The Sun. — London, England, 1847-03-17 00:00:00

C'ttrbf Mbttton SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS DAY.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. FACTORIES BILL. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition.) Mr. DENNISTOUN rose to b rin g forward the motion of which he had given notice, that the House should not resolve itself into a Committee until this day fortnight. He said, 1 no t w ithstanding the violent denunciations of the Hon. Gen tleman, the Member for Knaresborough (Mr. errand), against those who opposed this Bill, he should not be deterred from bringing forward his motion, and of stating the reasons which led him to do so, together with the reasons why he could not agree to the Bill ; but at the same time he must disclaim any intention of wishing to defeat the measure by any factitious opposition. He should not, at the moment the House was about to rise, at six o'clock, move an amendment, as had been done in the former discussions of the measure.—(Hear, hear.) When he looked at the history of the various proceedings which had taken place on the subject of a Ten Hours' Bill, he was fon ciblysled to the conclusion that lion. Members had but a very faint comprehension of the measure. He had taken the trouble to look through" Hansard ;" he there found that three years age when they divided on the Ten Hours' Bill introduced by Lord Ashley, that the numbers were 186 to 183, and on the Twelve Hours' Bill (as we understood the Hon. Gentleman) the numbers were—for the Bill, 188, and against it 181. Shortly after a Bill of the same class—a Ten Hours' Bill—was introduced, and the same House of Commons, who had decided against a Twelve Hours' Bill, voted against this Bill by an overwhelm ing majority of 297 to i 59. And now the suppoters of the measure had increased from 159 to 195, whilst the number of opponents of the measure had been reduced from e 97 to 87; therefore, it appeared to him, that the House had not a very definite notion of the question. Then he declared that the title of the Bill was a dishonest owe, as it was termed a "Bill for limiting the hours of labour of young persons and females in factories." He therefore wished to put this question to those who had charge of the Bill : " Will the Bill net also affect the labour of adults—of men ?" They must know that if they limited the hours of children and females to ten hours a day, that the men would be prevented from working more than ten hours a day. They could not work without their aid, and therefore they must suspend their labour at the same time. He said, theretore, that the Bill was nothing more than " a delusion, a mockery, and a snare," as it could not fail to have the effect he had pointed out. lie was not one of those who admitted that former legisla tion had been beneficial. They had lately interfered with regard to children, and the result of that interference was, that at the present moment there was not employed in Scotland one single young person under the age of thir teen. He wished to know if it had in any way pro moted their interest. On the contrary, he had in his possession an advertisement, inserted in a Glaseow paper, calling a meeting to take into ccnsideration the lamentable condition of the children who infested the streets of this, the second city in the empire. All illegitimate interference with labour on the part of the Government was, in his opinion, most objectionable. They had interfered in favour of the agriculturists by their abolitices of the corn-laws. They had itterfered in favour of the shipping interest by the navigation laws. In the West Indies, their sugar duties were interfering with them, and, again, there were the enormous duties they had imposed upon silk. He would ask the House who had been the parties? Who had come there year after year (as an Hon. Gentleman opposite had expressed it) whining fur protection, but those very parties on whose behalf they had attempted to interfere? They had not only interfered with protection but they were now about to interfere with the, rights of those who had never before asked anything at the hands of that House. He had been very much struck with the mode in which the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth put the case as atiacting wages, but he had very mach understated the case. He said that their interference would be equal to an income-tax of 12 per cent. on wages, but it was in reality equal to an income-tax of 16-a per cent., and more than that, for when they placed an income-tax on alt property above 150 L, they did cot, at the same time, tie the hands of all the parties who were liable to it. On the contrary, it was only an inducement for further exertion and more determined energy to make up for that loes. They were not only puffing a tax of five fold upon the labourer, but they at the saute time tied his hands, and said that no powers of his should be exerted be yond ten hours of labour. That was neither more nor less than a boon to their foreign competitors. He did think that the House stout(' be more cautious before it gave in to a notion, which he knew was very preydeete that this country, in its manufacture of cotton, was infallible in its supremacy, and that no foreign na: ion amid touch them. He believed that a more fatal delusion never went abroad ; and he might say that the trade of a country once gone, was gone for ever. Let the House look at the manufactures of Flanders. What was the situation of Bruges and Ghent ? At one time they possessed the whole manufacture of lace. They had lost it, and had never since been able to recover the loss. They might say that there men had not the industry and energy of these ef thin coun try, but they stood neaay equal to this country in the manu facture of cotton. Wtott was the state of the cotton trade towards the close of the last century, and he might say towards the close of the war? Why, this country possessed almost the entire manufacture of cotton, but, from one cause or another, competition had gradually sprung up, so that, at the present moment, in the article of cotton, instead of being the sole manufacturers, their foreign rivals managed exactly to compete with tbem ; that was to say, that they manufactured the same amount of cotton, and they were encroaching upon 'this country 'at a great rate. There were many causes for that. They had great water power and less cost of the raw material, but they were about to step in and make an artificial restriction, which would act as a boon to thiit country. He had got a statement of the usual hours worked by tive of their chief competitors, America, France, Prussia, Switzerland, and the Tyrol. They worked upon the average 14 per cent. more than this country. But, said the Noble Lord, they could not refer to America, because he understood that during six weeks or two months they had holidays allowed to them. Ile would then strike out America altogether, which worked 13 per cent. more than this country, and there remained still an advantage of 14 per cent. in favour of the remaining countries. They proposed to add la per cent. more to that advantage, making 30 per cent. in their favour. But, if they looked et it in another point of view, the magnitude of the interest involved in this country was something enormous. Let them see what was the money value of the manufactures of thin country? He should take it at the moderate estimate which he bad put, namely. 112,000,000. Now, if they struck off one-sixth of that amount ; they would strike off nineteen millions per cent. How would that effect the export trade? He believed that the great bulk of it would come into other hands, and if their exports did increase to nineteen millions, or in what. ever proportion they increased, he would wish to know what would become of their imports, and what would become of the enormous amount of trade they would be compelled to forego. He thought that the last Ministry had well and pro perly resisted this infraction, and, in point of fact, the present Government, although the Noble Lord at the head of it was not opposed to it, those who were at the present time more perfectly responsible for the finances of the country were in opposition, to it. What did the Chancellor of the Exche quer say? There was no man in that House more opposed to the views of the promoters of this measure. What said the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Right Non. Member for Cambridge, and what said the one before him, the Right Hon. Member for Portsmouth? What said Lord Monteagle and Lord Ripon ? Why they were all opposed to it. The Secretary of the Board of Trade, Lord Clarendon, the Secretary for Ireland, and the former Presi dent of the Board of Trade—every one of those, with a regard for the finances of the country, were diametrically opposed to it. Notwithstanding all that array of authority they had determined to proceed. At all events those opposed to the measure would have done their duty in warning the House of what in their opinion would to the inevitable result. On them alone would rest the responsibility. He would make a short statement with regard to the amend ment as pi oposed to her Majesty's Government. He had given the subject his best attention, and he must say that it appeared to him, as he would show, a very feasible one. His only objection was that the House was going too far, because in point of fact, they were to admit the principle of the ten hours altogether as applied to the number of hours to be wrought in a week or in a year. The advocates of this measure said that no female or young person should work more than 59 hours in a week. He took that principle, and agreed with it—all that he asked was that they should concede that which appeared to him to be the principle of the Bill. That they should be allowed to work during the three days as much as ,twelve hours at a time, binding themselves not to work during two con secutive days more than twenty hours—that was twelve hours one day and eight hours on the succeeding day. Their object was to be allowed to work their machinery during three d y 3 for twelve hours, so that by a system of relays the pro dective powers of the country woule not be trenched upon. If that ro:nt were conceded it would meet their views almost to the letter. That was a fair proposal, and they would do s e'l at once to agree to it. He called upon the House, how ever, to delay the measure for one single fortnight. The lion. Member for Knaresborough said that it was a most un fair thing to delay the passing of this measure until after Easter. He would ask the lion. Member for Oldham if there was the slightest chance of any further stage being obtained for this Bill before Easter? Even under the most favourable circumstances, they could not: get be yond the Committee • and when the report was brought up there would be a discussion upon that. Under the most favourable circumstances, they could not bring up the report before Easter. He proposed that they should go into Committee that day fortnight, so that the manufacturers of the country should have time to consider the provisions of the Bill. They would be able to say " aye" or "no." If they agreed to it, it would be preferable that the measure should have the general concurrence of the masters and men, and there would be less opposition in the House than there was likely to be if they went on at present. It would be difficult to explain, to such an audience as he then had, as to the proposed mode of working the mills by the system of relays; and how that system was to be got up. In his mind it was perfectly practicable to use such a system, and they would not require more than 20 per cent., or one-fifth more of the amount of labour. Sup- Posing that a mill at present employed 100 operatives, Under this clause, the same mill would be obliged to employ 120, and of course their wages would continue to be the time. The mode in which this was to be brought about be wand explain. Supposing that 120 hands entered the mill on the Monday morning, sixty of these hand; would work the entirethe clay, and the rest would be di v id e d i n t o t h ree hour of breakfast the fi rs t 20 l a b ourers wou ld retire, and t h eir and at three o'clock would be taken by the reserve twenty, places Wren b y the tweet second twenty would have their a ity which bad worked for the first three hours. It would and therefore to explain the system properly to the Hou,ssec,o on.,, ere ) , f r oje he could not proceed with it.—(Cries of would be again re lieved by another reserve, so that etslei third l branch would o nly have worked eight hours. The re e s t;ieurs, Was an d x s a i e x t t l sixty ) h f i t n h g at was, that Oil' of the 120 sixty worked fur twehalleet worked for eight hours. The next day versed, for those who worked twelve hours on th e M onday r w e ould work only eight hours on the Tuesday, who worked eight hours on the Itfruulay wo a r e k d t, the l se. hours on the Tues da y . Thus the thing would go tw e lve on until the Saturday, when the ho urs w ere restricte d to nine; but the same principle could be applied to those nine hours. s e that the whole 120 would only have been working seven hi ors per day during the week—an amount considerably less I tl an the pro} wed Ten Hours' Bill. In a short time he thouget that the system . would work so well that they weak( be enailed to carry it en with 116 instead of 120. 'He had endeavoured to make the system as distinct as pos sible, but if he had been at all obscure it was owing to the diFfien'ty of explaining these operations to su ch an assembly. had done his duty, and felt greatly obliged for the atten tion with which he had been heard, and would conclude by Moving that this Bill be committed thii day fortnight. Mr. FINCH had anticipated, when he saw the notice on the paper, that this motion was merely a factious opposition, but he saw that the measure was a bona fide one, and he believed therefore, whether the House accepted or rejected it, the mover and his motion were both entitled to respect. The Hon. Member for Oldham had him , self allowed that the system o f re l ays , a l t h oug h very ob jectionable on many accounts, was at least an advantage. The Hon. Member who had just sat down bad stated that the children in Glasgow were previously neglected, but that was not an uncommon occurrence, and he did not see that the Ten Hours' Bill would at all affect the evil of which so much complaint was made. It had been urged that with respect to young females they did not attend to them after the business Of the day was concluded ; but it , was plainly evident that, according to their constitution and the state of their health, they would either partake of domestic enjoyment or have the opportunity of improve ment in the lecture-room or reading classes. They would, by shortening the hours of labour, give them the opportunity of attending on Sunday-schools, of which, from being so wearied and jaded by their weekly labour, they could not now take advantage. By passing this Bill, then, they would be very largely advancing the morality of the people, for they would be affording to those young persons the opportunity for acquiring domestic habits, and thus not only enjoy a great benefit themselves, but also enable them to confer benefits on others. Then, with regard to wages, the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, had indulged in a long disquisition on the effect which this reduction of time would have upon wages; but a greater Nl lacy had never been put before an intelligent assembly. That Right Hon. Member had entered into a calculation to show, that, by this reduction, the working people would be obtaining two holidays instead of one; but the fact was, that they were absolutely working seven days a week, instead of six ; and the whole of the calculation on the reduc tion of the wages, by a sixteen per cent. income-tax, fell to the ground. By a reference to the work of Mr. Porter, it would be fOund that wages always bore a relative amount, not to the time of the worker, but to the importance of the business which he had to perform, and he ( Mr. Finch) was prepared to show that, according to the evidence of expe rience, the reduction of the hours of labour would in no way affect the rate of wages. The Right Honourable Baronet had talked of giving the people cheap mutton, cheap bread, and cheap beef ; 'out this had better be left to the people themselves, who, if they were allowed sufficient opportunity, would be able to take care of their own interests in these matters without the intervention of the Legislature. In America the manufacturers did not suffer by limiting the hours of labour, and in point of machinery, coals, and capital, they were in a much worse position than the manufacturers of this country. He had no hesitation in saying that the manufacturers of this country would have as much work cone by working ten hours a day as by working twelve hours, and 114 hoped the House would carry the Bill as a Ten Hours' Bill. Mr. AGLIONBY said that the principle of the Bill had been debated over and over again, and been decided upon by the House. lie did not think it necessary, there fore, to take up the time of the House, but would im plore them to go at once into Committee. The Hon. Member for G'asgow had stated no adequate reason for postponing the Bill. Enr a fortnight, and he hoped his pro. position would be rejected. He thought it better therefore to proceed with the question at once, and any amendments Hon. Members wished to make could be discussed in Com mittee. Lord J. RUSSELL agreed with the Hon. Gentleman who had just spoken that the best course for them to adopt would be to go into Committee at once. Had he had an opportu nity of stating his opinions before the House rose when the question was last under consideration, he would have made some remarks on the general question. It was not, however, the fault of the opponents of the measure that he had not had that opportunity. The Honourable Gentleman who spoke towards the close of the evening, had been carried away by his argument, and was in consequence induced to prolong his speech till nearly six o'clock. He was quite willing to forego the oppor tunity he had at present to enter into the question, and he did so for the purpose of preventing delay and avoiding a fresh debate. The House had pronounced its opinion on the measure twice—first, on the second reading of the Bill ; and, secondly, on going into Committee. Ile took the question, then, as decided, and he thought it far better for them to go into Committee at once, when any amendment the Hon. Member for Glasgow, or any other Hon. Member, might propose, could be discussed. He thought his Hon. Friend who had spoken last had made a mistake with regard to the proposition which he stated as having been made by the masters, and that it could not be regarded with sincerity, inasmuch as it was made at the eleventh hour. He (Lord John Russell) thought that so far from its being a proposition of the manufacturers, it was a proposition of one gentleman— (Cries of " three ")—engaged in the cotton manufactures. He thought it, therefore, un fair to charge them with bringing forward the question of relays, or of introducing it at the eleventh hour. He thought it quite unnecessary to discuss that propo sition now, and considered that the best course for the house to adopt would be to go at once into Committee. It was true that great anxiety and great ex pectations were felt on the subject, and he trusted they would lose no further time. Mr. FOX MAT LE said, when the Hon. Gentleman got up and used arguments for not delaying the further consideration of the Bill, he thought he should refrain from introducing topics in his speech, which would have the effect of giving use to argument. The lion. Member for Cockermouth stated that the object of the amendment was to cause farther delay, and that the minds of its advocates were so fully made up, that it was quite useless to make any proposition to them to forego the Ten Hours' Bill, and, secondly, that the propo sition now made was not a bond fide one, inasmuch WI it was made at the eleventh hour.—(Hear, hear.) The parties who had made this proposition were not only honourable men in their calling, but also gentlemen who had done all they could to carry out in their manufactories the provisions of the Factories Bill. • Mr. AGLION BY said—Directly the opposite. Mr. FOX MAULE—Then his ears never so mistook any thing which bad ever been stated in that House. He thought that the proposition showed something like a desire upon the part of the masters to meat the wishes of the men ; and he thought it desirable to secure the willing co-operation of both masters and operatives in carrying out the provisions of the Factories Bill, should such pars into a law. If good feeling were not established between the masters and opera tives the greatest mischiefs would result from the passing of the proposed measure. Mr. AGLIOXBY rose to explain. He denied having made any reflection whatever oa the character or conduct pursued by any manufacturers with respect to this measure. Mr. BROW:tilt: thought that by passing this measure an injury would be inflicted upon the country, equal in its ex tent to that produced by Louis XIV. upon France, by the banishment of skill and labour from that country, while the cruelty inflicted upon the operatives themselves would be of the most serious and alarming kind. It was an undeniable proposition, that a few hour's employment would be remune rated by low wages only. The present measure proposed to rob the poor man of all the capital which he possessed, viz., his labour, and he should therefore feel it his duty to oppose the further progress of the measure. Mr. PETER BORTHWICK opposed the amendment. The object of the amendment appeared to bins to have been proposed for the purpose of obstructing the progress of a measure which hal virtually received the sanction of the House. Mr. BRIGHT wished to make a few observations with respect to the petition which had been presented by the Noble Lord at the head of the Government. Some time ago a memorial was presented to the Noble Lord and his col leagues, signed by nearly 400 master spinners largely en gaged in the cotton trade, representing, he might say, five sixths of the capital invested iu that trade, and employing over 120,000 persons; but the Noble Lord, he was sorry to say, did not accede to the proposition which it contained. But, to• day, he had presented a petition in favour of the Bill, which he stated was signed by manufacturers in Lancashire, York, Chester, and Derby. The first name in the petition was that of the brother of the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Oldham, to which no one could object. Next came the names of several persons who were stated to reside in Rochdale; but, with the exception of about twelve, he was in a condition to say that he never bad the felicity of know ing that they were spinners. One signed himself John Scholefield, a flannel manufacturer, who stated that he em ployed six persons.—(" hear, hear," from Mr. Ferrand)— ! another, Josh. Wild, of Great Bolton, waste dealer, who em ployed four persons; but the majority of them employed no more than two persons, and but few of them employed three. Some of them signed theMselves grocers and drapers. At any rate the majority of those who had signed the petition had little or no connexion with steam-power, or in the capital invested in machinery, or any of those trades which the Bill was proposed to affect. He complained that such a petition had been presented by the Prime Minister, because a petition presented by one in that high office carried with it much authority. Perhaps not one-hundredth part of the capital invested in the cotton and other trades was represented by them. Either the Noble Lord must have been at a great loss for supporters, or he had been grossly deceived ; certainly it did not convey the views of those engaged in that trade. He also complained that the Noble Lord had not discussed the principle of the Bill. On the first occasion he was asked to discuss it, but he declined to do so; he was in the second stage sought to do so, but he again declined. Now they were about going into Com mittee he still adhered to his resolution not to speak. He should not complain of this if the Noble Lord were not at the head of the Government. He admired his talents and his courage, and he, and those on that side of the House who felt disposed to support the Noble Lord's Government, felt grieved at his silence as to the grounds on which he sup ported the Bill.—(Hear.) He stated it did not resolve itself into a question of principle but into one of degree; but, whether it was a question of principle or of degree, the Bill would, if passed, have the effect of stopping the ma chinery of the country to a great extent, and therefore WAS one of paramount importance.—(The Hon. Gentle man then read a long extract from an article in the last number of Cliambers's Journal, entitled " Two Days in Dundee," by William Chambers—all of whose writings, he said, could be relied upon—to show that many parents had removed their children from the factories, where they were earning 18.3 d. a week, for the purpose of being sent out to beg. The industrial schools gave three meals a day, and this led them to consider the question whether this quantity of food, and what was made by begging, was not of more value than the wages they received. This showed that interference with labour would do no good to those persons, whilst it would do incalculable mischief to the employers. By the returns of the factory inspectors, it appeared that from the year 1835, when this system of agitation commenced, down to 1839, there were 30,000 fewer children employed under 13 years of age. Mr. Owen was more entitled to the authorship of this plan than any :other person, as he had suggested it years ago. From a paper he had received from the United States, it appeared that a com mittee of Congress had, on his instigation, been appointed to consider the subject, but they had reported that they could not conic to any conclusion on the subject. The Bill would wantonly interfere with the capital of the country, and with out the aid of the great manufacturers, legislation could not be carried on at all ; and if the master-manufacturers thought proper to enter into a combination against this Bill it could not be carried out. The Hon. Gentleman the Member for Knaresborough had stated that if it was not passed the working classes would revolt ; but they had found that every seduction of the hours of work had been accompanied with a reduction of wages, and many of them anticipated a like result from this measure. Why should the manufacturers of cotton, who were anxious to make up for the losses of this year by working more hours during 1348 be prevented from doing so ? He believed the e nployers would rather have a ten hours than an e!even hours' Bill.—(Hear, hear.) The employers who approved of . it, simply did so i n or d er t h at i t might b e decided e d i t. 7t ( tj,,olet(ll‘l maintain erd ;and if it was f oun d a good principle they 0 11: , s , i e r, — h ( e h a i r e . a ) r, h l e l a e r ,. ) for Th on e e s , pe n e i c s h he o d f the matter the lion. Gentleman the Member for Salford (Mr. Brother ton) had a great effect upon the House; but since that Hon. Gentleman was thetakeniplaee, employment aent employede in a factory a great change had persons had been passed forbidding and the majority VI:II-teen for more than six who were apprenticed, d the young persons in other r s a trades,day in n er i e v under thirteen. is country under They had snore persons then in shops' the ages of fourteen than they bad their factories. They s were in a temperature not less injurious, and engaged in work - hardly less hurtful than in the factories. He had a strong feeling for the working classes, and he would rather oppose them than deceive them, for he had a regard for his own practical experience and con scientious convictions. He believed that the Bill was one which would be injurious, and therefore he should support the motion of the lion. Member and any other vote which would retard the passing of this measure. Her Majesty's Government had voted for this measure three years ago, and he (Mr. Bright) had predicted what would' happen. That prediction had since been fulfilled. He hoped that, seeing the consequences of the vote, her Majesty's Go vernment would not now assist in forwarding the measure. Mr. HINDLEY said that he had been a free-trader all his life, and believed in the principle to its fullest extent, but he thought that the Government should take care that the articles produced should be made with a due regard to the feelings and morals of the people. What had Mr. Cobden said upon this subject? After commenting upon the system of oppression upon trade, he had said, that if the Government would take off the restrictions upon trade, he would freely give his labourers the same wages which they were then receiving, with ten hours' labour (Loud cheers.) The Hon. Member for Oldham had not always supported the opinion he had just given out, for upon a former occasion he had agreed with the Hon. Member for Stockport in his views upon this measure. He would no longer trespass upon the time of the House, nor hinder them from going into Committee upon this question.—(Cheers.) Mr. FIELDEN was astonished at the assertions which had been made by the Hon. Merr.ber for Durham, for he had placed the petition against which this protest was entered in the hands of the Noble Lord a fortnight since. That Hon. Member had complained, in the protest which he had pre sented, that the mill-owners who had signed the petition were not men of property, and that it consequently was not entitled to the attention of the House, and had con tended that his own protest was a more valid document. But if it were so, why wsie not the names of the several partners in the different tiMis given, together with a state ment of the number of men employed in each factory, for that would have given validity to the assertions which it contained. There were 323 firms, whose names were signed to this protest, and it was pretended that they represented a constituency of 823,000 people, but he would like to know whether the Hon. Member for Durham would make himself responsible for the respectability of these firms, as he would make himself responsible for those who had signed the petition presented by the Noble Lord, and why throw the responsibility upon him of passing this Bill through the House? He should like to know how this protest was got up, and what part the Hon. Gentleman had taken in it. For his own part, he did not know but that it was written by the Hon. Gentleman himself, for he found that it was signed by Bright and Charlesworth, of Ashton under-Lyne.—(" Hear, hear," from Mr. Bright.) It was signed also by Samuel Scotland Jones, of Rochdale, and by several other persons whose respectability he would not impugn, but there were other names for which there were no owners in existence. There was Joel Gee, of Dunkingfield, together with several other the owners of which were nowhere to be found. While the names of those who had signed the petition presented by the Noble Lord were some of the most distinguished men in Manchester, well known throughout the whole of the menu- factoring districts.—(Hear.) And what did these people say? Why they wanted to convince him that he did not understand his own business.—(" Hear, hear," and laugh ter.) More than thirteen years ago he bad stated the whole of the case to the mill-owners, and had then recommended them to adopt the ten hours' system. And look at the be nefit that would have arisen from it. There was the Hon. Member for Durham himself, whose mills were at the pre sent moment entirely at a stand-still, and all his hands stand ing idle.—(" Hear," ,from Mr. Bright, and cheers from several parts of the House.) He did not hesitate to say, that if this Ten Hours' Bill had passed last session, and was at pre. present in operation, that every mill in Manchester would be now at work. They had machinery now erected at such an extent that they were enabled to supply all the markets of the world. And then with regard towages, it was his own firm conviction that wages would be as high under a Ten llours' Bill as they were under a twelve hours' system. In 1634 be bad recommended that a ten hcurs' plan should be adopted, and since then the House had passed a Bill for preventing the use of relays of children, and had hindered all under a certain age from working more than eight hours a day. But let him finish with the protest. (The Hon. Gentleman the❑ read several names which he stated to be fictitious.) The Hon. Gentle man had asserted that these parties were in possession of roily five-sixths of the capital employed in the cotton trade. Why a greater story never was told. his had to complain that no notice whatever had been given to him of the inten tion to bring this motion forward, for if he bad received a note, or any intimation whatever, he should certainly have been in his place to resist it. Nor had there been more courtesy with respect to the protest presented by the Hon. Member for Durham, of which he had heard nothing until he saw it on the table. The tact was, this motion was merely brought forward for the purposes of delay, for it could serve no otl.er purpose whatever. if there was any object really to be attained, why did not the Hon. Gentleman meet him at Manchester, at Oldham, at Halifax, and at the several other places which he had visited for the promotion of this object?—(Cheers.) it was true that the Hon. Member possessed, the gift of the gab—(Laughter)— but it was a pity that he did not use it in conferring a boon on the people, instead of imposing an injury. He would not consent to any delay of the measure, even for a single hour. Mr. BRIGHT said that he had no doubt that the whole of the mistake referred to by the Hon. Member for Oldham (Mr. Fielden) arose from a mistake in the printing of the list of the bellies from the petition. Mr. DENNISTOUN rose for the purpose of making some explanations respecting a conversation which had passed between himself and the lion. Member for Oldham (Mr. Fielden), to which that Hon. Member had referred. Mr. STANSFIELD was understood to say that he would support the motion. Sir R. PEEL said that he was not quite certain what was the actual motion before the House. Mr. DENNISTOUN said, the motion was to postpone the Bill gcing into Committee for a I..rtnight. Sir It. PEEL could not then support that motion. It appeared to him that it was only a motion for delaying the Bill. The Bill had been already fully discussed upon — every preceding occasion; it was now proposed to delay the Bill going into Committee for a fortnight, which would bring the House to the Wednesday immediately preceding the adjournment, a day which he did not think would be a very convenient one for the purpose of discussion in committee, and he thought that the consequence would be the postponement of the Bill till after Easter. He did not think that sufficient grounds had been made out for delaying the measure, and he should, therefore, feel it his duty to oppose the motion. Mr. DUNCAN supported the motion for postponement. Lord JOHN BUS'ELL said that the Ikon. Member for Durham complained that he had taken no part in the discus? sion. He should now, therefore, state as shortly as he could the reason which induced him to support the Bill. He hoped the Hon. Member, and other Hon. Gentlemen, would not forget that on one occasion lie did briefly state his reasons for supporting the Bill, and if he did not then go fully into the question, it was because he was limited to ten minutes to do so, the Hon. Member who spoke before having only finished ten minutes before six o'clock.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tainworth in a speech he made on the Bill, had also stated that he would like to hear him (Lord John Russell) express the views which he entertained on the subject, but the Right Honourable Baronet was so led away that evening by his argument, as to preclude the possibility of his being able to state what his views were. Be fore he could now proceed to make any observations on the general question, he wished to say that he did not think the Hon. Member for Durham had any right to lec ture him upon his conduct in 1844.—(Cheers.) It was with his eyes open that he (Lord J. Russell) then supported the measure brought forward, and he was quite willing to bear the responsibility of the consequences that resulted from that step. If he recollected well, it, was urged as an argument for the abolition of the corn-laws by the Hon. Gentleman and those who acted with him representing the Anti-Corn law League, that if these laws were abolished there would be no ;necessity for prolonging the hours of factory labour to the same extent as then prevailed. Now, if he were disposed to retali a te o n t h e H on . M em b er, he would say that those assertions were held out for the purpose of securing the support of the working classes, irrespective of the truth of the statement. He would not, however, say that they were insincere in their representations, but he thought that a consideration of this should induce him to be sparing in his taunts of his (Lord John Russell's) conduct in 1844. With regard to the question, it had been debated before, and it was scarcely necessary for them to enter into it. There could be no doubt but to limit the hours of labour for the young people in factories was a perfectly legitimate object. It was stated, however, that the con sequence of this would be to limit the labour of adults, but he could not assent to this objection, as it. would be just as reasonable to allege with regard to a proposal to make a railway from a sea-port to Loncon that it would injure the coasting trade generally. The principle of the measure was good, and should therefore be carried out, notwithstanding any inconvenience which might result. —(Hear, hear.) Ile thought the object of the Bill was a perfectly legitimate one, and it should therefore have his support, as he believed that great benefit would result from it. The powerful argument for the limitation of the hours of labour was the opportunity which would be thus afforded to the manufacturing population of having re ligious and moral instruction, cultivating the domestic atfec tions, and acquiring domestic habits. Now, the advocates of these improvements in the social condition of the working classes seemed to forget that they were incompatible with the protraction of the hours of labour to 14 hours a day. It was said, however, that the hours afforded for those purposes would be abused, and devotod to vice; but he was not deterred by such an objection from supporting the measure. He should be quite content if those who would be benefited were left to spend the leisure whi c h thi s Bill wou l d g i ve them at their own homes, in kindly intercourse, instead of imposing any restriction upon them as to how they should spend it.—( Hear.) They next came to the great question inserted in the Bill. Could they give these advantages to the sons and daughters of the working classes employed in, factories, without at the same time injuring the manufac turer and the industry of the country, and thereby injuring those classes whom the Bill was designed to benefit ? This was a large and formidable question, and thoughthe limitation of the hours of work might be indirect, still if the practical m er n effect of such a limitation was likely to injure our foreign coanc a c lu t r h e e . made out be the opponents of the measure to show th at N question ow ,h became, ed id not think n l k i e thatsaid, one of a v ery a case had be en serious serious injury to our foreign trade might be apprehended.— ( Hear, hear.) And, in considering the question, they must not simply look at the value of the manufactures exported from this country—namely, 37,000,0001., as for instance, one of the largest manufacturers in this country—Mr. Marshall, of Leeds, only worked his flax-mill eleven hours a day, and they had a right to assume that he did so with profit. They had also been told that many other manufacturers in Leeds did not employ their workers more than eleven hours a day; therefore the hours of work did not bear so materially on the amount exported as many Hon. Gentleineu seemed to suppose. The next consideration was, how many various elements there were in the price of the article, in order to show they would be affected by foreign competition. With respect to cotton, there was the original price of the raw material, the cost of its transit across the ocean, the commission of the merchant at Liverpool, the expenseof working it into thread and into various fabrics. It had then to be embarked again, and he would assume that it was carried to China, where it would have to compete with American and Swiss manufactures. The original cost would not be affected by the Bill, and the manufacturers would not pay their workers for twelve hours' work if they worked only ten.—(Loud cries of "Hear , hear.") The manufacturers would pay only for the quantity of work done. The expenses of a manufacturer win vested 100,0001. had 100,000/. in his works had been thus estimated :-5/. per cent. into, et on capi• al in the first instance ; we&r and tc ar 61. ; oil, tallow, mid coal, about 12/. ; and 1/. for gas ; making altogether twenty-four pounds per cent.--( Hear.) With regard to wear and tear, as far as the reduction of the price of labour was concerneo, there would he an equal re ductitoi lit this parr, La aunt :allow, &c , would be used, and thie, with the other item, would make a reduction of about 12/, per cent.; se that there was only W. per cent. on which any loss could take place—namely, the ill- \ KEW !;; '.•<;)ti7":7-'' k4i THF SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH 17, 1847. terest on the capital.—(Hear.) But look at the great ad vantages which the cotton manufacturers had obtained. There was formerly . a tax of 700,0001. a year on cotton in the raw material—( Hear, bear)—and the repeal of , the corn-laws must also be looked upon as a great advantage, as, now the corn-laws had been repealed, there could be no longer that difference between the price of corn in other countries in Europe and its price in this country.—(hear, hear.) Thee would be in the same position whether the price was high or low. If the average price of corn in this country was formerly 555. per quarter, and 455. in France, for the future the prices in these countries would be the same. If there was a time of extraordinary scarcity—a deficient harveet—and the price of corn was 70s. or 753. a quarter, the French manufacturer would not have the advantage of obtaining his corn at 605., whilst the English people had to pay 705., as there would be an equalisation of prices.—( Hear, hear.) These advantages, he thought, were equal to 700,000/. a year to those engaged in manufactures.—(Hear.) But ot this he was sure, that all those who had contended in that House for the repeal of the corn-laws urged in support of their repeal that they were the greatest disadvantages with which they had to contend, whether in China or America, against foreign ma nufactures, because they were debarred from using the corn and other provisions of the same parties —(Hear, hear ) He said, therefore, that the manufacturers had received great advantage by the repeal ore he cotton tax, and next by the repeal of the corn-laws.—(Hear, hear.) The duty on wool had also been taken off. It was stated, en behalf o! the working men, that the passing of this Bill would caws' much loss to them, by reducing their hours of work, and in consequence their wages. Now, as far as he (Lord John Russell) could judge, the working men were willing to risk a trial of a ten hours' Bill.—(Hear, hear.) The manufacturers could not suffer, because they would not give so much for less work as they would do for a greater quantity. It was urged, in opposition to the Bill, that the quantity of manufactures exported was equal to mills working twelve hours a day throughout the year, and that if the hours were reduced that the quantity of pro duction must be diminished. Now that was not correct.—(Mr. Bright said it was correct.) Yet he had heard the Hon. Gentle man state this fact, in connexion with his own mills.—(Hear.) There were many other mills working short time, and that short time was ten hours or eight hours a day. That lisp pened very often three times a week, or three days in the week. He said that the production wes not what it seemed, but it was diminished when there had not been suf ficient employment. It did seem to him, that if they introduced a Bill fur eleven hours, die conse quence would be, that there would not be a strain to produce the quantity that could be manufactured in twelve hours, but thet there would be a more steady employ ment throughout the whole year than there was at the present moment. It might be that in a certain time there would not be a sufficient number of mills to furnish the demand, but at least he thought it was not the case at the present time. No one could exclaim that there was at the present time a deficiency of power to produce all the manufactures of cotton which might be required for the demand of the world—and if that were the case, so far from thinking it an inconvenient or a bad time for entertaining this question, as they were told, it seemed to be peculiarly a fit time, because the same production which they now had in Lancashire and York would be continued, and that without the addition of a single mill or a single power.loom to the manufactures of this country. For his own part he should expect, that if a Bill, limiting the time cf labour to eleven hours were to pass, that the general production would be fully equal to that which it then was. lie believed that there would be fewer tits and starts. He believed that there would be a more equal employment, and the manufacturing capabilities of the country would be brought in force—when it was not so at the present time. It was said that after all they must look to the keen competition that was kept up, and they said that unless they had all the time which they had at present they should be unable to meet that competition. Why, if that were the case, he asked how had these parties been enabled to meet that competition hitherto. He was obligee to ask that, because they said that t hey were working under a disadvantage which, according to their statement, 11;:d overwhelmed the manufacture of this country. Let them take Russia. He believed that the Russian people were allowed to work ninety hours to the week. At the same time, money was advanced by the Government for the support of the cotton-mills in Russia, which were subjects of especial favour with that Government. There was no tax upon raw cotten. If such were the advantages given to the cotton manufacturer of Russia, he muse naturally ask what had enabled the manufacturers of this country to keep up the commercial prosperity which they had done. He believed that this fact depended on somewhat more than the mere circumstances attending the manufacture, which were not in themselves of paramount importance. His belief was that this country hed derived it from its genet al freedom and from its manufact tub' g skill; advantages of which it would not be deprived by reducing the hours of labour, if these e-oung persons were to work eleven hours per day. He could say, that in those countries where manufactures had sprung up, it was impossible to say that injurious facts had followed measures of this nature, or that the manufacturing prosperity could at all be estimated by these measures. He would then take the case of America. It was said that the competition of America was very dangerous to this country, but at the same time he believed that there was a law in Massachusetts that persons under fifteen years of age should not be employed more than nine months in the year, and the owners are obliged to glee them three months to attend to their education. If there was such a law in this country, by which every person under fifteen years of age should have three months' absence from the mills, they would be told at once that the measure would be fatal to the manufacturer, and that it was quite impos sible to keep up a competition of such a description, and yet America had kept it up, and he believed would keep up the competition, and furnish a great part of those manu factures which go to different parts of the world. lie be lieved that these things depended not on the general nature of the institutions, but on the commercial enterprise and manufacturing skill of different countries. It was clear that such was the case, for Russia, with all its advantages, was 'tenable to • compete with this country; while America, which was under great disadvantage in this respect and in wages, which were 18.3 d. more than those of Russia had been enabled to compete with them. He believed that the rate of wages in America were 15s. to 15s. 100.-2 much greater sum than they were here. At all events it could not be denied that there were great re strictions. His belief was, that if they were to restrict the hours of labour of young persons and of women to a period not exceeding eleven hours a day, they would find that the fears which had been so loudly expressed on this subj pct would shortly after the alteration give place to confi dence. They had repeatedly seen that measures of this kind had been introduced, and they had seen them obtain complete success. They had seen the people better off, in every respect, after these measures were passed. At the same time he thought that the con ' sideration was so very serious that it would be far better to introduce a Bill to reduce the number of hours to eleven than to go on with a Bill at present to limit the hours to ten. He thought it would be far better to adopt that which had been proved by experi ence, than to go at once to the extent of the limitation pro posed. He did not himself, think that manufacturing property would at all suffer by • the change ; and he did think that if it were possible to introduce such a change, that they did owe it to the rising generation to make an alteration which would be beneficial to them. He could not look with in difference to the statement that a great part of the people of this country had only to work, eat, sleep, and dies—(Cheers.) In his of nion it was the duty of the State to en deavour that they should have a people in the first place aware of the doctrines of their religion. In the next place, able to cultivate their domestic happiness and domestic affection, and, in the third place, look up to the laws and Government of the country as their protectors from undue op pression and undue inflictions upon the youth of the country. He confessed that he did not see that that object had been attained, or that it was likely to be attained, so long as the age afterem employed in the fectory, c or ni ng home every day t ired an d exhausted, would be able oyed for tw e l ve h ours a t a t hours of those young pe r s o ns were permitted to be protracted es they had hitherto been. H e could not oonceive himself that a girl work,of to do anything but rest, ia order to commence the labours of the next da y. He did not o a u d r fourteen two years hours o f under stand how such a young girl would be brought up to be a good wife or a good mother, and he was wilting , therefore, to incur the risk, in the hope of improving the condition and alleviating the condition ofehese people. He might be mistaken in that view, but he would only go according to what had appeared to him, after seriously considering this subject, to be the case. He was, therefore, ready to go into Committee on this Bill. Lie was ready, when the Speaker left the chair, to vote for the clause restricting the time of working to eleven hours. He wished the Bill to remain in that shape, as he thought it would give considerable advantages to those persons w ho were the objects of it. He would be ready to join those who were disposed to do a n y thin g fo r the welfare of this country. The House then went into Committee. Mr. DENNISTOUN rose to move the adjournment, but there were cries of "Go on, go on." Mr. HUME said that in his opinion, if they were to go on, they had better go on now, fur he was firmly convinced that the matter would not be settled in the country until the eight hours were obtained. For his own part, he should not move any amendment, and he would advise all his friends to abstain from doing so also. On the first clause being put, the object of it being to limit the working in factories to eleven hours each day after the Ist of May in the present year, Mr. BRIGHT rose to ask when these hours were to be taken, for the Bill did not specify when the mills were to be in operation. He presumed the Bill was to be perpetual, and therefore this point ought to be settled. Mr. FIELDEN answered that this Bill would, of course, be regulated, as to its construction, by the other Bills which had been passed for the regulation Of factories. Sir G. STRICKLAND wished to know whether it was in tended to limit the operation of the clause to two years, but no reply was given to the question. The clause was then passed. On the second clause being put, Mr. FIELDEN said that as there seemed a wish entertained by several Hon. Members, he would propose that the time fur limiting the labour to eleven hours a day should be ex tended one year, and he wished therefore that the Ist of May. 1849. should be substituted for the let of May, 1848. Mr. ROEBUCK quite disapproved of the Bill altogether, but as it was to be passed, he should prefer that the Ten Hours' system be adopted at once, and he would therefore move that the Ist of May 1818 be inserted instead of 1849. Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought that the Honourable Member who had charge of the Bill ought to use his own discretion as to what time he inserted, but for his own part when the clause for limiting the hours to ten a day came under consideration be should move for its omission altogether. The clause, as originally proposed, was then agreed to without a division. Upon clause 3 being proposed, Mr. I I OUVERIE called the attention of the Committee to what he considered would be the serious result of passing this measure upon the children employed in . factorie, ig n fo o c t rau c rrr o ti r ei l i s de e : n a t t t to by forbidding them to work, and not, at the same time, providing for them any other kind of em -0 Ivrr en', Cr affording them the means of education. Lord SiOEIPETII would not trouble the House at that late hour with his reasons why he thought this clause should be expunged. lie wished, however, to say that he would greater experience of the operation of such a reduction. It present. Mr. reduction than one hour till he had had been found by a number of manufacturers that the eleven hours had worked well, and he was not disposed to Mr. FERRAND thought that what the Noble Lord stated was a reason wily he should consent to reduce the hours to ten instead of eleven. Mr. DUNCAN supported the expunging of the clause, as, he was persuaded it would seriously injure the flax trade of the town of Dundee, which he represented. The Honourable Gentleman entered into some static with regard to the flax trade of Dundee in support of his vie w . Toe shortcoming upon all was no IPsA than 2..33t ) , ( 10011)4. (liiv:,,, (iivi:l,)-4:)1 is one article :ye 11:::i €:: - pwl . . , .1 only a , few Pictes of late, when we used to send out ship loads. If they reduced the time they would be doing away with th© whole of the foreign commerce of the country, for if they once lost their customers, they would never be able to regain them.—(Loud cries of "Divide, divide.") The House then divided, when there appeared— For the clause Against it Majority in favour of the clause —7B The clause, therefore, stands part of the Bill. The result of the division was received with loud cheers. The remaining clauses were then agreed to without amend ment. The announcement was received with loud cheers. The House having resumed, Mr. GREENE brought up the report, which was ordered to he taken into consideration on the 21st of April. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at a few minutes to Six o'clock. RAILWAY COMMITTEES. (THIS DAY). HOUSE OF COMMONS. GROUP, I. The Select Committee appointed to consider the merits of the Bills comprised in this group reassembled at the usual hour this morning, Lord Granville Somerset in the chair. THEISOUTH-EASTERN MX3)-RENT SCHEME. The day was occupied in hearing general evidence in fa vour of this line. Mr. Alderman Lucas, a landholder on the existing line from Paddock Wood to Maidstone, bore testimony to the great advantage the South-Eastern Mid-Kent scheme would afford to that part of the country. The Rev. Mr. Cobb, of Igluhain, said at present his part of the country was entirely without railway communication with London. lie preferred the South-Eastern Mid-Kent line, because he consilered it the best. It passed through 13astel Valley, a very large hop producing district, and it would derive considerable benefit from the construction of this line. Mr. Woodridge. of Tunbridge, proved that the majority of the inhabitants of that place were favourable to the South- Eastern scheme. Mr. Wm. Harrison, of Hadlow, said it was absolutely ne cessary that Hardlour ehould have a better communication with the metropolis. The South-Eastern line he considered accomplished that object in the best possible manner. Mr. Win. Golding, a farmer on the route of. the proposed line, gave it as his opinion that no district was more in want of railway accommodation than that lt•ing between Ightham an,Tunbridge and London. The South Eastern was the best line of the two. Mr. Mercer, of ➢laidstone, Mr. David Bailey-, of S.!ven oaks, Mr. Carter, a miller in the Bastead Valley, and a num ber of other residents, merchants, traders, and owners on the line, gave concurrent testimony to the former witnesses. The Committee then adjourned till to-morrow at twelve o'clock. GROUP XII. NEWP/119.RECET AND ELY. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition.) Mr. Arszrx, having gone at some length into the question of the subscription contracts, proceeded to explain the lead ing features of the scheme which he intended to establish by evidence. Mr. A. Ransome, of Ipswich, was the first wit ness called. He deposed that the two lines pro p9sed by the Eastern Counties Union Company were much inferior to the rival schemes, and were unanimously supported by the Bury St. Edmund's inhabi tants. The present scheme had their support, because it would .qise the town a direct communication with the estern and , mittliOd counties of England. Mn,4Vebber, of Ipswich, gave evidence of a similar chp.radfel , , A line which would connect Bury St.Edmund'a and Netv'Mairief was greatly to be preferred over the scheme to Ely,:aml it would open up the Midland Counties to the agri cultural produce of the East. Mr. Deck, auctioneer, of Bury St. Edmunds, gave evidence to a similar effect. The Committee then adjourned till to-morrow. SOUTH-EASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY.—(THIS DAY.) The twenty-first half-yearly general meeting of the nro-. prietors in this railway was held at the Board-room, London bridge Terminus, for the purpose of receiving the report of the directors, and transacting the ordinary business of the company. James M•Gregor, Esq., chairman of the com pany, presided. The advertisement calling the meeting having been read, and the common seal of the company affixed to the registry of proprietors, 7 The SECRETARY proceeded to read the report, of which the following is a brief abstract : " The Accounts of the South- Eastern Railvr3y Company for the half-year, ending on the :31st of January, 1847, show that the gross Rezeipts of the Company on Revenue Account have amounted during that period to 236,404/. Os. 5d.; that the working expenses have been 61,197/. 9s. ; the rent of the Greenwich Railway and the IVhitstable Railway, 19,878/. 2s. 3d. •, the Rates, Government Duty. anti Toll to the London, Brighton, and South-Coa s t Company, for the use of the Croydon Railway, 31,0471. ss. Bd., mak ing together the Expenditure on Revenue Account, 112,1221. 17s. 4d. The Balance carried to the Account of Profit and Loss, 124,281/. 3s. Id.; and the Profit and Loss Account shows an amount at the disposal of the Proprietors of 100,204/. 7s. 3d. " The amount received for passenger traffic during the half-year on the South-Eastern Railway, exclusive of the Greenwich Branch, is 144,0001. 12s. 7d., of which 55,422/. 15s. Id. has been paid by 112,419 first-class pas sengers; 54,683/. 12s. 11d. by 247,670 second-class pas sengers; and 33,8901. 45.; 7d. by 381,708 third-class pas sengers. comparison with the corresponding half-year of 1845-6 shows an increase during the last hall year of 38,5701. Bs. 9d. in receipt, and of 16,040 first class: 41,186 second class; and 130,344 third class in number, in all 187,579. The comparison of last half-year with the corresponding half-year of 1845-6, shows an increase of 7,241 of persons carried over the Greenwich Branch, within that period, and there is an increase of the earnings on this branch of 1,113/. 11 s. 7d. " The merchandise account has yielded 37,245/. 14s. 7d. during the last half year, which exceeds by 13,3201. 6i. 7d. the amount earned in the corresponding hail of last year. " The directors :gave up possession of the New Cross Lo comotive Works on the 31st of January, in accordance with the agreement which had been entered into, and removed the South-Eastern Locomotive Establishment to the new works, at Ashford. " The amount due to this company from the Brighton Company, on giving up the New Cross Works, amounting to nearly 40,0001, has net yet been paid. "The branch from Minster to Deal will open so soon as the swing-bridge over the Steer is completed. Its construc tion has been delayed by the severe winter. "The contracts for widening the Greenwich branch and extending it to Gravesend, and for filling up the canal in the tunnel, and doubling the line of the railway from Gravesend 'to Rochester, are all let. All the works are proceeding favourably, and there is every reason to expect that they will be completed according to the contracts, which require all the works to be constructed and ready for opening within twelve months after obtaining possession of the land. That part of the North Kent Railway between Gravesend and Rochester will, it is hoped, be opened as a double line in two months. " The directors have arranged with the Board of the Reading, Guildford, and Reigate Railway to vary the agree ment existing with that company, and instead of the South- Eastern Company allowing 44 per cent. to the Reading, Guildford, and Reigate Company, on the whole outlay for constructing the line and a division of profits besides, they have agreed, subject to the approbation of the proprietors, to allow 5 1 A per cent. without division of profits, on a fixed capital of 600,000/. The South-Eastern Company having the responsibility of executing the works. "The directors trust the arrangements they have made, and are making, for the internal management of the com pany, will insure to them efficient aid in all departments of its service, and they beg leave to tender to the proprietors their assurance that no exertions on their part shall be wanting to uphold the property and increase the prosperity of the South-Eastern Company." The CHAIRMAN then said that he trusted the report read would be found satisfactory. On the 24th of February they had an interview with the Brighton Company, which they had hoped would terminate satisfactorily, were it not for the expressed determination of the Brighton Company to proceed with their Mid-Kent schemes. A copy of the corres pondence which passed between the Chairmen of the two companies was read, and it appeared that while both parties expressed themselves anxious to come to terms, neither was willing to forego the schemes which they them selves were promoting. If he were asked why the negotia tion had not been proceeded with on their part, he should say that, as the basis of all negotiation was founded on the withdrawal of the Brighton Mid-Kent projects, the South-Eastern Company, finding that this withdrawal would not be conceded, and esteeming there projects, if finished, to be non-paying ones, had deemed it prudent to reject all overtures while these projects were insisted on. A SIIMIEHOLDER said that there was one item of expendi ture generally„ found in the reports of other railways which he did not find in the South-Eastern Company. He meant the amount due to directors for their own services. Were the directors not paid, or was the omission a clerical error? The CHAIRMAN said that when the directors undertook the management of the railway, they found that it was a matter of absolute necessity to apply the pruning knife to the salaries of all the officers. The secretary, for instance, was only allowed 400/. per annum, and the others wore propor tionably low. In adopting these reformatory measures, they felt it to be their duty to begin at home, and a resolution was agreed to that their services should be given gratuitously until the position of the company could be made fully satis factory to the proprietors.—(Great cheering.) The CHAIRMAN then moved the adoption of the report, which having been seconded, was carried unanimously. The CHAIRMAN then proposed that a dividend of 21s. per share on the paid-up shares be declared ;of 13s. on the shares created on the 19th of March, 1844; and of 7s. 6d. per share on the shares created on the 7th day of November, 1814; the same to be made payable on the 12th of April, 1847.—Carried. The retiring directors, Mr. Martin Luther Pritchard, Mr. Alexander Randall, and Mr. Henry Lewis Sinai], were re elected. A resolution, expressive of the obligations of the company to Lord Viscount Torrington, moved by Mr. PRESCOTT, seconded by Mr. Busman, and supported by Mr. D. SA LOONS, was carried with acc l amat i on . I he CHAIRMAN said the business of the meeting was now over, but he could not permit them to separate without ex pressing the thanks of himself and his colleagues for the honourable confidence had they reposed in them, and he begged to assure them that no effort would be wanting on their part to carry the affairs of the company to a successful termination.—(Cheers.) Mr. BARLOW moved a vote of thanks to the chairman : Mr. COLEMAN seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. The CIIAI RMAN returned thanks, and the meeting broke up. REGISTRY of BIRTHS and DEATHS DURING THE WEEK ENDING MARCH 13. Deaths registered in the week. Births registered in the week. Males ... ... ... r,03 Males ... ... ... 740 Females ... ... 5 3 Females ... ... 695 Total ... 1,026 Tot 11 -. 1,435 - ------ - TUESDAY NIGHT'S GAZETTE. DIVIDENDS DECLARED. John Griffiths, stationer, Liverpool—tirst div. of fig. in the pound, ou any Thursday, at the office of Mr. Cezenove, Liverpool. James Willsor, wine merchant, Liverpool—second div. of 4s. sd. in the pound, on any Thu:sday, at the office of Mr. Cazenove, Liverpool. Joseph Hall, innkeeper, Carligle 7 first div. of ss. in the polar!, on a:ly at ti:e Gli.cc of Mr. L:k..l•. castle-upon-Tyne. John Jones, ironmonger, Buralem, StaCrdshire—first div. of 53. 6d. in the pound, any Thursday, at the office of Mr. Christie, Birmingham. Charles Taylor, brush manufacturer, Birmingham—firs div. of 9d. in the pound, on any Tuesday before May 31, at the office of Mr. Whitmore, Birmingham. Thomas Peirson, money scrivener, Warwick-court, Holborn —first div of 4s. in the pound, on any Saturday, at the office of Mr. Green, Aldermanbury. DIVIDENDS. At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basinghall-street. J. '1 itley, woollendraper, High-street, Southwark, April 7, at half-past eleven—R. Satchel!, jun., brewer, Winsley street, Southwark, April 21, at one-11. Wilkinson, cabinet. maker, Watford, Hertfordshire, April 21, at twelve—J. Clark, merchant, Cresent, Minories, April 21, at twelve. In the Country. D. W. Acraman, W. E. Acraman, and A. J. Acraman, merchants, Bristol, April 9, at twelve, at the Bristol District Court—A. Birchall, share broker, Manchester, April 9, at eleven, at the Manchester District Court—J. Roberts and H. Hughes, linendrapers, Manchester, April 9, at eleven, at the Iklanchester District Court—J. Roberts, linendraper, Manchester, April 9, at eleven, at the Manchester District Court—H. Hughes, linendraper, Manchester, April 9, at eleven, at the Manchester District Court—A. S. ]'Laurin, warehouseman, Bradford, Yorkshire, April 9, at eleven at the Leeds District Court—J. Wintzr, Stoke-under-Hamdon, Somersetshire, April 7, at eleven, at the Exeter District Court—J. Winter. Stoke•under-Hamdon, April 8, at one, at the Exeter District Court. UEL.TIFICATES to be granted, unless cause be snown to the contrary, on the day herein mentioned. P. J. Luntlev, druggist, Bread-street-hill, City, April 8— A. S. M'Laurin, warehouseman, Bradford, Yorkshire, April 8 —J. Bickerton, hat manufacturer, Castle-street, Southwark, April 14—T. Yates, cotton manufacturer, Bolton-le-Moors, Lancashire, April B—W. F. Brand, draper, Wigan, Lan ' cashire April 6—J. Sutcliffe, cotton spinner, Ilabergham Eaves, Lancashire, April 6. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. J. S. and A. Westbro - a,ficense7cFvietuallers, Fecemans'- court, Cheapsizle—F. Allen and J. W. Byrne, manufacf uring chemists, Bow-common—H. Jenkinson and NV. 11. 1l•Dowell, coal inerchants, Liverpool—J. Booth and J. Ward, surgeons, Penistone, Yorkshire—J. Brown, D. Crighton, and J. Holden, spinner, Pendleton, Lancashire (so far as regards J. Brown) —II. Ball, W. Cumley, and W_ Ball, calenderers, Manchester —A. Currie, C. Tanqueray. and J. S. Tanqueray, rectitiers, Vine-street, Bloomsbury—A. Graham, R. Graham, A. Mounsey, It. Jackson, J. Monkhouse, and M. Falcon, brewers, Carlisle—T. Gorst and W. Owen, grocers, Warring ton—W. and W. Weighill, tanners, Whitby, Yorkshire—J. Rosbettom, J. Wane, and T. Moon, colliers, Eccleston, Lao cashire so far as regards J. Resbottom—W. Gregory and C. B. Williams, map sellers, Cheap,ide—T. Cope and J. Charhis worth, linen manufacturers, Barnsley, Yorkshire— EL and S. Wake, school slate manufacturers, Lombard-strect, South wark-bridge-road—R. Learoyd, J. Learoyd, and J. Learoyd, cotton spinners, Halifax, Yorkshire—C. A. de Liancourt and L. Castelain, oil clarifiers, Battersea—A. S. Stocker and C. 11. Whitfield, wine merchants, Middlesex-passage, Bartholo mew-close, City. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATION'S. Stewart Duncan, Robert Dunn, and David Whyte, ware housemen, Edinburgh, March 23 and April 9, at two, at the chambers of Mr. Muir, Edinburgh. Alexander Stevenson and Sous, stock brol - ers, Edinburgh, March 22 and April 22, at one, at Stevenson and Sons' Edinburgh. THE ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH TERMINI.—At a meeting of the Commissioners of Sewers, held yesterday, the secretary of the Electric Telegraph Company applied for permission to lay down the wires of communication through the City, from the various electric telegraphs, to unite 111 one centre in Lothbury. The secretary said that the Company intended to bring the electric telegraph into the City by the way of London-bridge, King William- street, and Princes street, into Lothbury, where the terminus of the Company would be, and from thence they intend to proceed along Moorgate-street into Finsbury. The object of the Company was to bring the electric line of the South-Western and Dover Railways by the above line into the laity ; and from the terminus at Lothbury to unite them with the Eastern Counties, the London and Birmingham, and the Great Western lines, so as to form one general communication with the different railways throughout the kingdom. The Com pany proposed to lay down the pipe s a l ongs id e o f th e k er b, and in a line with the gas pipes, so as to prevent any nuisance or stoppage arising to the traffic, or annoyance to the foot passengers. The question that the Company be empowered to lay down the wires of the electric telegraph was carried unanimously. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, March 16. BIRMINGHAM AND OXFORD RAILWAY. Lord L YNDHURST said that in addressing the House, he was quite sure that when their Lordships were advised of all the circumstances of the case, they would be of opinion that the facts stated in this petition, so tar from at all contradict ing, to a great extent confirmed the case, and strengthened all the facts which had already been stated to the House. There were many points of controversy between them, but with re ference to the least important facts he should be silent, for the Committee of their Lordships should appoint a Committee who would investigate the facts upon the examination of witnesses. It was not a dispute as far as he was concerned, for he did not interfere in these matters unless the public interest was deeply concerned, which it certainly was, in these measures. He bad no right to expect their Lordships to accede to his motion, un less it were affecting the public interest. He did consider that interest deeply concerned in the course by which the North- Western Company had forced these circumstances before the consideration of their Lordships. There were several Noble Lords then present who were not there eu a former occasion, and if the House would allow him, he would state to them the several facts connected with the case. Last session of Parliament a Bill was agreed to, sanctioning a line of railway branching out of the Rugby and Birmingham Railway, and proceeding to Birmingham. This was agreed to as a rival or competing line to the old London and Birmingham Railway. As might be expected, a great amount of opposition was experienced by the promoters of the line, but it was carried, As he had stated. en presenting the petition on this subject on a former night, the principle en which the Commit-. tee proceeded in agreeing to the Bill, was that the line would be one of great importance to the public as a rival and com peting line, and because of the overwhelming amount of business on the other line. The Bill was carried through, notwithstanding the opposition of the Birmingham Company, and the Great Western Company was empowered to purchase the company if they saw fit and came to terms with the directors of the new line. The Birmingham Company had no right to purchase the line, as, by so doing, the advantage of a competing line to the public would be taken away. Negotiations were entered into subsequently, which ended in an agreement with the Great Western Company to purchase the line. To make the agreement valid, according to the provisions of the Act, a meeting of the shareholders,was re quired, aria on the 4th of December this was accordingly held. At this meeting the agreement made by the directors was con firmed. The shareholders confirmed that agreement. At that meeting a gentleman attended of the name of Moseley, who was the avowed agent of the Birmingham Company, and offered a much higher price than that offered by the Great Western. Considerable discussion ensued, but the proprietors declined to accede to the offer, as they had authorised the directors to enter into an agreement with the Great Western. The Act of the company did not authorise them to enter into an agreement with the Birmingham Company. They therefore con firmed the original proposition for entering into an agreement with the Great Western. On the 16th o December Mr. Glyn, the chairman of the Bir ' mingbam Company, wrote a letter to the chairman of the Oxford Company renewing the offer made at the meeting, but it was again rejected. A meeting of the Birmingham proprie tors was called about that time, for the purpose of approving of the conduct of Mr. Glyn and gr. Moseley ; so that this was purely a transaction of the Birmingham Company, who were desirous to net possession of this Oxford Company, obviou•ly for the purpose of preventing that competition which it was the wish of Parliament to establish. They would agree with him that no public company could be guilty of more improper conduct. Immediately after the 16th of Dscember, when the Oxford Company had given their final answer, the purchase of shares by the Birmingham Company commenced ' • he said by the Birmingham Company, because he was ju,tified in saying co, from reasons which he should adduce. They purchased 4t1,000 shares out of the 50,000, in order that they might ac complish their object by unfair means, when they found that fair means had failed to effect it, that they might have the direct control of the line. They were purchased in the course of a month or six weeks ; not, certainly, in the name of the company, but in the names of their agents. For instance, Sir. Burdon, an agent of one of the Manchester banks, which was connected with the Birmingham Company, purchased 3,000, not, it was true, on his own responsibility, but in con sequence of an indemnity which he had received from one of the directors. What, then, was the next step pursued by the company ? They proposed to raise the number of the directors to eighteen, and they also proposed th a t f our o l them should go out. They appointed six of their own directors, but some difficulty arose as to the mode in which the direc tors should go out, and the solicitor to the London and Bir mingham Company, in order to meet the difficulties of the case, had actually summoned another special meeting for the purpose of reducing the number of the directors.—(Laugh ter.) Thus, by means of all this complicated machinery, the company had obtained the entire possession of the railway, and would adopt it to suit their own purposes, notwithstanding that this line was passed as a rival line to the North-Western, and passed especially for the purpose of competition between the two lines, and thus to tend to the benefit of the interests of the public. He contended that air. Moseley was the acting agent of the London and North-Western Company, and the whole transaction had been carried on through Mr. Moseley's solicitor. His Noble Friend Lad asked why not refer the matter to the Railway Commissioners. He objected to such a reference, because the Commissioners had no power to examine witnesses; while he equally objected to the matter being referred to the Committee on the Bill in the other House, because that Bill had no reference whatever to the Bir mingham and Oxford line. Under these circumstances he must press his motion for a Committee of Inquiry. He had no interest whatever on either side, and it was solely on public grounds that he had made the motion. Lord STANLEY begged to correct a statement made by his Noble Friend. He (Lord Stanley) was sure there never was any intention of reducing the number of directors. But what did the Noble Lord propose to do? Supposing that the evidence taken in the House substantiated the statements of his Noble Friend, what could he do then? Why, nothing; therefore he thought that his Noble Friend should not press the motion. He maintained that there was no monopoly sought to be main tained by the London and North-Western Company against the Great Western Company. The Bill which was authorised last session authorised the use of the line freely by the Great Western Company. They could, if they thought fit, run trains from Oxford to Birmingham and from Birmingham to Oxford. But what did the Noble and Learned Lord seek to do? He seeks that the Great Western Company should ob tain possession of the line against four-fifths of the share holders, who were opposed to it. So far from the Londan and North-Western Company seeking to exclude the Great Western Company, they had Lot the power to do so, as the Act provided for the concurrent use of the line. If th e) thought proper to go into an investigation, he considered they would be losing valuable time, but if they did agree he trusted that the Noble and Learned Lord (Lyndhurst) would state what end he had in view b y the inquiry. Lord H ATHERTON would trouble the House a few minutes while he stated the reasons which had led him to support the Oxford and Birmingham Railway Bill. The proptietory and directors were almost the same. Their object was to serve the same districts, and as they were sup ported by the same evidence, these two lines were the crea tion of public, wants and opinion ir. that part of the kingdom. His Noble Friend had Old him that the Grand Junction was originally the promoters of this line, and took an active interest in it. They did so from a sense of the necessity of establish ing a competing line; with the London and Birmingham, be tween Birmingham anti Oxford. The lines were supported by all the principal towns of Birmingham. and so overwhelming was the evidence given by these gentlemen in favour of the line, as one likely to accommodate the manufactures of the dis trict, that the Committee both of this and the other House unanimously sanctioned the railway. If the Great Western simeld no., however, pnrel ase the line. they were to he em powered to run trains iu time line, no other company to be al lowed that privilege. If the North- Western Company became the proprietors of the line they would effectually] destroy that competition with the .Great Western which Parliament wished to create, as the might by crowding the Birmingham line with hear,' mineral traffic prevent the rapid passage of passenger traffic on the Oxford line. Both the Birmingham and Oxford and the Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and Dudley Companies refused : to accede to the proposition of the Birmingham Con3pael . , Then came the ctier of Mr, Moseley, a gentleman extensively engaged in share transactions in Manchester and L verpool, as .d well acquainted with railway matters. He would not call him the " mouth piece" of the Birmingham Company, as t hat term had much displeased him at one of the meetings , but be certainly appeared to be the agent of that company, as h e took a paper out of his pocket and offered certain terms in th e name of the North- Westera Company, if they would consent to lease their line to that company and to repudiate the Great western. But the proposition was scouted by the meeting ; and it ass most remarkable that a man of Mr. Glyn's standing , and° his experience, should have so far forgotten himself as to tale, repeated the offer. He would not enter into the legal view Ts the whole transaction; but to show the difficult positi ul l i t which the Oxford Company was placed he should state tP.!,, they had to deal with 40,C00 shareholders, who repre tente r the North-Western Company, and who were determined ed abrogate the agreement with the Great Western, which has been entered into in accordance with the Act under whi ch the line was to be constructed. Lord BROUGHAM said that ho was not disposed to P er i ; suade their Lordships to postpone or put cif this inquiry, the sole ground that he was not able to see his was , clear I°t , i s remedy. It appeared to him that great irregularities bad te,,le place, not to say fraud, between these two companies, an d thought that it was due to their Lordships, to the public, a ii n ke to the companies themselves, that the inquiry should t place in another House, and that there would be no ne ces U for their Lordships troubling themselves about it. W respect to the language of the petitir,ners, courted inquiry, he had never yet heard of any athbautse,tPl parties to which did not always pretend. t o court ieq u h r e b . Then it was said that there was a Bill in another place , w " might come down there, or rather, he should say, come 1 , there—(A laugh)—and which also might not come there; ~t but, said the Noble Lord, what signifies that, if it dees_au", come up here it will be inquired into elsewhere. lie ha d r„ - s - at confidence in that other place. He had the greatest eca A r; ts that it was possible to entertain towards that other place proceedings, When he considered how it was made up ashen! holders who could not sit on this Committee but could on t‘haiti and remembered the courtesies and compliments that P amongst themselves, he must confess that he had not confitle t b i tit in the proceedings, he would net say of that other pla ne ' . o k of some other place; and that opinion had induced him to do that they ought to keep the inquiry in that place.—( H ear e lit laughter.) lie thought, however, that the Committee Wig to be named by the Committee of Selection.—(Hear.) ;( the The Marquis of LANDSDOWNE wished to know Noble and Learned Lord who made the motion had any nul tion to allow the Committee to be named by the Committee Selection ? Lord LYNDHURST said he had no objection to the eau ° proposed. that Earl FITZ WILLIAM thought it was most desirabl e they should have an impartial Committee, but he doubted 'f ly proper Committee could be selected in the ordinary waybt thought such a Committee would be too small. They 70 to have a large one, embracing as far as possible the vaal 'os conflicting views on the subject. It was a most imPot i ti o question, as he plainly saw what the end of all this w on t,* that the executive government would have, in a great meow to take the control of these great lines of communicatio n _li their own hands. It was not to be borne that all the 85, means of intercommunication in this country should f all the hands of three or four great companies. He was gl ad di notice the feeling of their Lordships on this subject, as his ~0 desire in proposing to enlarge the Conarnitte was to make effective as possible. el Lord CAMPBELL asked Lord Brougham if he sw L other cases to ring for ward ord BROUG b HAM said he had some other petition s present. better Lord CAMPBELL suggested that the petitions ha d be presented, and the Committee appointed afterwards. be Lord LYNDHURST said that the authority on eall' e had made certain statements in his address was that d oo r Moseley, the agent of the London and North-Nester' pany. a e l After a few words from Lord STANLEY, in explanatifed the Act of Parliament under which the agreement he re` e. to ire his sneech had h"en made, it Lord BROUGHAM presented two petitions of a nee character to the one presented by Lord Lyndhurst, in ce r loy to the Bristol and Exeter and Crediton and Exeter Ita' Companies. The motion for a Select Covnmittee on the several se named in the petitions was then agreed to. CANAL NAVIGATION. cer The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from t ot tain canal shareholders, complaining of the difficulties 00, now laboured under in regard to opposing railway co ra l 's and praying for a remedy. LOAN BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. CONSOLIDATED BILL. This Bill was also read a third time and passed. IRISH POOR-LAW. eek Lord MONTEAGLE gave notice that on this day ,` l be belt would move for a Select Committee to inquire into mode of administering the puo:•-laws in Ireland, and el f regarding out-door relief. Their Lordships then adjourned. HO USE 01 Cf.),11,11 UN S. March 16. OF ADJOURNED DEBATE.—ANNEXATIO N CRACOW. On the order of the day for the adjourned debat e 4)11 Cracow being read, the Sir JOHN W.A.LSEI rose and said in addre s si . ng, 1 , 0 House he would apply himself first to the . partl s o o. of the question arising out of the motion of the Member tor Montrose, and inquire what was t he Pr Z;s cal and immediate question before the House. The l question for them to consider would be wheth er they .01 any legal right to free themselves from the obligs...ir; of that treaty to continue the payment to n o s : whether it would b e cons i sten t with the fatt ear treaties, or with th e i r own character, to tinue that paym en t. Th e secon d question I ' m " o f whether, the other being assumed, it would be vile' whether it would be politic, whether it would be coo fe : sistent with their national status in the P:d sent condition of Europe, to pursue such a cou r o4 l When he entered upon this question, he met ay that he felt considerable dissatisfaction ijr the mode in which the Honourabll %en. for Montrose had introduced his motion, not 00 , had stated what was not literally true, but any perusuli who was not acquainted with the whole question, w°_,, be led into a very erroneous conclusion. The eonv P tion of the 19th of November, 1831, was merely sup le mental measure, to supply a P ar liamentary deficien cy : was contended that, in equity, England could not av ail ";d, of the treaty of Vienna. It was, however, subsequentitebst mittel that Parliamentary sanction was requisite:ol'oo treaty bore date May, 1815, and the treaty .ia f fed' to merely a subsequent and technical treaty, C ' We ' .-- t - then, 01 effect to the former one. What was that trea ee n Y eland wa s i 1815, and what were the obligations by which —4 t end , bound under that treaty ? The treaty to which t he nd, b y 1815 referred was one between Holland and Russia' Bible for the treaty of 1831, England renders el herself resOohißosite the obligations into which Holland had entered fjeto In order to show what the nature of that treaty was' t .,bich i t Baronet read the preamble of the treaty of 1815. by " c i ee ed b 1 appeared that, in consideration of the assistance ren .0 0 ,0 the allied powers to Holland, fshe agreed to pay cent p ly for the expenses which had been incurred. It was P!°'" O. dent that this sum was te be paid for the restorationl ell kingdom of Holland. At the conclusion ' O O O speech on Thursday last, the Right "' fi nal A i ° el Baronet the Member for Tamworth had taken '; a fere* remind the House of the services which England Led r e e d sli e j to Europe during the great struggle of the l as t war; w a e. of the obligations which : he had undertaken when sh e 5,,,,, ° 0 06 0 —when she took up —the responsibilities of the treaty it o ettle Holland and Russia. He rejoiced to hear such sen,hoebt from the lips of the Right Hon. Gentleman, but he,' 00 England should be reminded that she was not the onl y tilStlo, in making those arrangement!, and he thought some Sn e er °' was due to Russia, as she was the first that broke the Y - Napoleon, and helped to effect the deliverance of Eerie' p re Right lion. Gentleman the Member for Tamworth 01° 0 0 tested against a doctrine in one of Monsieur Guizot'sdelilligs', that the breach of one article of a treaty dissolved the l ie lion of the treaty itself on all who were parties to its A ,r not think that M ons . G u i ze t was correct ly u nderst o "'ooo . though he was not sorry to see the protest of the Righ e t , Gentleman, he th oug ht th a t he h a d p u t a w ider latitulle the phra se th an t h e wr i ter o f it i nten d e d. H e should f i e, know, howev er , h ow th e y s hould act in the event ,enee adopting the resolutions of the Hon. Member for If they acted in this manner, they would be affirming th e ir ee, ciple that the infraction by Russia of one particle of the obe would justi4 them in releasing themselves from all th o u gatiens which they owed to Russia, on entirely others V iit ee„' The Member for Montrose had made the question 5- 40 1 °" judicial character, and he had called upon the House t°_, l foe whether, under certain considerations, they were relea w ; p oilli obligations otherwise binding. This was a very delic at e ed . ,,, tion to be in, namely, to be judges of their own case , . 1 1 10 " was, therefore , doubly necessary for them to consider b ed bearings of the case, and to see how far they s verejtis ti de ,s o l attaching weight to the allegations which bad been 0 1 % - osel how far matter had been urged in defence of the partioe l lor,, He said the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for vo had expresed a strong opinion of the necessity of a fo . „ er- es it o " England,—ef all the great Powers according a full "', 0 0e . „ of p-otection to the smaller states. His expression 0 1 4 0 . 0 0 ' thing to the effect that they were in a position to P o , ot , anxiety as to such a Power as Prussia absorbing 11 ' 55 eseig, Bavaria, Prussia ; but he did feel that it was the one P r 'to of the body of international law to afford prote ctian ed 4iP; weaker States, He (Sir John Walsh) entirely Orr.. polit e ' the Right Hon. Baronet, that that was the duty and O . d to; of the great States, and that it would be the policy % P OP special interest of England to do so, for England had neeeitil to gain from territorial aggrandi s e men t, or f r om ce° . 'est - , and if she absorbed any w ea k e r St a t e , s h e would d°, s o tb a sacrifice, and the loss would be entirely hers. But awhi le b' entertained that opinion, he hoped that every Minige t n elsl British empire would bear it in mind. Still, he o° ,"e t y that, among those smaller states there was a recipr°"; slo ° duty, that if they had a right to protection they `c et e - eec bound to observe strict neutrality, and to avoid giving 7; in casion for aggression from the larger States. He did * l o on' the smaller States ought to pursue such a course sn ot secure them peace, which to them was so valuable. t 4!. pose they should take an instance. They a ll knew t e portanee of the noble city of Frankfort, one of the o ° s / a be t emi r nent of commercial cities ; they had all seen her palaces t „, th e merchants, the prosperity which existed in her e tree b . 001 vital spirit of commercial enterprise which had given l ie tb, 0 , 1 nence to that town. Suppose, then, it were poso rriterir, France were suddenly inflamed with the lust of te ciifi possession, and with a wish to obtain that fair ity that she was to set her armies in motion and invade the ° Frankfort. If such took place there would no do u b t __ or burst of indignation throughout Europe. But let theuL.ereit pose, that instead of pursuing the quiet avocation of coo' b e , that she was obliged, by some unfortunate eircurristancue. ' °1 a e come a political point. Let them suppose that Fran l t hat to become what Coblentz was at the commencement rieice' century. Thut she should become the point from wheFrsO°9 enemies of France might issue. It would be easy for uitit oi to state that an infraction of a treaty had taken place. .-17,„,ve mutandis, he did not see the great difference between tleora7,;,o thetical case of Frankfort and the real case of y e dtba to the In making these observa t ions he must call the attentioPd House to the fact that this insurrection was not en titlr n. esi For t sympathy of the House, as was the insurrection of 18 3 v t eif this insurrection there was no Kosciusko at Cracow. N ee movement there ryes none of the countenance of th os e Noe Poles who were foremost in the great struggle of 1 65 !' e eer stepped forward with f 0 much gallantry, men who w e r e w isb, ready to promote the interests of their country, and wel t . of so much ardour were ready to encounter the whole Pc7a Russia—men who sacrificed property, relatives, bone' 1 00 4' that man holds dear, for the int:ependerce of their t O , OO . These were not the men who gave counteuaece to the ' we ll. rection of Cracow. lie believed, indeed, that it was t eec tle known fact that none of these men had, either n e "_; ;00 ; or indirectly, taken part in this Cracow insurr.__%:',o but they had, on the contrary, withheld all their colionteh ;rem that disastrous enterprise, He perceived from a aPt" - -••=wlm s