The Sun. — London, England, 1847-05-18 00:00:00

1 ..:"t. ~i tt ,~~~ e , iacation—men whose lives are one professional and • exercise of philanthropy—have assisted these in the ears of the Le2islature by ttleir sanction and 4.20 in -7, r: ; tice, clergymen of every religious persuasion. Spriest ing from such a source, founded on such a basis of feel ing and opinion, it has made its way through much dit ficalty against powerful opposition, till it has obtained the sanction of an influential portion of a Cabinet, of a conclusive majority of the House of Commons, arid, se supported end recommended, has reached the table of your Lordships' House. I state there things, my Lords, not for the purpose of inducing any one of your Lordships to abdicate your privilege of free discus sion or of deliberate judgment. Latest and least of the importations to your Lordship' House, I should be sorry to signalise my first endeavour at ad dressing your Lordships by proposing any surrender of Your independence, any infraction of your privileges. My Lords, the principle of this Bill has been impinged as involving legislative interference with the rights of capital and labour. I might slur this objection on the ground of repeated precedent. I am prepared, however, 1f necessary, to contend that I am advocating nothing inconsistent with the doctrines of political economy at all. My Lords, 1 dislike a meddling Government. I believe with them that for the creation of the greatest producible wealth in any given community, and, there fore, for the widest diffusion of that material well-being which attends the production of wealth, the policy of abstinence from legislative meddling is the sound policy, and, therefore, I think it incumbent on any ona who departs from that policy to assign distinct grounds for his justification. The master manufacturer and the operative have both a right, I admit it, to say to me_ You are interfering with my free action—you are select ing mine from a crowd of other occupations, to make it the subject of experimental legislation. I claim an ex planation. I demand an exceptional reason for your conduct. My Lords, I find that justification, as most of your Lordships will anticipate, in the inherent, inalien able tendencies of that agent which Watt forced into the service of man as applied to the four great branches of our textile industry which come under the provisions of this Bill--I mean the tendency, in the first instance, to attract to its ministration the labour of those W hom, in respect of age and sex, or both, nature never intended for hard and continuous labour ; and next, in 48 tendency to make that labour continuous, and un ceasing, and protracted to a limit of physical and mental endurance which, in my opinion, no Christian legislature can see its subjects approach without ac nowledging the duty of interfering, if it can interfere, for their relief and protection.—(Hear.) It is ox this these branches my Lords, that, finding as I do, with regard to branches of industry, the means and opportunity of interference, I claim the right to exercise them. I 3 4 :1 1 Y , mY Lords, fi n di ng the means and opportunity, for 1 8 also is an essential element of practical interference, used, is, nay reply to an argument which, though often ;rut is, I think, singularly inconclusive to a course of who very commonly adopted towards any man 13 is hunting down a particular grievance, and which other ende avours ojeet t s o of divert his attention by pointing out fifty pursuit. My Lords, there is doubtless enough of abuse, and misery, and oppression in the fold world to make a sentimental or flighty philanthropist his arms in despair. My Lords, I invite your Lordship s to interfere with these large collected ag ferieigations of labour, because theory and experience are ran you can do so with effect—because they because°n to inspection and capable of control you can do much to prevent abuse, and, if I am the hard necessity arise, to punish it. aware that this ve ry feature of the case has been alleged as a reason f or non -i nter f erence. I t h as b een said that the factory system la the very department of O ur indust r y i n which abuse is oppression are most o.eiseen overable, and can l east escape d etect i on . . We have repeatedly t o ld th a t we t a ke an unphilosophical view of the effects of tl e use of machinery; that it is labourat dimninisher of the sum of mental and physical , the f ert il e source of le i sure an d con t e ntment, and that we should be cautious bow we meddle with its ope rations. I admit these facts; but I demand your Lord ships' attention to some further facts connected with the employment of that fixed and expensive capital into the scope and effect of which it becomes a duty, from % , vhich, as a legislator, I cannot escape, _ s inquire. n quire. ese is, in my opinion, no grander result of human intelli gence than a large cotton mill; but I s ay this of it, t h at f rom the moment its engine is starte d , r aised by th e cap i tal and governed by the will of the acute and enterprising individual who sits in its office, it becomes the direct interest of that presiding genius that its motions should be as unceasing and continuous as stamen contrivance can make them, that there is no part Of that vast system of wheels and levers which can rest without loss, o r , i n t h e or di nary and average course of commercial prosperity, p ursue i ts motions without gain. The human labour attached hand and foot to thaf is systemfor th e most part a d m i ts not of relays. What the e natural, th e i nev i ta bl e consequence of this ? Why, that .which has resulted—that with which, step by step, haves'FraeliSan cautiously, effectually, and successfully, you _ b een endeavourin g f o r thi r ty y ears to moderate 2, 1 ,u control, in w i se d e fi ance of the abstract principles Political economy. That the strong impulse of gain Placed in dir ec t an d dangerous antagonism with the ellir us of h umanity —that it almost invariably prevails in the left and hear)—as for a time it was btizttie'orottenstt")iltfhleft to itself, it reduces a part of your popu e condition of slavery, unmitigated by that does n the owner (ocfon the well-being of the party which operat e h a e hacker s ) I. the slave-owner of Carolina, or the row.—or a hunter in Leicestershire, or Rotten to My Lords, such things have been • prevent them you have' repeatedly interfered and your labours have net been in vain. Now, my Lords, does the same reason hold good with other departments of human industry in which machinery of human contrivance is less concerned? I say machinery of human contrivance, for I hold that, in some sense, the earth itself is a ma chine, that the clod of the valley, in which you drop the germ of future vegetation, is as much a machine as that in which you deposit your portions of raw cotton to be twisted and elongated. In another place, my Lords, ' I took the liberty, at the risk of some offence, of telling the lords of the soil that in this point of view I consi dered them as master manufacturers, and I re-assert that opinion here. Your Lordships, in the management oF hereditary estates which have descended to you from the Conquest, are working with machinery as well as Mr. Greg or Mr. Birley ; but, my Lords, there is this dit fereace between the machinery of God's contrivance and that of his creatures. The earth will work alone, in the silence of night, under the stars of heaven, unlit by your gas, uufed by your fires, admitting st intervals, which nature indicates, the regulated assistance of man, taking him into partnership, but with no direct tendencies to Make him its slave.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) Such, my Lords, are the considerations which have induced nie to overcome the repug nance I individually enter tain to meddling with concerns which, from their mag nitude and complexity, I dread to approach.—(Cheers.) Tw o main objections have been taken to the measure, two principal and widely distinct consequences have been held out as certain to ensue. It is said, that by striking off a twelfth from the time during which, when employment is rife, you are at present able to labour, You will either diminish wages or incur defeat from for eign competition. For the first of these consequences I h ave always advised those with whom I had been in communication to be preared, and I have certainly aYs received the answe p r that, to the best of their ability, a they had counted the cost, and were prepared, on oeuats of ain themselves and their . families, to encounter it. ..„ not fond of prophesying in matters of this descrip t,no, hut if, on the one hand, I am not prepared to risk the miserable value of my reputation for accuracy on a c alculatio n of the exact effect upon wages, on the other, _ any man to favour me with a c a lc u l a ti on o f th e amount of actual domestic economy which may be effected by the mother of three children wh o re t urns t o r home two hours sooner than at present. I cannot calculate this, because I cannot sew, I cannot darn, I cannot wash, and I cannot cook. On these matters I Must refer your Lordships to your wives and servants. Still less can I calculate the evanescent quantities, the moral effects of leisure and repose to the mind, or lay down in advance statistical results on bodily health or longevity. I have no doubt whatever that the average suns total of these elements, if they could be calculated, Would show a set-off to any probable diminution of money wages, which will one day be satis factory to those who have co-operated in passing. I this measure.—(Hear, hear.) On this su bject T must also call your Lordships' attention toanot t h i. e e r work kumis stanee—the deductions now f made when brought in by the operative or waste and spoil. My Lords, from such information as I can obtain , it is my firm belief that nine-tenths of that spoiled w ork occurs In the last weary hours of the operative's present ave rage toil. I have never met with any man, of any class, conversant with the subject, who has not laid much stress on this circumstance. I pass, my Lords, to the question of foreign competition. I do not profess to receive with indifference, from men for whose station, acquirements, and abilities I have profound respect, their warnings on thi s su bj ect ; but I am consoled by the re flection that no step has been taken in this matter which has not been preceded by similar warnings of ruin and similar threats of emigration to those which, I doubt not, have assailed many of your Lordships as they have assailed me. And yet, my Lords, I hold in my h an d a paper which shows that Engl an d has yet held her own against the competition of the world, and which leads me to think that if she is doomed to suffer decay, it will originate rather in a diminished supply of the raw material than in any legislation which, for the sake of the highest interests of humanity, your Lordship may have consented to adopt. My Lords, I believe that from a concourse of circumstances peculiar to the character of this nation, England is in a condition to set an example to the world in this matter. as she has done in others—that she is able to do right and fearnot; and more than this, that her example will be followed, and that foreign statesmen who may not be disposed to follow it will be pressed by that influence of public feeling and opinion which is acting upon ourselves.—(Cheers.) My Lords, in the course I have taken in accepting the conduct of this Bill I have undertaken a grave responsibility for its eventual c onsequences. Should it prosper to the extent of toy I nVes and expectations, and should I live to see that result, I reserve to myself, as my sole but all sufficient reward, the gratification of that spectacle. Popularity I have not sought, and utterly disclaim. If that reward should eventually fall clue, it is impossible that the intel ligence and justice of the people should not place the saddl e on the right horse. It will be due, in the first instance, to my Noble Friend—it will be due to the master manufacturer, who has not allowed himself to be swayed by considerations which would place his own i nterests in seemi ng , t h ough, as I believe, d e l ss i ve con trasts rasts with th us • of others. It will be due to those who have worked th roug h t h e long hours of this Bill in the workshop of the Legislatu re , and not the labourer of the elev ent h hour, who now b egs y our L or d a hip s , pardon for so long trespassi ng on your Lordships ' attention.— second reading of the'Bill fobs rs-) The Nob l e Earl c o n c l u d e d by mov i n g the Lord FEVERSHAM said that in seconding the motion of his Noble 17;•:r 1 sat. down. wished to make 01 L•W g s nera lly, A , ersbl , body th e iminstrious o ti well-disposed operatives, men in favour of this measure, from a desire nut only to svoid the present severe labour and its sudden alterations, but from a conviction that it was a measure which ;mist eventually result in the ad vancement of their interest —by their eqalising the awouut of labour to be distributed amongst them, and rendering their employment more constant. The ques tion of wages was one which had induced many to ' stand forward iu opposition to this measure, who ap proved of ins regulations as being likely to benefit the working classes. It was possible that the rate of wages might be reduced, but that would be coun teracted by the greater certainty of employment. This Bill had been brought into the other House by a gentleman who was himself deeply interes:ed in the manufactures of the country. Mr. Fielding had sped a long life in the cotton manufacture, and during the course of that life he had most materially benefited the working classes, and he had brought forward this men sure with a view of adding one more benefit to the many he had conferred upon the working classes. The opinions of this gentleman were supported by a very large number of those who were also engagjd in the various manufactures of the country, and who had equally the welfare of the operatives in view. The Noble nerd then proceeded to refer at a considerable length to documents which showed that from the year 1819 to the present time the provisions of this Bill had been mat ter of agitation, not only amongst the class whom it mor e insmedit elv• affected, bat in the Houses of Parliament. and since that time, up to the year 1847, the consumption of cotton had increased nearly at the rate of 400 per ' cent. In seconding the motion for the second reading of this Bill, he was not aware of what reception he would meet with from the House and from her Majesty's Go vernment, but he hoped that a measure, which was so perfectly consonant with all recognised principles of po litical economy. and so well calculated to benefit the working classes, would not be olherwise than favourably received. Lord BROUGHAM said that he was very sorry to .dsturb the unanimity of feeling which had appeared upon this question during the evening, by an expression of dissent from the measure before them. He was glad to see so large an attendance of the Right Reverend Pre lates, as this matter was one, in the discussion of which they ought to be more than usually interested ; and he trusted that he should be enabled to lay before them such views of this question as would perhaps induce them to consider it maturely before giving an assent to it. The question was not one which was merely affecting the interests of the manufacturer—it affected the condition of that great body of men who laboured for the support of these manufactures, and with whose condition and labour he had, ever since he had had the power of reasoning, maintained that they had no right of interference. There were no mysteries of political economy in science connected with this ques tion, for if any man who had formerly worked twelve hours a day were restricted to ten, it was nothing but common sense to believe that suck a step would have the effect of increasing the price of manufactured com modities. He could not too highly deprecate the conduct of any man who volunteered to meddle with this vast subject, which effected thirty-seven millions of the trade of this country, and assure the world that ho was so confident of is theory that he had no doubts of its future success. There was no question which required more caution and slowness of action than this. It required the deepest and acutest circumspec tion to deal with it ; and for any man to dare to assert that there could be no soundness of the principles of the measure was really surprising. At the present moment, the manufacturing districts were overstocked with labour—they were overwhelmed with an immense body of destitute children—and their Lordships ought, there fore, to be the more cautious in the steps they took with regard to the intermeddling policy. It must not be supposed that he was the advocate of the mill. owner. On the contrary, he was speaking for those whom the millowner employed—namely, the labourers ; and on their behalf, and their behalf alone, he warned their Lordships of the direful consequences that must. inevitably follow the adoption of this measure. There was, however, no ground to justify their Lordships adopting it. True, they had in terfered to a moderate extent already, but then that in terference was to get rid of a crying evil. Here, how ever, there was no such cause to justify the interference. There were no charges of cruelty brought against the millowner—there was no overworking of the labourer. He was satisfied with his present situation, but the pro moters of this Bill knew better than he did himself, and told their Lordships that he was not only overworked but excessively and cruelly overworked. Their former interference was in defence of children to prevent their being unduly employed at night, but the present Bill was not to protect the labourer but to destroy one-sixth part of the total manufactures of the country. That was the real object of the Bill, or at all events it was ;the direct tendency of the measure, and he put it to their Lordships whether they were prepared to strike such a blow at a branch of the trade of the country, which exported upwards of 70,000,0001. per annum, and employed upwards of a million of people. Surely such a step must considerably reduce the wages of the labourer, and yet it was said that the Bill was for his protection. For his protection, indeed Why, he had been told upon the best authority, that if the steam-engine of S. mill were stopped for repairs, but for a few hours, it had a considerable effect upon the wages of the labourer. The labourers in manufactories would feel every reduction that might be made in the hours of labour, and by the present Bill the wages would undergo wages ifthis oufillth weree man persi m s t u e s d t follow. a very material diminution. More than one-sixth also en was taken from the master's profits, an d if th e p ro fit s o f the mastersuo w had t n away, w d a oA y t the but in they should have ere long to retrace their steps. The argument of his Noble Friend who had just sat down— that manufacturers were a t p resent compelled to work only six, seven, and ten hours p er d mint at all in favour of th e Bill. The ay—was n o argu present distre ss in the manufacturing district s was very great , but th a t surely was no reason why they sh ou ldenla per petuate it, which would be the eff ec t if ft zur to me asure became law. " To belay" thi ngs , as the sailor present termed it, and make no effort to chang e them for the better, was not the way to secure the prosperity of the manufacturing interest ; and he apprehended if they placed restriction on the hours of labour they would be only confirming the existence of the present state of things. He would ask their Lordships would the Americans, the Dutch, or the Swedes, follow their example? No, they would not; but the conse quence would be that not only those nations but the French and other continental nations would be stimu lated to increased exertion, and would eventually suc ceed in driving them from their own markets, and anni hilate the manufacturing and commercial superiority of this country.—(Hear, hear.) With regard to the moral effect of this measure he would observe that poverty and distress was as fatal to the mental and moral as it was to the physical condition of the people. Now, by taking off one-sixth part of the profits of the manufacturers, there could be no other result than a dimi nution of the bodily comforts and circumstances of the working classes. (Hear, hear.) The consequence of this would be poverty. And no more effectual means could be desired to secure the moral degradation of the people. He certainly did think there would be much more good sense in an eight hours' Bill, than one for ten hours. The principle was the same, and the probability was greater of effecting the object they had before them. The man who had worked ten hours was so fatigued as to be unable to attend to what was intended to enlighten his mind. —(Hear) He (Lord Brougham) had had experience of that for twenty-five years, during which he had en deavoured to educate the labouring classes, and had been successfully defeated by sleep.—(Laughter.) But the most remarkable thing was that all the good was to be obtained at the sacrifice of one-sixth of the working man's week's wages. Mr. Arkwright, a gentleman who possessed four mills in the North Riding of Yorkshire, having heard that his men were agitating short time, made a proposal of short time to his workmen. The first and largest mill decided for the long time ; the second, by a large majority, chose the long time ; and the third and fourth decided for the short time. He put one at least of thus mills on short time, according to their own election, but they had not been ong under the new arrangement till they discovered that there was a dimi nution of their wages. This was a new fact, and they re-considered their choice. But there was another au thority against this Bill. The House of Commons had sent up the Bill backed by a majority. In theory it was to he reckoned the same House of Commons. Well, in March, 1844, the Twelve Hours Bill was rejected by a majority of three ; shortly after they rejected a Ten Hours' Bill by a majority of 7—not the same ma jority ; and they would neither have the Ten Hours nor the Twelve Hours' Bill, and the Eleven Hours even had not yet been heard of.—(Laughter.) The 3d of May came, and the Ten Hours' Bill was again rejected by a good workable majority of 137. But the year 1846 came, and with a split in the House. The Corn Bill had been passed, and the land-men',and the wool-men were pitted one against another. A measure affecting corn had been carried, and the other party were now determined to turn against the mills. A short period of three years got a majority of 108 for the second reading ; such was the unaccountable change. And was this the time when the House of Commons should come to such a conclu aio n ; a time when everything was threatening, and food riots were occurring in the coun tr y ? Was this a measure to en f orce i n the present state of things, wh en i n our country, t h e ot h er d a y, 200 special constables were sworn in in consequence of the food riots; when the people , e craving for employment a nd food, w as this the were time, upon speculation, upon shadows, and upon fantasy, to pass a measure which would curtail the four great and staple manufactures of Engla n d? Nothing could injure or curtail manufactures, or in the slightest way i n j ure ; h e; . i , that did not, of ne cessity The wool trade was one of the four that was t o be strucke at by this Bill. 240,000 tons were grown, and they were about the labour to cut off on e-sixth part of upon it; and would not that, of necessity, cut down a part o f the lab of the Nobl e mover and o u r. He had heard the speeches seconder of this measure, and by they were characterised an absence of all personal reflection, and therefore to them, but to less his obs e r vat i ons did no t apply wise me n e l sew here. A measure to be worthy of the sanction and adoption of the Legislature, and to be useful must combine beneficen ce w i t h b enevo l en ce. The execution of goo d it, in order co as essential as the will to do designed. There effectuallywere,hb benefit those for whom it was ard-w b orked, half-fansisheed admitted, th ousan d s o f p oor , h factories, and they all wished rnen engaged in the matito to remedy th e ir s ufferings, convinced but their reason sh o uld b e of the efficacy or the measure they adopted befo re s hould not pass it because theirf they passed it. They feelings of compassion were roused without seeing l c early that that which was intended. 11 ,, had himsPir se rn the toilA of ti •e , unfor• offered to them as a remedy would reall y hare the eff,ct Inftll. t--;W:.:7;(;i1 111 eati , . tole. T 1 :iat; , xieen or sec( retureing to their homes worn on e j .:.e . teen hours 01 labour, wit h gernienis chimed wiiii per spiration, without even the comfort of a change of clothes, or the comfort—to theta a luxury—of fuel. He had seen these, and was not the condition of the hardest worked factory labourer to be envied by such men as these ? Their physical existence was affected, and a man employed as a farm labourer was at the age of 45 as iutirm as a man of 70 in the upper classes of life; and if they spoke of unhealthy employment, why did they not turn their attention to other occupations far inure delete rious and destructive than that of factory labour. There were the workers in steel and brass, who lived in an atmos phere they r filledworked, with andthe ti w ho filings of f early th e agesmetals r o li m p n oh diseases whtcit engen d er ed by it. Why did they not pass such a mea • su re with regard to them? Why, it would be t o th em yw o d it i t e lf ( 4 l as it was to the factory labourers, an act of the grossest and most cruel injustice ; and yet the workers in brass, from the time of Tubal Cain downwards, were destroyed by their occupations. It was upon all these grounds, and with many apologies for having so long detained them, that he asked them to refuse their assent to the Bill, and moved that it be read that day six months. The Bishop of LONDON said that he felt that he laboured under a great disadvantage in following the Noble Lord who had just spoken ; but he felt bound to express to their Lordships his entire concurrence in the measure which they had then under discussion, and which had been so ably attacked by the Noble Lord who had just sat down. Ile gave his assent to the measure without the smallest feeling of doubt upon his mind that the grounds upon which it was proposed were unsafe or unsound.—(Hear, hear.) He was ready to admit as a general principle, that they should not he terfere with the free competition for labour ; but there were circumstances which might warrant such an inter ference, and render it necessary. He thought that it was the duty of a Government to protect the interests of any large class of the community when it was likely to suffer, and to remove, as far as it could, any evils which pressed upon them unnecessarily. It was with regard to the large body of children employed on fac tory labour, that he thought this measure most parti cularly deserving of their Lordships' attention. The physical condition, and the moral condition of the children were objects to which their attention ought to be directed in whatever occupation they were engaged. The Noble Lord had painted to them in glowing colours the miseries suffered by the agricultural labourer, but he (the Bishop of London) thought that the picture was overdrawn. The agricultural labourer could breathe the pure air, and see the clear light of Heaven, and he could at any time suspend his toil—even though it were only for a few minutes—so as to prevent that exhaustion of strength and spirits which continuous labour would necessarily entail. The factory labourer, on the contrary, was shut up in a close factory, and could not rest for a moment. The ma chinery was kept continuously in motion, for a given number of hours, and a given amount of work was to be done. This had its natural effect upon the labourer ; and was marked by the exhausted spirit, the debilitated frame, and the early death. It was a fact, notorious to all in the manufacturing districts, the labour caused a fearfully increased number of deaths. The average du ration of human life, in the manufacturing districts, was ono-half shorter among the factory labourers than amongst the other operative classes. This was not the only evil which arose; for, with the children employed, not only physical weakness, but a want of mental cul tivation was the ccnsequence. Before they reached the age of thirteen, they might, perhaps, be sent to an evening school ; but after thirteen a double amount of labour was thrown upon them, and their physical powers being too much exhausted during the day, to admit of their attending an evening school, they lost all that they had learned. It might be argued that this in terference would—pro tanto—injure either the working classes, by reducing their wages, or the property of the manufacturer. That argument was not borne out by the facts which had already existed ; for the former Factory Bill had produced neither any serious di minution of the produce of woollen goods, or in the wages paid to the operative.—(Hear, hear.) His Noble and Learned Friend had told their Lord ships that the adoption of this Bill would considerably reduce the manufacturing produce of the country. Now it was a well known fact that from the best and purest motives a large number of mill-owners had long ago prescribed the short hour system their own esta blishments with the greatest success. Now was that a sufficient answer to the argument of his Noble and Learned Friend. In his own humble judgment it was, for he could not believe that the mill-owner to whom he had alluded could be so blind to their own interests as to continue the system they had commenced if it reduced their trade. Now, the truth was, it had produced no such effect. It had improved the condition of their labourers, both in mind and body, and the result had been that the former productions of their mills had not been reduced by the disinterested step they had taken. There could be no doubt that, at the present moment, the manufacturing interest was suffering from the severest privations, and yet the labourers employjd by that interest. were patient and contented under their sufferings, and he was therefore glad, that in supporting this measure, Government had showed that they sympathised with them in their sufferings. In conclusion, he had only to assure their Lordships that he believed Ellis measure would add to tie. 'es.iluence of this country, and improve the sous of toil, and it was upon that ground he supported it. The Duke of RICHMOND would not have risen had it not been for one or two remarks which had fallen from his Noble and Learned Friend who had addressed their Lordships at so much length. His Noble and Learned Friend had told them that the majority of the mill owners were opposed to this Bill. Now that was not the case. The mill-owners were supporters of this Bill, and although he entertained the utmost disrespect for the mill-owners or the Anti-corn-law League's support, he cordially agreed with them in supporting this measure. His Noble and Learned Friend had told them that an agricultural labourer was not so strong as any one of their Lordships who had reached the age of seventy. No*, if his Noble and Learned Friend wished it, he could produce an agricultural labourer from Sussex, of forty-five years of age, who would carry any one of their Lordships upon his back without any diffi culty, and in his opinion few Noble Lords could accom• plish such a feat as that.—(Great laughter.) Lord CLARENDON felt constrained to oppose this measure, because he felt that it would oppress and injure those who were to be benefited by it rather than improve their condition.—(Hear, hear.) But he felt that it would not only be attended with that result, but it would inflict a serious injury upon the trade of' the country. Besides, there was no case of cruelty or injustice on the part of the employer made out for this Bill, and considering that at this moment the factory labourer did not on the average work more than eleven hours per day at very easy work, he thought there was no necessity for their Lordships fur ther interfering in the progress of the trade of the country. There could be no doubt that the Bill, if it were passed, would materially reduce the manufac turing productions of the country, and it must, therefore, of necessity, reduce trade, and see ing that, as in former instances, there was no crying evil to be put down by the Bill, he could nat conscientiously give it his support. But be fore their Lordships gave their assent to this Bill, it was their duty to consider what effect it would have upon other branches of trade than manufacturers. In the first place, a reduction of the hours of labour, from twelve to ten hours, would largely reduce the consump tion of coal in this country. It would also reduce the consumption of tallow, wool, and many other similar articles of manufacturing consumption, besides reducing the amount of shipping employed by this country. It was, therefore, almost impossible to calculate the in jury the passing of the Bill would inflict upon this country. This country did not depend upon the greater number of hours which her labourers worked, in competing with the foreigner, but e t I h V reduced,eeiiris then,wha tdsh i i f p t s h an e os w te o rtio r o k bu i n es gl effected of a t h w a ai t yt mbsb.yaocuahlnidn impressionhr ya hav e w e u r p e po n t o thatob upon the sup er i or ity o f h er mac hi nery. — (H ear. ) export trade of th e country. H e, therefore e im lc red ell, in passing this Bill they improved the condition of the labourer, because it was clear, that if it reduced the trade of the country, it must, as a necessary consequence, di minish the wages of the manufacturing labourer. He thought the present time was not favourable for thi, experiment. He agreed with the Noble and Learned Lord that the operatives were not favourable to the Bill, and that they had never asked for it. There were mills at present working six, eight, and ten hours a day. and among the manufacturing population, this state of things was by no means satisfactory. Let them apply the rule proposed by this Bill to other classes in so ciety as well as manufacturing. Let him ask their Lord ships how they would like an Act of Parliament com• pelling them to dispense with the sixth of the labour of their domestic servants ? What did they think of the Legislature enforcing them, then, to accept the sixth of the labour of their own agricultural labourers ? Let him ask the Noble Duke opposite how he would like such a proposition ? The Duke of RICHMOND could see no reasonable objection to it if the half of the agricultural labourers died from excessive labour—(Hear, hear.) The Earl of CLARENDON said that that was an assumption in which he could not agree with regard to the manufacturing population. Ho deprecated inter ference with the income of the poor man. By this measure they were interfering with him, and were inflicting the most serious injury to the working classes of this country. For these reasons, therefore, he would record his vote against the measure. The Bishop of OXFORD would state the reasons which induced him to give his vote in favour of this measure before the House. It was contended that the supporters of this Bill were driving the manufacturers of the country abroad, and that they were interfering with the legitimate property of the manufacturers. Now, how did the case stand ? Why, this very class—the manufacturers themselves—had, to the extent of two thirds of their number, petitioned in favour of the measure. He denied that the Bill was an interference with the legitimate profits of business. It was only an interference with unsound and injurious speculation.— (Hear, hear.) It was nothing but an assumption that one-sixth of the income of the working classes would be taken away by the measure. He himself put that proposition to some working mechanics, and was told by them in reply thet that was the argument of my Lord Brougham.—(Laughter.) But what was their answer to it, They said that they could not admit its truth, but even if it was so they could not see their children up with their bodies wasted and th e i r e ven to save that one sixth of their mins li g i r u o r e e - d i n g income. —(Hear, hear.) The Noble Earl told them that thee exported thirty-seven millions of goods annually, and that by the present Bill they would be cutting off one-sixth of that amount. lie thought that the asser tion of the two last, hours of th. , (late'‹ labour being the upon Jit , NO .OUta Wute uOn. hoUr. Ut profit., taxing as they did excessively the energies of the poor creatures who were engaged at those factories, and that they were rather a drawback than otherwise on the labour of the rest of the day. Those who knew their own inte rests had taken this view of the matter. The Messrs. Marshall of Leeds, for instance, had cut off one of these hours, and had reduced the time in their factories to elev2n hours. In the case of another firm, which had taken an account of the work done for five weeks before a ',Auction of the hours of labour, and five weeks after wards, it was found that more work had been done cur ing the ten hours than during the twelve.—(Hear, hear.) A measure, the very counterpart of this, had be.ti brought forward by the late Sir Robert Peel, in 1815, and from that time to the present it had been agitating the public mind, and frequent attempts had been wade to obtain for it the sanction of the Legislature. They had already made several preliminary steps which might serve to give them some oxperience of the opera tion of the Bill. They had passed a Bill against women ; working in mines. That was against much opposition; but the result had been with increased good effect, both I to the women themselves, the subjects of that legislative measure, and to the masters of those mines. They had passed a Bill limiting the time to twelve hours in those very factories, and the result had been so far beneficial. The result must be good. The want ;of the measure was evinced by dire effects on the physical and moral condition of the labourers.—(Hear.) It became then not a question of wealth or loss. Wealth so gained was unlawfully gained, and therefore the Legislature could not sanction it by refusing to interfere. But why were the capitalists able to impose the amount of labour? That was the question iif the Noble Earl (Clarendon). He answered, that the alternative offered them was no work at all? Long hours or no work—such was the alternative, the dire alternative, offered to the needy workman, and could their Lordships doubt which he must choose ? How, then, if their Lordships did not interfere, were they to retrieve themselves ?—how, but by com bining against their masters. Were their Lord ships prepared for that result, and the attendant evils? Were they prepared to encounter these, or to drive the stay of the country—tbe labouring classes—from their shores to a foreign land? On what did their supe riority as a manufacturing nation rest ? On these two things—the security in this country of all vested pro • perry; and, 2d, the physical strength of the people, and their patience in attending upon machinery. Were they prepared to drive the population to that extremity that the manufacturer should be in dread of seeing his pro perty in flames; or to countenance a system which as certainly reduced their physical strength as it existed, and thereby to cut off the right hand of their strength and their greatness ? He trusted their Lordships would better consider the results of their decision ere they came to a rote upon the Bill. Lord BROUGHAM explained. Lord WHARNCLIFFE—The question before them now was not a new one. It was important, and it bad occupied an important space on the attention of the Legislature ; it had come before them in 1801 ; it had been taken up again in 1815 ; it was again before Par liament in 1831, in 1844, and 1846. During all that time public opinion had grown ; the votes of the other House of Parliament and public sentiment had both progressed, till, when the Bill was before the other House of Parliament, petitions were presented with 178,000 signatures, while only something like 1,000 were sent in against it. The Noble Lord, who spoke throughout in a very low tone of voice, concluded by stating that he would support the Bill. The Bishop of ST. DAVIDS regretted to rise at that late hour of the night, or to weaken the effect of the elo quent and tender address of the Right Rev. Prelate who had preceded him. But some things had struck his mind with great power, and he hoped he might be allowed shortly to address their Lordships. He agreed with many things which had fallen from the Noble and Learned Lord, and yet he felt compelled to give his rote in support of the motion by the Noble Earl (El lesmere). There was one thing which fell from the Noble and Learned Lord which seemed to hun have no foundation whereon to rest. He said that this was a subject on which legislation could not tuterfe-s Why ? On what did he rest the assertion ? Was Legislature a body 1€ as free from sinister motives, or more likely to be moved by a bias ? Did the Nottle and Learned Lord say so on the authority of what he con ceived to be the principles of Political Ecopotny ? What was the principle of Political Economy ? Why, that the Legislature should not in terfere with free industry. But here lay the f-dlacy. It was assumed that industry was free. In going back into the history of the factory system, they could not deny but that great abuses had existed, and that many of the manufacturers had not done that towards the working population which was desirable on their part to do. No doubt circumstances had done much to cause them to pursue the course which they had done ; bat on that very account he thought that in terference was required, in order to put an end to the evils and abuses which existed in the system. In the course of the present debate, the Noble and Learned Lord opposite (Lord Brougham) had endeavoured to alarm them with a fearful picture of what was to follow if the measure passed—that wages would be reduced, profits would fall, and general distress overtake the ma nufacturing districts. Now to that he (the Bishop o St. David's) would answer, that those who had fully con. sidered the question, and who well knew the nature of this branch of industry, declared that this was a a gross exaggeration, and that the estimate of the evils apprehended had no foundation whatever in fact. Not only the most intelligent of the working population, but Dlany of the greatest manufacturers of the country had met these objections, and shown that they were falla cious and unsound. Though it had been said that this would be a perilous experiment, he contended that the peril was all on the side of the system the Bill sought to amend, and he theref ore ca ll e d on t h e i r L o rdships to act on the humane the greatest number, dthe second reading of peincipl e o f t h e grea test happiness to an support the Bill.—(Cheers.) beware lest by knowledge of i measure was, greattahat Lord ASIIBURTON called on their Lordships to the bread of injudicious interference they took away Right Reverend Prelatewerepopulationworking population pprroohpaebrl eauthorities . t oH decide didnotthe had to submit to the had been taken to • would have been glad inquire more fully into the feelings and sentiments of the master manufacturers. At the present time the m anufacturingproducer of this country ported it, but as it did not co n nt h a o. contained a clause for eleven of things. The gallery was then cleared for they ought e ere they aggravated that state Had the Bill comptehtitrioefnorientoalpl pause vote for the amendmentofrheawdouivlideihoaewshulepn-i the Noblesuch an a d clause, Learned Lord. there appeared— For the second reading of the Bill, Contents Against the Bill ............................... 11 Majority f or t h e second reading... —42 Their Lordships then adjourned at a Quarter past Twelve o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 17. SCHOOL S OF DESIGN. Mr. WAKLEY said there was a second question, and he hoped he should have a more satisfactory ansmec than to the first. It was with reference to tee school of design, and he wished to know when the evidence taken before a Special Committee of the council of the School of Design, as to the state and management of the school, is to be presented to the House? Mr. M. GIBSON said that he regretted that such dAily had taken place, but ha thought that in ten days at furthest he might be able to furnish these returns. Mr. 11. BAILLIE said that he had asked the Govern ` went the other night, whether it was their intention to restrict the amount of grain in distilleries until the pre sent crisis should be past? The CHANCELLOR, of the EXCHEQUER said ' that the Government did not think it politic on their part to interfere with the commerce of the country, by placing any restriction upon one of its most important channels. lie found that the distillers had stated to the Government, that they were about to use a large quan tity of sugar for the purposes of distillation, and had requested that several of the preliminary investigations might be dispensed with. Under his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) direction, it had been notified that all the obstacles that could be dispensed with should be tsce,s whetherof tea, coffee, and o th er articles su e of f f there was t o b e re moved, for he considered it exceedingly d es i ra bl e . Mr. HUME said that this day week he w ou ld p u t a question to the Noble Lord at the he a d o f t h e Govern ment, as to whether t was .his intention t o ta k e any n any reduction of the du t y ? Th e CHANCELLOR of the EX CHEQUER said he that the Government had received noti ce t h at a lear similar lar reducing nature? tp l r f o consi derable quantity of molasses was required for distilla• Lion ; but there had been a con sideration o f other arti cles, with a view to ascertain wheth er t h ey should re duce the duties on other articles mentioned in the Cus toms Duties Act, and they had found that a lth ough the i m portation of the articles h adincreased, the prices had not been raised. Among those especially y were the arti cles of sugar and tea. ENLISTMENT OF MARINES. Captain LAYA . RD . moved for return s connected with the enlistment of ma marines during th e l ast five years. Mr. EWART wished to know w h ether the Noble Lord at the head of the Government had any objection to lay upon the table of the House the address of the board of wine-growers, presented a short time back ? Lord J. RUSSELL replied that there would be n , ) objection whatever. COLONIAL .GOVERNMENTS. Mr. HUME said he wished to ask the Under-Secre tary for the Colonies a question, of which he had given notice. It would be remembered that last session he presented a petition from Van Diem en ' s L and, signed by 6,000 persons, praying the House to apply the repre sentative system of government to that island. Now the question he wished to ask was, whether Government ha,l been maturing an y plan for extending; the privilege and rights of representative bodies to that island and the other colonies ? Mr. HAWES said, in answer to the question of his Hononourable Friend, he had to state that the subject to which he had referred had not been lost sight of. There was a measure in contem plation—hemight say, in preparation—with the view to give the benefits of the British Constitution to the Australian coloniewhie had generally included Van Diemen's Land.Tle di not think, however, that the me asure could intro duced in the present session. TRANSPORTATION. Mr. EWART asked the Hon. Gentleman the Seere ‘ I ' o 7: Ha' i; 1.,,. iVkd V in- t.qttion of revising the present system a, view alteraliuu Ine law Mr. HAWES said the subject would shortly come under discussion in that House, when his Noble Friend the First Lord of the Treasury would be prepared to state fully what his intentions were. CORN RETURNS, Mr. P. MILES said, in the early part of the session he moved for certain corn returns in continuation of those which had been annually laid before the House for many years past. It was, however, communicated to him, that an additit,a hq had made to the return would cause a delay in making the return, and ho intimated to the corn. inspector that he would not press for that part of the return. Still, the return was not forthcoming, and he therefore wished to ask the Hon. Gentleman (the Vice-President of the Board of Trade) whether the return would shortly be laid upon the table of the House ? Mr. MILNER GIBSON said the order was made upon the Treasury, and not upon the Board of Trade ; but. nevertheless, he would make inquiry into the cause of the delay. POOR LAWS. On the order of the day being read for the second reading of the Poor-law Administration Bill, Mr. FERRAND asked the Chancellor of the Ex chequer whether the private defence of the Poor-law Commissioners to the charges brought against them before the Andover Union Committee (intitled, " Let ters addressed by the Poor-law Commissioners to the Secretary of State, respecting the transaction of the business of the Commission, &c., &c., &c.," embellished with the Royal Arms, and " printed by W. Clowes and Sons, Stamford-street, for her Majesty's Stationery Office)," has been printed and circulated with the sanc tion of her Majesty's Government ;—if printed and cir culated with the sanction of her Majesty's Government, whether he intends the expense to be defrayed out of the public purse ;—if printed and circulated at the pub lic expense, whether he will lay upon the table of the House a statement of the expense ? The defence, the lion. Member asserted, contained most unjust calumnies and flagrant untruths, and had not only been circulated , amongst Members of that House, but had been for warded to different tradesmen throughout the country. He held in his hand, for instance, a copy which had been sent to a tradesman in Oxford-street. The CHANCELLOR, of the EXCHEQUER said, with regard to the first question, the Poor-law Commis sioners were called upon by his Right Hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department to make a defence in answer to certain inquiries which he had caused to be instituted into their proceedings, and the Commissioners made what the Hon. Gentleman called a private defence, which was comprised in certain letters which were laid upon the table of the House. He did not think, therefore, that the defence could be strictly called a private one. It was certainly true that the let ters had been published and circulated by the Commis sioners, and it had been done by the consent of the Go vernment. With regard to the second question, he cer tainly thought the expense ought to be defrayed out of the public funds, because, in publishing the correspon dence, the Commissioners had only to act in conformity with their usual practice in such matters. POOR LAW IRELAND. Mr. P. SCROPE desired to ask the Secretary f.r Ireland, whether he was prepared to lay upon the table of the House any statt ment as to the progress of the system of relief in Ireland under the Temporary Relief Act Y He also wished to know, whether there was any compulsory power to compel the Relief Com mittee to do their duty, and in cases where they would not do so, to discharge them and appoint fresh off►cers? The Honourable Member adverted to a charge made against Lord Berehaven, that there had been great destitution on h:s estate, and that he only subscribed twenty shillings a month, and that he subsequently withdrew that relief altogether, confining himself for ten months to the inside of his demesne, the gates of cafich were strktly lucked. _ _ Mr. LABOUCiiERE said that there would be a report laid upon the table of the house which would give his Hon. Friend all the information he desired, ho was anxious to say that it was no fault of Sir John Bur goyne that a great many evils had occurred, it was quite !sue there was great indispositio❑ on the part of many ►telief Commissioners to aid the Government, and the people themselves desired to return to the ancient system read begging. In conclusion he would only say that from his knowledge of Lord Berehaven, he would not believe that he had been guilty of such inhumanity as that stated by the Hon. Member. That Noble Lord had expressed to him such a concern for the poor in his neighbpurhood, that he could not come to any other conclusion. Mr. SHAW said that he was quite sure that Lord Berehaven could perfectly clear himself of such a charge. And on the part of the Irish proprietors, he would say that the Member for Stroud took advantage in that House to say things which he could not justify out of it. Mr. B. OSBORNE said that it was rather hard to blame the Hon. Member for Stroud for his observations on the Irish landlords, for such a course was so popular, that it was not to be wondered at. WARNER'S EXPERIMENT. Lord INGESTRE said, with reference to an answer from a Member of the Government respecting Captai❑ Warner's invention, he would say that he himself was a witness of the late experiment, and he wholly disagreed in the unfavourable opinion which was given of it. NEW POOR-LAW BILL. Mr. FEHR AND, on the order of the day for the second reading of the New Poor Law Bill being read, asked the Law Officers of the Crown, by what authority Par. liament is invested with the right to delegate to any person, or body of persons, the power of making rules and orders which shall be as binding and authoritative upon the people of England and Wales as an Act of Parliament ? If Parliament is not thus authorised, by what statute can the people of England and Wales be forced to obey, as law, the rules and orders of the Poor law Commissioners ? If there be no statute, have not all parsons committed to prison for disobeying the rules and orders of the Poor-law Commissioners been illegally deprived of their liberty? The ATTORNEY•GENERAL said that Parliament had an inherent right to delegate its power to any person or persons in such a manner as should be binding upon the people. He mentioned courts of law, and other tribunals, as instances where this power had been exercised. Sir JOHN WALSH desired to ask the Member for Stroud whether he had communicated with Lord Bere haven relative to the charge he brought against him. Mr. P. SCROPE replied that he had not, and that it was objected to mention anonymous cases. He would be quite happy if Lord Berehaven was enabled through hi , t means to justify himself, for the present was not the first time such charges had been made. THE bIOTT CASE. Mr. FERRAND desired to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the appointment of Mr. Mott to the office of district au ditor received the sanction of the Poor - law Commissioners after he had been dismissed from the office of Assistant Poor-law Commissioner ? Whe• ther the Poor-law Commissioners allowed him to hold the office of district auditor at the time that he was part proprietor of the Haydock Lodge Lunatic Asylum, or after the Commissioners in Lunacy declared, in their report on the state of the Haydock Lodge Lunatic Asylum, that Mr. Mott had failed to fulfil a positive nd solemn pledge which he had given to the justices of Lancashire, and that he appeared quite unworthy of the trust, and became most negligent and remiss in tht, di,charge of his functions? Whether they have al loNed him to hold the office of district auditor of Lanca shire, whilst living in the Isle of Man, out of the way of hi.; creditors; after he was seised by a sheriff's officer, wnen on his read to audit the union accounts; durinn the time he was a prisoner in Lancaster Castle; and After a public advertisement appeared in the Times newspaper, warning the public not to pay him money belonging to the proprietors of the Haydock Lodge Lunatic Asylum? Whether he has again abandoned the discharge of his duties, and left England, although holding the office of district auditor? Sir G. GREY said Mr. Mott had not been dismissed, nor had he ceased to hold the situation referred t 9. There had been 37 candidates for the situation, from whom two had been selected. At the election made by the guardians there had been ten votes for Mr Gardiner and fourteen for Mr. Mott. The Act of Parliament did not require the sanction of the Poor•law Commissioners to the election ; nor was it considered that his manage ment of the Haydock lodge Lunatic Asylum was a legal disqualification to his holding the office. That part of the question which referred to the justices having de dared him unworthy of his trust was not correct ; and further, the Poor-law Commissioners had no official in formation of the allegations in the third part of tho question ; and with regard to the fourth, the Poor law Commissioners had received letters from Mr. Mott upon official business, from Manchester, dated the 7th May, where they believed him to be at present re siding. — POOR-LAW ADMINISTRATION BILL. The Order of the Day for the second reading of the Poor-law Administration Bill being read, Mr. BANKES presented Is petition from a union in Dorsetshire, complaining of the conduct of the auditor for neglect of duty, and that they had received no re dress from the Poor-law Commissioners. The petition was ordered to lie on the table. Mr. FERRAND said he was thankful to his Right Hon. Friend, the Attorney-General, for the manly man ncr in which he had answered his question. Notwith standing, however, the high respect which he enter. tained for the legal knowledge of his Learned Friend, he would be enabled to produce much higher authority to bear out his own view of the case. He could not but express his astonishment at the declaration made by the Right Honourable Baronet, the Secretary for the Home Department, that Mr. Mott had not been dismissed particularly when it had been stated by the Right Hon. Baronet who had preceded the Home Secretary in that office, had declared that he had been dismissed, and that the Hon. Member for Bolton knew the cause why he had been removed. He would leave that between them ; but he could not but observe that something wro ng had been said to o ne or the other of them. Ile was ready to admit that the Right Hon. Baronet had said what be believed to be true. At the close of last session the present Sf.eretary for the Home Department had give a pledge that a Committee would be appointed in the present session to inquire into the poor-laws. Sir GEORGE GREY denied that he had given any such pledge. Mr. FERRAND said there could be no doubt that he had been so reported in all the papers. The Nobl e L or d the First Lord of the Treasury, had also declared that he was prepared to defend the conduct of the Poor-law Commissioners. Ile would that night have an opportu nity of doing it. He hoped he would do so, and prove that the new poor-law had obtained for the people the Wessings which were held out would follow in its train— thikt it had been a blessing, mad not a curse. He, at all events, could prove it had failed in conferring any such whenever advanta g es, and dint it a t; fßilitre, had crumb, . • Th , . r th c 141,1 b - , , 2u accnAou,ed to boa.t that the f,, + t► the IT IVC , re n vier esll- 0 . upon to obey any law which was nut passe., oy both planchet, o: the Legislature, but notwithstanding, they had been obliged, now for thirteen years, to obey the orders of the Poor-law Com missioners, as the law of the land. A Committee of that House had been appointed to inquire into the operation of that law, and after having sat for four months, they came to the decision that the Poor-law Commissioners had acted in a most arbitrary manner towards the As sistant Poor-law Commissioners. He thought it was not sufficient that th e Poor law Commissioners should be dismissed, but that the law should be repealed. When the law was first broached it was supported by men whose object was to do away with poor-laws altogether, and to punish poverty as a crime. The perion who first brought it forward was Lord Brougham, who, be fore he introduced it obtained a pledge from both the political parties that they would not repeal what ever might be the extent of the opposition raised against it. He would ask, who had been selected to guide the Bill ? No other than Mr. Malthus, a man whose opinions on the subject was odious to the country.—(An Hon. Member said he was dead.) Well, then, he left his legacy behind him. He was Lord Brougham's guide in this measure. He who had de clared that he who was not provided with necessaries by his parents, had no right to food ; that no place had been provided for him at Nature's feast, and that he had no right to be there. Lord Brougham defended this gentleman, and stated that he had been greatly misrepresented, and that he was a most humane and amiable man. A Commission was then appointed to inquire into the old poor-law, and evidence taken by Assistant Poor-law Commissioners, who knew what was required of them, and did what they were ordered, as obedient servants. Then came forth the re port, that " dark document," which was so bad and wicked, that the Duke of Wellington denied its existence. It was opposed by a friend of his, now on a bed of sick ness (Mr. Walter), whose services would last for cen turies, when the ,Hogg Baronetcy would be buried in oblivion.—(Partial murmurs.) That document had been signed by two of the bishops of their church, the Bishops of London and Chester. Lord Althorp introduced the Bill into that House, which gave power to the Poor law Commissioners to limit the amount of food, but not to increase it, and also to lower wages. In the correspondence of Messrs. Ashworth and Gregg, it appeared that the guardians, in a case of a strike for wages, were authorised to refuse relief if they knew the parties could earn wages upon which they could earn a subsistence. As soon as the New Poor. law Bill passed, the Poor-law Commissioners employed persons as Assistant-Commissioners, whom they sent to the agricultural districts to induce the people to leave their homes, assuring them that if they did so, they should have abundant employment in the manufacturing districts. They placarded places with tables of wages, which they never did, and it was never intended that they should receive. One of the blackest things they did was to send Dr. Kay down to Suffolk and Norfolk to induce the labourers to go to Manchester, where they sent them ticketed and labelled, like beasts to the slaugh ter. But, as his Right Hon. and Learned Friend (the Attorney-General) seemed to smile, he thought it his duty to reiterate what he had said : the labourers sent to Manchester were actually ticketed, packed in boats, and without any places to go to, turned adrift in the streets of Manchester in the middle of the night. But they should now hear Dr. Kay's own description of this town three years before. In describing it, he said that the inhabitants had ceased to have a pride in the ap pearance of their houses. They spent their lives in squalid wretchedness—their domestic economy was neglected—their houses were ill furnished and ill ventilated their food meagre, and not nutri tious, and they frequently fell victims to drink. Such was the description of Manchester, when the inha bitants of the southern districts of England were to be absorbed into the workshops of the manufacturers. He would detail to the House the cruelties inflicted upon those agricultural labourers. Not content with calling in the military, the Government sent down the Metro politan Police, and there, with drawn cutlasses they sought to enforce those tyrannical laws. They sold up thousands of the poor people. Immense buildings were erected in the county as modern bastiles, where they were immured in cells, not allowed to go a place of worship, their diet tables were worse than those of felons, they were com pelled to wear a felon's dress, and they branded their clothes with the name of " the union workhouse" upon it, their furniture was sold, husbands were separated from their wives, and children stolen from their parents at the point of the bayonet. The union workhouses were cleared, and its inmates sold to the manufacturers. He held in his band an application of one of the manu facturers for these poor people to the guardians of the poor of the Llangollen Union, dated only twelve months since, in which the applicant stated that he had employment in his mills for twenty or thirty ' females, and also a number of boys, and stating that it there were any in the union fit for such employment, one of the firm would come over to the union and bring those unfortunate creatures to the factory districts. And who were the parties who were chosen to look over those unfortunate creatures? Why, it was a well-known fact that if the Government could offer the office, a non-com missioned officer of the cavalry, whose previous occupa tion might be supposed to have inured him to wretched ness or made his heart callous, was the person whose services they were most glad to obtain. These unions were formed so large that the poor had to travel to the board of guardians ten, twenty, and even thirty miles, in order to obtain their paltry pittance. Such was the distance they had to travel that it often occupied three whole days in going and returning from the union. He held in his band a letter from a clergyman. in which be stated that he knew a poor man who had to travel 24 miles every week in order to obtain even a sixpence. Then, in addition to this, the poor have died in numbers from want and improper medical treatment.—(Hear, hear.) Aye, numbers have died from those sources under the sanction of the Poor-law Commissioners and the Government. Such were some of the horrible effects of this blood-stained law—for such it was. Yes, blood had been shed, and that too at the point of the bayonet, in the endeavours of the Government to enforce the cruelties of that law. He would read to the House the solemn pledges made by Lord Brougham when he pleaded in the House of Lords for the second reading of this ini quitous Bill. (The Hon. Member then proceeded to read an extract from the speech of the Noble Lord, in which he stated that that measure would elevate the character of the people of this country, give a new im pulse to property, and destroy idleness and vice.) How had (continued the Hon. Member) these pledges and promises been realised ? The people had been robbed and plundered under the operation of that law for upwards of thirteen years. Was it to be supposed now that the curtain was allowed to descend quietly over those scenes of horror, of blood, and of cruelty ? If the Government was prepared to take upon itself the responsibility of all these accumulated cruelties, they certainly possessed more courage and bravery than he had ever given them credit for possessing. Before the passing of this law the people were promised good wages ; neat, good, and comfortable houses. But what was the result, as appeared by the statements of the Hon. Member for Manchester some time since? He sale, that the people of Manchester were some of then, living upon Id. per day ; that they were in th, habit of eating dead horses, and so poverty striken were great masses of the people, that the) were in the habit of pawning their day clothes in the evening in order to obtain their bed clothes from th pawnbroker's to cover them at night. He had thought it his duty to move some time since for a return of th mode in which the poor had been disposed of ; aua although that return had been ordered, still not tht slightest notice had been taken of that order, and de reason given for it was that no possible account could be obtained, and no return had been made from that day to this. In the year 1843 the poor-law had been in operation nine years. Now, what was the effect of this law upon the morals, the condition, and the habits of the people ? That law, which had been pledged to produce such beneficial results ? He begged to ' read to the House a statement, made by one of the pre sent Qabinet Ministers. Lord Howick, when a Member of this House, stated that in Sum terland the poor-rate:• had risen to 18s. in the pound. (rile Hon. Member then proceeded to read at considerable length an extract front a speech of Lord Howick.) What a contrast (con tinued the Hon. Member) did that statement present to the fair pledges and promises made by Lord Brougham. and others, when the measure was introduced. He would, therefore, convict the Government of having been false prophets out of the mouth of one of the members of their own Cabinet. He would also read t. the House a statement made by Lord Brougham in th.. year 1843, nine years after the passing of the Act. in order to show to the House in what manner the operation of the law had borne out the pledges and promises of its supporters. The Hon. Gentleman then read an extract from the Times of 1843, stating that a great number of the poor of Stourbridge were subsisting upon turnips alone, and that the farmers in the neighbourhood had had five or six tons a week stolen; but they were in such a deplor able state that the persons could not find it in their hearts to prosecute them. He held in his hand en account of proceedings which took place in the same year at the Brentford Sessions, before the magistrates of the county of Middlesex. A poor man was brought up before them in the prison dress, and branded in the way he had mentioned. The magistrates, and five or six were present, all spoke with indignation of the manner in which the poor were treated under the sanction of the Poor-law Commissioners, and one of them, Mr. Armstrong, stated that the country was coming back to the times of feudal slavery, and he was glad to find that the members of the Bench were Commissioners unanimous newspapers in deprecating the edpurprecianragstuitnf the conduct which the towards the poor. He numb er als ho o iuen h ht a r d yga a vean aceo o u f n e t x o tr f ac tia t: manner wyearshieh 1b inh2ad andc which ul d a B r 4f g r3 e 7 nu we m • hers of persons were sent t.. i p a r w iso c n on fo un r i m ssi e o r n el e y disobeying r , s,buth the he would not o rderstak take of the p th eP timeoor of the House by reading them, beyond H stating that they y r , e a t n e d re London,illreference to Sussex,and also witham psi Hampshire, respect E t to t e h x ; Kent, h A a do especialvSrurß re edbridge, and Sevenoaks Unions. The treat ment of the poor in the Blything Union so exasperated the working classes in that vicinity th at t h ey were on their way t o t h e union (which was protected by police) with pickaxes in their hands, when they were met by a clergyman, who said, addressing one, " Honest man!" " Honest r He replied, " the law won't allow us to Is honest ; when we come poor we are treated like felons He, however, dissuaded them from their purpose. occurred as far back as in 1842. And her Majesty Government said, after all that had occurred, that t h e law worked well, and they screened the Com missioners against public inquiry andp P ublre indignation, r-igw and aided and assisted them in oppressing the poor for ary thing. w 7as said azainst the Po: , r-ir.w . • ;tl-, rerno+ law, and hi s sentiments vs ire iuudle sneered. j " lin-e'er mity of practice" was, no doubt, a grand principle ; but it was one which had been tested and had been found fallacious. Now he ( \tr. Ferranti) had seen the bodies of persons who had been starved to death by this law. He once attended a jury, who felt desirous to return a verdict of " wilful murder " against the relieving officer, and the coroner agreed with them, because it was veell knee n to them that the man bad refused to afford the woman it had died relief ; hi s pocket ate! threw the m w on ha t t he wa ra s b: h e e , and u tu i r n e t o h f e but when the man was taxed with this, he drew the printed instructions of the Poor -law Commissioners from insulting manner snapped his fingers at the jury. RAND said he had not got a copy of them, those most ? I,GE GREY— ibnusSlttlirtrruh.cGetyFiEoEnOßsl were to the effect, that the man was not to go a yard out of his parish for the purpose of dispensing re lief. The woman lived on the other side of a brook, i about ten yards out of the parish, but she had of ten re t eeived relief from the same officer ; he, however, w as only in the habit of visiting that part of his dis trict once a week. Then the auditors had caused the greatest dissatisfaction to the board of guardians, Every post brought him letters setting forth the evils which the auditors caused. The relieving officer of Dudley had brought an action against the guardians of the poor, for tie acing the inmates of the union to "plum-pudding" on Christmas-day. In 1845, the Hon Gentleman the Member for Finsbury (Mr. Wakley) eame down to the House, and made a horrible and startling statement, that it was currently reported that the poor in the Andover Union Work house were so starved, that they were living on carrion, and fighting for the possession of the bones which they were employed in grinding for the purpose of manure. He now came to 1847—and where, he asked—where were the Poor-law Commissioners who had caused all this cruelty and misery ? The Government said that they were to be dismissed from their offices, but the Government were still prepared (in a state of despair) to defend them. Why did they do so ? Wss it because they believed that the charges which had been made against them were untrue ? Could they deny the state of things which existed in the Andover Union. or the statements which he had made that night, could they believe that the voice of the people throughout the country would have been raised against them if they had not been guilty of all that h a d been imputed to them f What did the Right Hon. Baronet say in introducing the present Bill ? Did he say that they must adopt " uniformity of practice ? " No ; that the operation of of the measure must vary with the circumstances of the district of the country to which it was applied. Was "uniformity of practice " still to be the principle of the measure ? Sir G. GREY —I did not say so. Mr. FERRAND—Then is it now to vary? But did the Government think that men had not the same love for their wives and children in one part of the county as in another, that concessions were to be made in favour of the northern part of that county, in consequence of the violence which they had manifested towards the measure. He called upon them, therefore, to say how the measure was to vary ? They had no right to pass such a law ; and, what was mere, the people of this country would not tolerate a varying law under which the greatest tyranny might be inflicted upon them. In some parts of the county they said that no relief was to be given except in the workhouse, but he had heard a Secretary of State state that the p ople might have relief out of the workhouse. There hire, he said, let them have a law clearly defined, in order that the poor might know how they would be affected, and what cruelties they might anticipate would be practised upon them, instead of leaving the matter in tho hands of an irresponsible board. He had read the defence which had been made of the Poor-law Com missioners, but it did not deserve the name which had been applied to it, as it was nothing more than an exparte statement: it amounted to this, that after thirteen years of oppression of the poor they had been enabled to save 1,000,000/, a year, of which the poor nad been robbed, in order that the comadssieners might he enabled to make this boast. They might have saved the rates in the south of England, where incen diarism was rife, and in those districts from which the poor had been driven, to the manu facturing districts, to equalise wages, or to escape persecution by becoming inmates of the gaols, hut in the north of England the very converse had -oc curred. The guardians of Wakefield, thinking that it would be no use to petition the House on the subject of the poor-law, as Parliament had delegated its powers to three Commissioners, petitioned the board, and urged that the Wakefield Union should be abolished, as it. had been productive of the greatest evil, as the poor rates had increased 10,3061. in three years.—(llear.) chat was the way they diminished the expenditure.— (Rear, hear.) We had also returns from the unions in his part of' the country, but it was sufficient to state that they had increased, and were increasing. —(Hear.) Then what was the other cost of this unconstitutional measure during the last 13 years ? First, they had had the re bellion in Wales, fearful outbreaks in the north of Eng land, incendiarism rife in the south, and a fearful amount of concealments of childbirth, in order that they might escape the treatment which they could not fail to expe rience in the unions. They had had to establish rural police in different parts of the country, to call out 10,000 pensioners, to have gaols enlarged and new ones erected ; the sessions in the north of England were held every seven weeks, instead of every twelve weeks, and winter sessions were obliged to be held, which was rather an unusual occurrence, and Mr. Justice Coleridge had stated at the last York assizes that crime was rapidly in creasing over the whole country. Then they were going to build barracks in Birmingham, in order that they might be enabled to dispatch the military to any part at a short notice in order to keep the people in a state of despotism. Consideration had caused this? Why, the tyranny practised upon the people by the Poor-law Commissioner, for they had the people discontented in the north, in the south, and east districts ; and the peac e was on l y main tained by the presence o f the military and police. Work houses had been erected under the protection of a mili tary guard, and they had greater distress in this', ' country than they had had since the time of the Freno/n Revolution. These were the penalties they were culla d upon to pay. And how long did they think the people wonld submit to this state of thing,? they were going -to let the Poor-law Commissioners "down easily," but did they think that the people were not ?sufficient ly eware that this would be a great question at ehe next general ection ? The Whigs had stood pretty firmly to the declarations made by them at tit e last general election. But what was the conduct of the late Government ? What was their conduct with Cam bridge when the poor-law was made the rallying cry, and when they came to the House and betrayed them ?• He could name a borough where two candidates took it in turns to do the pathetic on the new poer-law—oner was returned to the House, and continued his opposition, to the poor-law, and the other was rejected, but he sub-. eeqiently obtained a seat in that I louse, and now sup-• ported the law.—( Hear, hear.) He challenged any one toe :ay that the law had not only proved a great issilure, but. at hitter curse upon the country, aid the remedy was rhea same cm. 1 and unconstitutional syse m under anethere form. In the first clause tour Cabin: Ministers were to. '.:e pledged to maintain this law against nil opposition a and in the sixth clause two c. unaissionere and thee president were empowered to use any powers vested int tile whole body. By the eleventh they were empowered! to seamen witnesses, and also to make rules, and tr. t -titer them. But was the Right Hen. Baronet incline( 1 o sign an order to separate a man from his wife, are .l . 111 , :I :hildren from their parents? Was he going , t i o s . arien t i b i , , all the tyranny which had been practised ii r s in , g i ia. ' tht to relief as th e poor man Lot d Right Hon. Baronet had to his own property. past 13 years? had as st inalienable a a b t i r e ig a h t:Vhe to do . . ? the measure upon those who were near a w I iß,arroeudgthoatmeshtad admitted that this was so. Was he pre ~. dear to him ? If rot, what right had he to inflict ito tortures upon the poor man ? And let him tell tile 'tight Hon. Baronet that a poor men was just as lot sat ,f: his wife and children as the Right Hon. Baronet w is ~f his. But what must be the position of a Caleti net Minister who was compelled to act thus towaeeds :he poor man, for no other crime than that he was poor and unable to obt tin work. Teen they threw • the responsibility upon her Majesty. By the 20th clause the Queen, by the advice of the Privy Council, we s em powered to alter the rules ; but the four Cabinet Ministers were Members of the Privy Council. The Nlinisters were, therefore, responsible. Then they were to appoint inspectors. From that tyranny to whom were they to appeal ? Their appeals might be, kept r o i n g i h t t h t e o S p o a y s ( s m; h i Sovereign. He h)lacdknofr opposed to the pr inciPle ber of high authorities, were v. t ili t l e i nd L e o d ek th e a , t i4 csh a teH n o u. u m, s . e . present Bill. ' h were here given to the Poor- law powers whic h be exercised by e vett the Commis sioners were such as could not which was here contended for. Lord% inferclt,hour? hithat It was their leoun6en duty himself upon this question. present matter at rest. He would vete} a letter Sovereign. Lord Abinger had also stron g l y ex . p ress e d to set the which he had received from a working man. (TI le lion. Member here read the letter in questing, whi eh s trongly deprecated the working of the poor-law.) Coo ke and Blackston agreed with him on this eubjeae Judge flaines was also of the opinion ellich be express, - .:d, and even Lord Brougham himself' admitted tint s right of the poor to r e li e f . And they had n e right to impose upo n t h em a Po law Commissioners themselvvesasssaaalidge. TI that 1 1 1 ' ie 1-k p 'o re r- - sent crime, which was the result of d e stitution, was repugnant to the feelings of human nat 3 re. The lint:. Member for Bath was constrained to ? ;state that for Ireland it was necessary to go back to the 43d of Elizabeth. As many Members of Parliams int would, no doubt, refer to the coreluct of the poor-law gut :rdians, he would not dwell upon their conduct. He would, however, allude to the Lung Town union —(I fear. hear.) The Hon. Member deprecated the state of that union. Alta these were the foundations on which r tepore s were used against him in 184 . 2 for the purposes of en r,, t i ng !tiro, reports to which he had net further alluded to than to state that Sir John Walsiughain, in h is report 1.1 pon the same unien, showed that 49 inmates were irsleaping in thirteen or fourteen beds , and when he lai a similar , , .,icts before the House, the Home Secretary, e iir James Graham, turned up his eyes, and smote his bra cast, that things could occur. The report state d , that from he da y the law was enforced, in 1838 , to tl le time in which it was made a resident poo r law, corn coissionent such :tad never entered it. O n h ear i ng tnie, the I ate Minis -or said, high time for the Gevernment to int Nrfert , , yet what was the ease ? Wh en did they enter the Rouse again ? not for four years—not till May, IR46.—not until he himself came down to the House. and las.kei.l the. Government to insist that an Assistant Pour -law C Com missioner sho u ld visit bingli-v. Now, let then a .ses- eivt- h ee were the next visits paid. They were made a-r .intee. i w al4 S. ay op )1 is k, Trig SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY MAY 18, 1847.