The Express.
London, England, 1855-05-04 00:00:00

t~

Mr. WILKINSON rose to object to it, and urged that,
however praiseworthy the oldsot of its promoten it was not
aAt subject for courshory hatialation. Thies Would be as
wash desecration of the SobMeth in dealing before 10 as
after that hoar. There had been many attempts before to
bring in a bill of Ole kind ; one some few years ago by Mr.
Pearson, and the other it 1861 by bin hon. colleague ; but
the diSsulties of the case had been found to be so

Brut, that neither of them passed. It there were
any leghlative interference in this direction, he thought,
at all events, it ought to edgiest' with the gouerement.
It appeared to him that it was an attempt to legislate segalast
the poorer elms of traders for the benefit of those vibe were
in better circumstances. He would not himself divide the
house againstthe bill, but if any other hoe. member would
do so, he would vote with him. If, however, the bill were
reed a second time, he hoped it would be referred to natant
committee. (Hear, bear.)
Lord EBRINGTON war in favour of the bill, on religious

grounds.
The Marquis of BLANDFORD hoped it would result
in relieving one class of tradesmen from the bondage
which they endured from the competition of other trades-
men who kept open their shops on Sundays, and also
tor relieving the sensate of tradesmen from labour
on Sundays. He regretted that the bill, which was
likely to be so useful, passed over the sale of spirits and
beer. The sale of fish, game, and other thisga was pro-
hibited ; but for reasons which were well known he sup-

posed tie noble lord was not able to touch the sale of spit:ts
sad beer. Wino it was that from 6 o'clock to 10 on

Sundays the public houses were filled with persoos carousing,
and reducing themselves to the level of bouts, he could net
conceive a subject more cognate to the present, nor more
deserving the attention of parliament.
Sir 0. OEBY said be did not and d that there was

any opposition to the present stage of the bill, for the hon.
member for Lambeth did not propose that it ..hould be read

a *mood time that day siz months, bat only sugeested
that it should be referred to a select committee. Under

these diminution's, it was hardly necessary to protract this
disco-lion. (Hear.) The government were ready to agree
to the eecond reaming, but he must say tbat previous
attempts at legislation were not very encouragieg, or gave
any hopes of success ; bat he was watt that this or any bill
would attempt to deal with the existing system of Sunday
trading. It was not introducing a new principle, for Sun-
day trading was now illegal; but owing to defects in tl
Act, partly from its being too comprehensive, and part
from the mode of enforcing penalties, it had been renders
inoperative. The pima' bd. aid not rest on the priacipi
of enforcing the religions observance of tree Sabbath, for, i
it-dtd, it must go much (artiste than it went; but it con
salted the general convenient, of the public, and it would
deal with a great and crying evil. He believed that it met
with the went of the great body of tradesmen in the
metropolis.
Mr. T. BUNCOMBE inquired whether he WAS to under.
stand that the bill was to go to a select committee? (No
no.) According to precedent all bills of this nature went
• select committee before they were brought before a coat
mitt.* of the whole house ; and if this bill was to go to
select committee, it would be hardly worm while to dace
its provisions now. What did the government intend to do
with regard to sending it to a select committee ? All the
bills en this subject—that brought in by his boa. friead tko
member for Ashton, one which ease down from the Lords,
and one brought in by the member for Lambeth In 18.51
were all sent to •select committee, and all fell to the ground.
That bad been the cue with all the bills of this kind whisk
had been introduced. He did not distrust the inten-
tions of the noble lord, but he had undertaken to
deal with a delicate and difficult subject. He (Mr.
Buncombe) had not had a deputation of barbers, like
the noble lord the member for Mrevlebone, but he
had had deputations from the working elapses, and
he knew that they had no desire to desecrate the sabbath—
(hear, hear)—they had no desire to make purchases on Sun-
day morning, bat their necessities required it. He thought
that on inquiry it would be found that there must be a great
many changes in our social arrangements before you could
legislate on this subject. In the first place, there was the
questien of paying wages on Saturday evening. It was said
teat some employers paid wages at an early hoar; but it
should be recollected that • great deal of the work done in
the metropolis was piece-work, and • working man who took
home his work on a Saturday evening though he might find
his wages ready, yet had to wait to get hie next week's
work given to him, and it was often past 12 before he
got not only his wages but his work ; and how was
he to lay in his stock for the following day ?
Again, a great many contracts were made with workmen
by builders who took them into the eot.ntry on Monday
morning and brought them back late on the Saturday even-
ing. How could these men manage to make their purchases
on the Saturday night? He was told that working men
went to the public-houses on S .turday and spent their wages
in getting drank, but it wee no such thing, for they had not
time to do so after they got their wages. Another change
must be made before you could legislate on this subject with
eff set : you must improve the dwellings of the poorer dames.
(Hear, hear.) What was the use of a man in tbis town who
often lived with his family and five or six others in one
room, bringing in meat or other article, on Saturday eras-
ing ; they would be putrid before the night was half over.
You must. therefore, in the first place, give those classes
better dwellings. It was all very well for those who had
larders and cellars to say that those persons should make
their purchases oo Satutday night. He was told that
many tradesmen themselves were anxious that there should
be a law against trading on Sunday, and that the very cir-
cumstance of their trading themselves did violence to their
consciences. But no one was compelled to do so, and the
conscientious man shoo' suffer for conscience sake. What
was it that compelled them ? Why, they said that if they
did not, their neighbours would profit by it; and that was
not the sort of conscientious men that were worthy the at-
tention of the house. But he might he asked, whet ought
to be done ? He was told that the trading on Sunday after-
noon was disgraceful, and ought to be put down ; but that
was a mere question of police. What he should Pay ought
to be done was, to have one law for the rich and the poor.
They had had many bills on this question—such, for instance,
as Sir Andrew Agnew's bill ; but the only successful lawgiver
on this subject was Charles 11., but those laws were not
sufficiently stringent for the present time. He would have
one law for the whole isountry, for why should a measure
be confined to the metropolis? Why should Birmingham
and Liverpool, and other large towns, be exempt ? There
should be one law, which should declare that there should
be no Sunday trading after half-past 10 in the morning of
any sort or kind, end it should be applicable to rich and
poor. That would be legislation with regard to the Sabbath
worthy of the attention of the house, but such little things
as the sale of milk, eggs, and fruits, which they were going
to discuss, were unworthy of that aeoembly ; but they should
enact one al law for all climes of the community.
Mr. JAS. MACGREGOR said that having been largely
connected with the working men in the metropolis receiving
wages, and having had some experience of them, be could
ray that there was no class better able to fudge of their own
interest; and as regarded the value of a day of rest to them,
he was convinced that if they were referred to it would be
found that they would claim their right to that advantage.
The intelligence of that class was not to he measured by the
wages they received, and they were entitled to retain • pri-
wiles" which had boon sanctioned by • higher legislative
pow-er than Chas house, ant which had declared that there
Monti be a :lay of rat ant s etsfAtins from the orainaly
tabours of lift.
Sir J. SHIILI.IIIf said that Mr. Denoombe's al:comet of
the result of sending kills of this kind to a select committee
was not very eacouraging,_ and after the fate of these bills
he was unwilling to wad this to a Committee upstairs—es-
pecially as the clauses of the bill were very few '
and seal
as the house could make practicable. When his sale
friend introduced the bill be said that be was favourable Is
the principle of the bill, but he could not pledge himself Is
all the details of • bill which he had not seen. There WNW
nos, points in the bill which he thought objectionable ; .1111
bethought it mono a bill which was for the benefit of
tradesmen only, but one for the promotion of the couillart
of the working classes, and he was glad that it had
been introduced. There was a growing feeling that thous
should be greater opportunities for relaxation afferdsd
to the working causes. He never believed that you wad
make people religions by act of parliament • bet the reel of
&easy was the greatest he himself knew, Led he wished to
eel it enjoyed by the working man. He hoped the noble
lord would mowed the bill to a select committee. There
I was a prejudice out of doors against bile of this kind, but all
the former bills on the subject were impracticable from
their very nature. He thought, however, that this would
be a practicable measure. He could only say that if any
one doubted the state of trading in the metropolises Sunday
let him go to Clare Market, a part of his constituency, and
he would fled that it was carriedi on all day ; and much to
their credit be had that evening presented a petition in
favour of the bill signed by all the butchers in that locality
with °seer two exceptions.
Mr. M CHAMBERS said that this had been found to be
• difficult subject for legislation, but the reason why other
measures bed failed was because they had gone too far. His
hon. friead the member for Finsbury was mistaken in sup-
posing that this bill was unfavourable to the working
clams ; and as to the necessity of =akin other changes
before such a memoirs was passed, he thought such a bill
would rather force masters to pay wages earlier, as it would
be urged on them to do so to enable their workmen to go to
market on the Saturday, whereas now they did
not mind detaining them late on the Saturday,
because they could go to market from S to 1 o'clock on
Sunday. As to the lower elms of tradesmen, they had pre-
sented many petitions in favour of the hill; and he had laid
some stress on one petition, which came from the New Cut,
to Lambeth, because it had been said on • former occasion
that the tradesmen In that locality could not do their
bushels if such a bill passed, He would support a mea-
sure which would eeablo all pesos' better to observe the
Sabbath.
Mr. J. O PHILLIMORE maid that no answer bed boss
gives to the objection of Mr. T. Buncombe, that this was
merely • local bill ; and he was of opinion that nothing
solid be mare injurious than legislating for particular
plasm. He thought that the 9th clause, which gave large
powers to the polies for enforcing the law, would lead to
great oppeessioo if it passed as it stood.
Mr. HADFIELD hoped, If the bill went to a select com-
mittee, that gentlemen would be put os it who were preeti-
ceLy acquainted with the management of large conosnerh
and the mode of paying wages early on the Saturdays and
on Fridays, for their @swamies sad philanthropic feelings
towards the working climes would be found of great oohs.
The real question was the regulation Of the missal of
wages, so as to *sable working people to ening* Ueda
&grain In such a moaner as to leave time for rest and meta-
, dos.
Mr. W. J. FOR hoped that if the bill was referred to a
' taint eseatitte., that seausittsa should be otaapesed at