years and one month old re- original projectors, in consideration of having a certain num- On counsel being heard a ceived. With regard to the case of foreign competition, he her of shares allotted, or a certain amount of money paid The LORD CHIEF June believed that it was not properly understoo d b y the Hon. them out of the deposits, would bear the directors harmless at some length, decided tin Member for Oldham. He had in his hand a statement-of the in the expenses. The shares had never been allotted, and for the purpose. raw material consumed in. the manufacture of this country. the arrangement was not carried out. • Mr. Sergeant CHANNEL. In the cotton trade alono 600 millions of pounds of cotton No, &spite being raised respecting the fact of the adver- 'consented to be non-suited. were used, ard in She wool and worsted there were not, ti seme nts having been inserted in the ne ws p a p ers b y M r. Th e p l a i nt iff s were non - su ited accordingly. less than .260 millions of pounds used. In the fl ax trade! Barker, GILES V. BLAXTON. there were 177 millione of pounds imported, and in the! . Mr. Sergeant Ernes submitted that no evideece had leen . This Action was brought by toe same plaintiffs against silk 600,000 pounds, making in all 1,000,175,0 00 potinds. I adduced to fi x th e li a bility o n the defendant. N o p r o o f w a s another provisional director of the same company. given that any credit had been given to the provisional di- The circumstances of the case being similar to the pre- If that were divided by six, it would give a diminutio n in ! , the consumption ,of the raw material of 176,000,000 of , rectors. If any credit was given it was either to the secre- ceding one the record was withdrawie pounds, and how was it possible to dis • pense with one•sixth : tary or the committee of management. It did not appear of this deScription of munufactiire. The 'difference in the that the secretary, who gave the orders, had ever been ap- QUEEN'S BENCH.—(THIS DAY.) revenue would alone amount to 7,000,000/. annually. ' pointed by the provisional directors; for the meeting at That was a question worthy of the consideration of the which that gentleman and the solicitor were appointed was ( Before Mr. WIGHTMAN and a Special Jury.) Chancellor of the Exchequer , as it would - make a reduction of. only a meeting of certain gentlemen favourable to a parti- KNILL v. LOVEGROVE. 7,000,000/. per annum in the expenditure. He had attended cular line of railwa y . Any appointment of officers or orders Counsel, Sergeant Shee and Mr. Lush for the plaintiff ; many meetings at Manchester, and was aware that not one emanating from such a meeting, therefore , could not bind, and h llfr. Knowles, Q. C., and Mr. Miller fo r the d e f e nd an t. single individual of the working classes would accept of this the provisional directors who might be afterwards published firsts r ,thne Gloucester breachau sosefgs goodnstivtairdaewtnii an action brought by the plaintiff, a bankrupt in allegedfa t h h i,si againstast t n o e r e n e e s y st a rb the defendant y T d h ee e Bill if he did not believe that no reduction would take place in connection with the company. f v e i n n cl d g an ec e in in the rate of wages, Many of the work -people he employed Mr. KEAN followed on the same side. had petitioned that House in favour of the Bill, and - Mr. Comm:mai contended for the liability of the defendant he was glad that they had done so, as it showed that on the grounds set forth in the evidence. This case was dif- before the Bankr upt Court of an act of bankruptcy executed b li • provisional directors , foss the were independent, and could act for themselves.. ferent from the ordinary cases of . . y nill ; second, the use of fraudulent pretensions that all ' b the creditors were re d That was the case in many of the largest and best establish- much as no distinction had been shown in practice here e- y and willing to accept a composition of 4s. in the ound ' a ments in their trade • but he warned the House , that if they tween provisional directors and the committee of manage- in consequence of which Knill executed a • deed of P wort encouraged the working classes to come to that House for went. In fact they acted as one concern. Again it had whereby 200/. was recovered, a sum represente g d age' a legislative enactments to limit their hours of labour, and to been clearly shown, that the defendant had given his consent sufficient for that purpose; fix their scale of salary, that every manufacturer would be to be a provisional committee-man ; that his name had been but it afterwards turned s out that only of the five creditors agreed to accept the obliged to unite in self-defence—(Loud cries of "Divide , inserted in the prospectus by his instructions; that a cor- c e omposition, and only two of these received payment to th divide")—sod that, he was sure, would do away rection of his name was made in his own presence ; asired in costa, of 17/. the rest of the 200/. being swallowed up with the good feeling which at present existed and that as . provisional director, he had the defendant's own he bad tetween the manufacturers and their workmen.—(Renewed to have 150 shares allotted. Besides bill of costs amounting to 108/ , and the' 1 plintiff, now bereft of his money, was in no better . condition cries of " Divide divide.") He would not detain the House, given on several other instances proofs that he took was issued; third s the want of due vigilance an when the " but he understood that it was intended to bring forward in a lively interest in the company's proceedings. He sub- o t n the part of the defendant in endeavouring to bring the re Committee a clause to limit the hours of working to eleven witted , also, that the meeting on the Bth of October was rest of the credi tors to an agreement to accept the and not ten hours. Now he thought that the House would clearly a meeting of provisional directors, for though they composition of 4s. in the pound. at once concede that the workmen were right or they were might meet in the first instance as gentlemen in favour of a The evidence, which occupied the Court the whole of the wrong in this demand—if they were right it was a cowardly particular scheme, they resolved themselves before breaking day, was multifarious and every uninteresting. It failed to shrinking from their principles for Hon. Members to up into a provisional committee, and made the appointments prove the first allegation of a breach of good faith, and there depart from their principles, if wrong , they had only to op - as such. The acts of the officers, therefore, were to be taken fore that part of the case was abandoned by the plaintiff's pose the Bill altogether. He could not consent to the second as proceeding from the instructions of the p rovisional corn counsel. reading of this measure. mittee ; and as advertising was absolutel y necessary for for- Witnesses were called on both sides, who showed Sir ANDREW LEITH HAY moved the adjournment of warding the scheme, that was clearly a liability incurred at the debate. their instance. that the plaintiff, aware that some of his creditors would . not accede to the composition of 45., agreed to pay a com- Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that he rose only to say a few Mr. James and Mr. Parry followed on the same side. . . of 10of them, andpressed the d f position s, to two words to the House, in consequence of the attack which had Mr. Sergeant BYLES replied, recapitulating the objections dant toget the fiatsupersededandsaid, with ; been made upon him a few minutes before six o'clock. he had previously advanced. regard to his creditors he would take his chance. If the Hon. Member for Durham (Mr. Bright) had intended The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said, a great deal of what had If the plaintiff was deceived by the representations to have made this attack, he (Lord J. Russell) thought been advanced on this occasion was inapplicable to the pre of his attorney into the hope that the sum re it should have been made at five o'clock—(Continued cheer- sent case. There were certain points on such questions as ing)—and he really thought that the Honourable Mem- these, settled as law, till reversed by the House of Lords— covered under the mortgage-deed would be sufficient ber, in his anxiety to :make the best ;defence on behalf an event which lie apprehended would never take place. If to obtain a settlement from his creditors, this of the cotton manufacturers, had departed from that be differed ever so widely from what had been already de- was not an issue in the trial. The fiat was ultimately super candour and courtesy to which Honourable Members cided, in his individual capacity, he would in law and pro- ceded , and about 15/. were paid to the creditor therest of . themoney being swallowed in s ' who might differ in opinion from him were fully entitled. priety be bound to give effect to it; but lie saw no ground, .. l up costs, but the plaintiff The Hon. Member said that this was a question of whatever for difference. Much had been said about the hard- found himself no better situated with regard to his creditoil principle, he (Lord John Russell) did not view it as ship of the plaintiff having no responsible party to proceed than when the fiat issued. such. He conceived that the difference between against, if these provisional directors were not liable. But in The •after consulting about ' jury for the defendant. ten, eleven, and twelve . hours was a question of a g reat number of those cases, he must remark, the actions degree, and not a question of principle. This was no new wer e not in realit y brou g ht on behalf of the plaintiffs, The Court rose at six o'clock. principle, as the Hon. Member had been pleased to allege. but only to enable the projectors of companies The limitation of the hours of labour had been introduced to save themselves from liabilities incurred, and to saddle before into that House, and it would be found thattit was them on other parties. He did not, however, say that this carried out in the statutes of the realm.—(Hear, hear, was the case with the present plaintiff, who was a trades and cheers.) Neither was it a change in the old law, man, and had, no doubt performed the services for which he for the old law protected apprentices against their mas- sought to recover. It was settled as law that an individual ters: it was, therefore, no question of privilege; it consenting to be put on the list of provisional directors did was merely a question whether the Legislature should not, therefore, pledge his credit for any debts that might be throw the shield of protection round the younger workers. contracted in forwarding the objects of the company : It That was a mere question of the day, on which the mem- had also been settled that the taking of shares as a provisional hers of the Government might differ without at all director did not establish a liability. Now the present differing on any principle. It' the Honourable Member action was brought by an advertising agent, and it would differed from that principle : if he thought the Legislature be necessary to refer to the evidence which bad been were wrong in the course they had adopted, he should have adduced in support of the liability, in order to discover it proposed the repeal of the laws on the subject. He knew there was no exception to the rule. The evidence had not that it was necessary now for him to enter into this shown that the defendant assented to be placed on the pro question. He had stated what he thought was • visional directory, and that he had also consented to take the general principle, and if this debate came to be 150 shares, though it appeared shares had never been issued. adjourned be would not detain the House by any length- It had next been shown that he bad expressed himself as cued observations. But if the House were pleased willing to have his name advertised as a provisional director. to listen he would not address himself more than Now, these in his (the Lord Chief Justice's) opinion, did not a few minutes to the question. He considered , ral.o the case out of the decision which the superior Court. then, as he had already etated, that it was not a question bee come to, theietbre did not establish the legal liability e t of principle, but of degree; and that young persons of 13 the defendant. In reviewing the oilier parts of the case, he years of age, working twelve, thirteen, orteurteen hours a day, did not think there were any circumstances to alter were taxed too much, because their bodily frame was not this view of the matter. The meeting of the Bth of sufficiently matured. He considered it was too much to give October seemed to hint but a meeting of certain gentlemen time for their moral or mental improvement, and he conceived desirous of forwarding a particular railway scheme, and they that it was so far a question of degree, inasmuch as a shorter appointed the provisional directors, but at this time they period of labour would be more fitted for them. The were not directors. Neither did he think the circumstance Honourable Member for Durham had expresied a of the defendant promising subsequently to settle the matter. fear of foreign competition. That was another of such a character as to give any other complexion to the question, and with regard to it he would only say case. The evidence of that was not very clear, and was given that the same objection had been urged in every by Mr. Garbett, who, it should be observed, bad been iriti previous arrangement that had been made fro m 1831 mately connected with getting up the scheme. to the present time, and he was happy to sa y that the The Learned Judge having gone over the evidence in d e . manufa c tures . of the country were still flourishing, tail, g ave it as his decision that there was not sufficient evi wl le the factory operatives had been g reatl y benefited. deuce to go to the jury, and that the plaintiffs should be ron- The i limitation of labour had given them three or four months suited, or else a verdict to go for the defendant, in order to in the year for the purposes of improvement. He would not admit of a bill . of exceptions. have troubled the House so long but for the attack of the Under the direction of his Lordship, a verdict was returned Hon. Member for Durham.—(Cheers.) for the defendant. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the Mr. COCKBURN, on behalf of the plaintiffs, then tendered a House Adjourned at Six o'clock. bill of exceptions to the ruling of his Lordship. Circulars have been issued calling a private meet ing of the Irish Members on the subject of Lord Georg* Bentinck's measure on the railway grant for Ireland. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, Feb. 9. PAROCHIAL FUNDS. Lord BROUGHAM quite concurred in the opinion xpressed by the Noble Marquis upon the talents and abilities of the writer of that letter, his respected and reverend friend, Rev. W. Herbert. Lord COTTENHAM would not enter into the ques tion whether the duties enjoined by the charter were performed or not, because there was no information on that subject. The statements niade with regard to ti is had been very contradictory. The charter said that peculiar duties were to be discharged ; but if these du ties were performed, there did not appear to be constant e..sidence enjoined. If they omitted to do their duty, :here was in this respect, he apprehended no distineti. n between them and the other large corporations of this country. In Henry the Eighth's time, when monaste ries and religious houses were dissolved, the rectories which formed a part of them fell to the ground, and b. - came the property of private individuals. Others of them remained ecclesiastical corporations, and were in appropriate rectories to the present time. In the neigh bourhood where he lived there were four contiguous parishes, the duties of which were discharged by a Dean and Chapter. The revenues of each of these parishes amounted to n) less than 8001. a year, while the salary of the clergyman, who did the spiritual duty, was only 401. He was not able to say what was the amount of the revenues of the other parishes ; but they were, no doubt, in the same proportion. The law gave the Dean and Chapter that discretion, for it presumed they would be so disposed to superintend the spiritual instruction of the people as to render any cognizance of the law un necessary. They had the law on their side, and from the best judgment he could form on the matter they were as well' entitled to the tithes and rectorial revenues as their Lordships were to their estates. Lord CAMPBELL wished to make a single observa tion. There was a difference between what was called appropriate tithes which were held, as lawyers called it, in lay fee, and ecclesiastical property to which duties were annexed. He differed with his Noble Friend w ith regard to the point of residence. These duties as: en joined by the old charters made residence necessary, and there was a penalty annexed if the duty so enjoined was not observed. Now, that penalty supposed a duty to be performed, the non-observance of which was visited with the penalty. Now, it appeared to him from the lucid statement of the Noble Lord who Introduced the subject, that a duty was imposed and that it should be performed. No blame, however, should be attached he believed to the parties involved in the petition, to whom the cause of religion and education was so muds indebted. Lord COTTENHAM disclaimed expressing any opinion as to whether the duties were performed or not. He expressly avoided making any reference to that. His observations were confined to the property in a legal point of view. Lord STANLEY would not presume to deal with the legal question, but he could not help urging upon their Lordships that 3 and 4 Will. IV., c. 113, rated pro perty, like that in question, as rectorial property.. What he wished to urge upon their Lordships was, whether the requirements of the charter were satisfied, and whether they acted the part of good citizens, by the way in which they performed their duties. It was for their Lordships and the country to consider whether this was a state of the law which ought to be considered incapable of a remedy. Were the inhabitants of Man chester, and other populous places, who had levied upon them 5,0001. or 6,0001. a year for the purposes of spiritual instruction, to be deprived of that spiritual instruction, and to see the funds placed in the hands of persons who did not recognise any corresponding claim upon them, but to expend them as they thought proper, and where they thought proper, without fulfilling the duties for which the funds were raised, and to see them liable, in addition, to have them taken up by the ecclesiastical commissioners, and diverted from recto' ial to chapter purposes. They were anxious to see the matter properly arranged before the final establishment of the see. They said the funds were rectorial funds, and that they were improperly applied. He was sur rised that they should avail themselves of a technicality a the charter to evade the proper performance of their uties. BAIL COURT.-(THIS DAY.) (Before the Judges in Banco.) SHANKS V. SWEETLAND. Mr. BUTT, Q.C., who appeared for the plaintiff, said that this was a motion for a new trial instituted by Admira Shanks, for the recovery of a right of way over a piece of land adjoining a tenement and some mills, occupied by a person of the name of Reed, who was himself a tenant of 111 r. Sweetland. It appeared that the piece of land had been for a considerable time in a state ,of waste, and un occupied for any useful purpose. On the farther side of it there was a small stream of water which was used by Reed as a convenience, and it was necessary to pass across this land of Admiral Shanks' to get to it. The con stant exereise of this custom for a length of time had induced Sweetland and Reed to believe that the easement was vested in the proprietor pro tempore of the tenement, and that with the easement the real:property came also. Mr. Sergeant KINGLALE, on behalf of the defendant, said that if there had been no grant of the right of easement, there had been an open use of the right of way for time that was legally immemorial. During the trial in the court below both the tenant Reed, and also an old man long resident in the neighbourhood, named Wollen, had declared that, so long as they had known the premises, this right of way had been enjoyed without interruption. The cause had been put to the jury, under the direction of the Learned Judge who tried the cause, for them to return a verdict, on the ground that if Reed went over the land be lieving that he had the right, if not to the possession of the land, at least to the easement of passing over it. That, be (Mr. Sergeant Kinglake) submitted, was an erroneous di rection, for the principle on which the jury ought to have been directed to return their verdict was upon the point as to whe ther there was an open possession or not. He contended that there had been this open possession, and that the • plaintiff ought, therefore, to be nonsuited. Mr. MosTaGuit Saran tolloWed on the same side, and contended, that the mere belief of any man could not be taken, for unless there were facts to confirm the existence of that belief, and that an uncommunicated belief was an improper ground on which to found a decision, and that a cause, which rested on such evidence, ought to be stopped, in limine. Both Reed and Wollen had shown that there had been an occupation for above forty years. There was the actual occupation of the 'right of way, and the whole difficu!ty of the case arose out of the testimony of Reed, who had testified that the tenant was in occupation of the land. That was clearly going too far, and as it the case with the testimony of willing witnesses in numerous instances, was both wrong and mischievous. But this in no way shook the real merits of the case, for it had been decided by the Court in the case of Bright v. Walker, that the right of easement should, in the words of the Act be claimed as such, and not as a right to the land. They also stated in their judgment, that this right must be used openly, not by stealth, but hi the face of tie whole world. But the jury in this case had given their verdict even upon the weakest ground; and he, therefore, submitted that it ought not to be reversed, sitnply, because one witness had made an injudicious statement, and be did not hesitate to assert that if it were reversed the Court would be destroying an Int meme number of rights in this couutry, for witnesses could always be found to come up and make an overstatement. Mr. BUTT, for the plaintiff, contended that there had been no sufficient evidence given to prove the right, for there was other land beside that which had been adduced. Mr. JuStice Cot.xenDGE said that if there had been no evi dence to go to the jury, he wondered that the counsel on the trial did not turn round and tell the jury so at the time. Mr. BUTT resumed, and went through the evidence, en deavouring to show that it was either insufficient or con ffiellifg;•and thus either way constituted a sufficient cause for making the rule absolute for setting aside the verdict. An argument was raised as to what was the land. over which this right of land was claimed; when it was estab lished that the piece of ground over which this right had been exercised, although unquestionably the property of Admiral Shanks, was separated from his other-property by a wall, and lay on the aide of the ground which was occupied by Reed. 44 Lord BROUGHAM said that he had seen in the blue book two letters, which complained that Captain Wyt.ne, one of the superintendents of the relief rate, had im posed upon its funds two persons who were in the elNir receipt of 601. a-year each, as well as several other per sons who were in easy circumstances. He had - he.ird from private sources, from persons who were interested neither one way or the other in the matter, and who only know. Captain Wynne in his public capacity, the highest testimonies to his private character. That might be all very true ; but they had only to deal with that Gallant Officer as a public man, and it was neces sary that the country should have some certain know ledge of the way in which this money was applied. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE p er fe c tly agree d in the supposition that there ought to be every care for the proper application of the money under the Labour rate Act, but this much he could say that no set of men could have discharged their duties better than the superintendents under the Labour rate Act, and he could - affirm, from the information trans mitted to her Majesty's Government, that Cap tain Wynne had discharged his duties with great diligence, fidelity, and di:cretion. That of ficer had evinced the greatest courage in the discharge of his duties, and far from being instrumental in imposing persons on the rate who were not entitled to it, be had absolutely removed more than eleven hundred persons from the rate whom be thought ineligib)e for the relief. Lord MONTEAGLE could bear ample testimony t? the ability and zeal with which the supaintendants ned discharged their difficult, arduous, and trying . d e ut w ie k . - . 1, could, from his own knowledge speak as to h in carry out the wishes of their supeerai which a great number of gent l em et . i ara ha . d and i f a t v t o b u o r j e d ba t d o t h h e ei t r ha j t ud e g a m pt e 9 n i t theyin any w were e e notinstance be a_ en . ci.mistalkt migihnt had been guilty of wilful negli gence, so, S et, „ imposingulesspersons on the rate, without ascer- Wynne had been misbhtlaoknewn in his views, but even if that if-rombisiersorial knowledge whether they ere to the relief, he ought to be exonerated from all blame. entitledgtaet n n c i Lord BROUGHAM thought the evidence ought to neg, o r no. be produc"d upon which the report was made. Probably Captain Wynne was right after all. The subject then dropped, The Earl of EGLINTON presented a petition from the distillers of S ye c at o hi tl ne a tß n o d itt iasngocawoinmsbtte r yf tohr at e e r e paa d lr u el i c sas t imodenantoyt than h t , nm e c duty oul d o b n rum. intr odu ß c Scotch spirits. The Earl of CLARENDON said the petitioners had waited upon him, and his Right Hon. Friend the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, and he must confess that they did not make out any case why they should have addi tional protection. Lord MONTEAGLE said be had a petition from Ire land of precisely -the same effect as the one which had just been presented. The case of Ireland, howeier, was harder than that of Scotland, for Ireland had no draw back, where Scotland had. After a few words from Lord STANLEY mil Earl GREY, the subject dropped. Their Lordships then adjourned. The Learned Judges consulted together, and then L.brd Chief Justice DENMAN said that they conceived that this trial had not been quite satisfactory, on the ground of insufficient evidence of Reed's occupation, and they therefore decreed that the rule for a new trial should be made absolute, the costs to abide the issue. EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.) (Sittings at Nisi Prius, before the LORD CHIEF BARON and a Common Jury.) CARMAN v. JOHNSON. Mr. Martin appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Willes for the defendant. This was an action for the recovery of the balance of a loan made by the Metropolitan Loan Society, for which defendant became security. A verdict was taken for the plaintiff for 511.35. 4d., with leave to the defeudant to move to enter a nonsuit. JAMES V. MAN/i. Mr. Martin and Mr. Howorth appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Humphrey and Mr. Prentice for the defendant. This was an action to recover compensation in damages for an injury sustained by plaintiff's cab from a collision With defendant's cart on the 7th July last, in Piccadilly, in conse quence of alleged negligence on the part of defendant's servant. A number of witnesses having been examined on both sides, a verdict was given for the plaintiff for 121. 10s. — costs, 40s. COMMON PLEAS.—(THIS DAY.) GILES AND ANOTHER I'. COMFORT.. --TI " TIINIIRIDGE WELLS AND RYE HARBOUR RAILWAY. This was an action brought by Messrs. Francis Giles and Alfred Giles, engineers, to recover 1,5601. for work and labour done in surveying the line, and preparing the plans and sections of the Tunbridge Wells and Rye Harbour R a ilway Company. This was the first doefld3anats pleaded sb e y d the same plaintiffs in this Court. The fen the general issue. Mr. Sergeant (Mennen and Mr. Pigot appeared for th e _ p l a intiffs; and Mr. Cockburn for the defendant, who is a merchant in the city of London. opened the ease , Mr. Sergeant CHANNELL having pro ceeded to call his witnesses. From the evidence adduced it appeared that the scheme was projected hi the latter end of 1845, and that in pursuance of a resolution of a meeting of the provisional directors, held on the 26th of October, the plain- HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 9. tiffs were appointed the engineers, and instructed to pro- NAVIGATION LAWS. ceal with the work. The defendant hadprevious this consented to be a provisional director f he to of 1 Mr. liICARDO, in continuation, proceeded 4 10 say•-• Mr. `homes, in his evidence, further statai that many which the present one emanated, ag e s o ha a res sc had m b e ee o n n‘ al- 1 lotted to him. It was further alleged that he bad been sacrifices were made by the home merchant wad mana• present at the meeting of the `A - ' th of October, an d torturer for the purpose of encouraging nitwit sme coin• moved a resolution. The fact of consenting. t o ' mer ; and he considered that some sacrifice should be become a provi s i ona l di rector and to ta ki ng s h ares was clearly I made for the general security of the country • ; but the preyed, but the seeretury of the company coald.uot say that 1 question had never been put in such a , light e t: ~.„ riwi• Dc ars. mfort wbst narvatattached I 1 ' Po .s th [CE, e! ,at th eff yam Jie - - 1 on b o f • en t SANDERSON. The arguments in this part heard case were resumed this morning. The case came before their Lordships upon appeal from the decision of his Excellency the Governor of the island, refusing to dismiss the respondent, the Chief Justice of the colony, flout his situation. The case appears likely to os cupy several days, the first counsel for the appellant (Mr. J. P. Wilde) not having yet concluded his address to their Lordships. CHANCERY.—(THIS DAY.) The Lord Chancellor sat to-day in his Court, in the Old lall, Lincoln's Inn, and heard appeal motions. THE ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH COMPANY V. NOTT AND GAMBLE, This case came before his Lordship upon a motion in the nature of an appeal from the decision of his Honour the Vice-Chancellor of England, ordering a motion for an injunction made on behalf of the plaintiffs, the Electric Telegraph Company, to stand over, and giving liberty to the plaintifis to try such action as they might be advised to try the validity of the patents, to prevent the infringement of which was the object for which that injunction was sought. One of the objects of the present moti n was to discharge that order, also to obtain an injunction from his Lordship to restrain the nefentlants from directly or indirectly making, using, exercising, or putting in practice the invention or improvement contained in the patents ' belonging to the plaintiff of the :years 1837, 1840, and 1842, or from, or in any way, resembling or counterfeiting them. We have already given a statement of the facts of the case, and it is, therefore, unnecessary to repety them. Mr. Bethell, Mr. Teid, and Mr. Heathfield, appeared in support of the appeal motion ; and Mr. :quart and Mr. Webster were counsel for Messrs. Gamble and Nott. The case appears likely to occupy a day or two. VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.) (Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR of ENGLAND). THE LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY t", SWA INSO N. Mr. BETIIELL, with whom was Mr. Follett, applied in this case upon motion to discharge an order made by Sir W. Horne, one of the Masters of the Court, by which he gave to the defendant six weeks longer to put in an answer, plea, or demurrer to the bill of the plaintiffs. The London and North-Western Railway company was now incor porated with many other railway companies, by several Acts of Parliament, and it was usual in any bill filed by the company to mention those Acts. The London and ,North-11 estern Railway Company had entered into a con tract with the defendant, Mr. Swainson, for the purchase of a piece of land, and the present Bill was filed on the 22d of December, 1846, for the specific performance of that contract, and praying that:it might be decreed that the plaintiff was bound specifically to perform the contract. The defendant did not put in his answer in time, and not being, able, as he alleged, to do so, in consequence of no t having had au opportunity of reading the several Acts referred to in the Bill, he applied, u nder the new order, tdo Sir W. Borne for further time , which application was grante , and six weeks fofther given, and that order it was now sought to discharge. ansiidhis r t e; ;fr. erld \l i,t ' oo a aN i tn k oidi e ue r igtb a aid n lvir. t ee lL h 7 d r ee i g toc h in. t d - de o ar p n p ,t, o f s t e se d ni r the d‘\ar .yisi,, application. eO i)t uotb ien clln COMMON PLEAS.—(THIS BAY.) BARKER V. lANDEN. On the assembling of the er_lirt this morning, this case, whick was part-heard yesterday, was Nr. Stepens., the teeretary of the company, recahq,d, iso. ion the his os RIM tee of 'hr trd