The Express.
London, England, 1847-02-18 00:00:00

with half an hour for bet akfest, an hour fa dinner, and half
an hour generally for tea, loosing twelve hears a day tor
clear labour. The labour of iyinnieg was most laborious,
and perhaps was only exceed.] in that respect by mowing
alone; and few mowers worked twelve hours without inter-
mission. It was imenesible anjbedy could work for twelve
hours in this way without injuring his constitution. Farm
and other labourer' seldom worked more than ten hours a
day. Many of tke member* of that house had argued about
the great disadvantege of losing a farthing a pound on the cot.
ton manufacture by redo big the hour. of bane in opposition '
to the far more important quation, 'tamely, the morel: mg of
the lives of millioos of the people of this country. They said
that it was the duty of the British House of Commons to re-
fuse this bill in order that the superabundant wealth of the
manufacturers might be made greater than it was. There
was not a cotton-spinner in Lancashire who dared attend a
public maing in any one of the large manufacturing towns,
and there openly state, in the presence of numbers of the
factory workmen, facts similar to those which had been
laud in that house ; and if there seas one hon. member
eminent,' with the cotton trade who was prepared to die-
pute the policy of granting this measure before the factory
workers of the north of England, he challenged him to go
down to the town with which ho was connected, where he
(Mr. Ferrand) would meet him, and disuse the question
with him at a public meeting ; and he pledged his word, that
although attempts had been secretly made to induce the fee-
tory workers in many parts to make statements in
opposition to the bill—and he should prove it to the
house before long—he should show that tho ope-
ratives themselves were anxious to work no more
than ten hours a day, and that if the house would
nut legislate for them they would legislate for themselves.
It was further dated, by the authority to which he hai re-
ferred, that the 6,urth cause of the ill-health prevailing in
the manufacturing districts might be traced to the weakened
condition of married females working in factories, which also
passed to their offspring. Was there a member of that house
who could contravene these facts, or eay thst they had not
led to the sacrifice of thousands of human lives ? Tke ma-
nufacturers had also said, in a statement which had been
circulated among the members of that house, that if they
carnet the Ten Hours Bill, the goserninent must be res-
ponsible fur the consequences, and they had gone so far as to
threaten to close their mills, fur the purpose of creating
events similar to those which occurred in 1812. Was that
the way for men who had amassed enormous wealth cut of the
bones alai sinews of the starving people of England to con-
duct theinalves ? Was that the way in which they should
set an example? After they had voted—disgracefully to
themselves—and had carried the corn-laws, they still opposed
the Factory Bill, after they had promised to give it their
support.( ear, hear,)
r.BRIGHT—No.
Mr. FERRAND —The hon. member for Durham said
" No." He (Mr. Ferrand) believed that they did, and if
they did he called on them, as men of honour, to redeem
their pledge, and if they did not do so, they ought to be
branded with infamy and disgrace. It was not the ininietere
that would be responsible, but the manefacturen by their
representatives in that house. The manufacturers had de-
clared that if they were left alone, and legislative interfer-
ence were not brought to bear upon them, they would im-
mediately arrange the thing
.between the masters and the
workmen—that they would introduce a Tea Hours' Bill
themselves. Had they done so ? They had broken
their pledge and promises, being determined that
this disgraceful state of things should continue,
and it was therefore the duty of parliament to
interfere, aced to protect the weak against the strong.
It was machinery which destroyed the system of manual
labour ; and he had been told, by very competent authority,
that in a few years machinery would destroy the labour of
70,000 persons more. What were the manufacturers doing
at the present moment ? Their mills were not running six
hours a-day. To effect permanent good the employment in
mills ought to be steady and regular ; and they ought not to
starve the people for one half of the ycar, and work them to
death during the other half. Its bad received so-emote from
Manchester, which stated that there was a probability that
• the peat maionty of the mills would soon be entirely closed,
..^; • • a . .110 yet, during this state of things, it was proposed to retain
the power of working the people for twelve hours a day. The
4 .te first medical men in England had declared that no mesa was
capable of working twelve hours a-day during the whole year.
They were longer than any horse or man could bear it; and
yet women and children were compelled to bear it, and were
dying by thousand*. Even men could not bear the factory
labour beyond the age of 45. The hon. member for Mon
trose had said, leave the women and children to themselves,
they would settle the matter with their masters. Did any
man suppose that when a mother went to the mills, receiving
only 81. or 10e. per week, and returning she found her three
or four children crying forfood, that she would not work her
fingers' ends raw, and herself to death, rather than sit down
and see her children starving ? He had conversed with
some of these women themselves, and they had eked to him
that it was little known what their sufferings were. When
they returned weary and fatigued, and saw their children in
want, yet they would work, as long as God gave them health
and strength, to support them. hon. member for Dur-
ham, OR Wednesday last, made some extraordinary
statements, and that in so determined and firm a
manner, that he (Mr. Ferrand) had no doubt that
the house believed them to be all true. The hon.
member had asid, in one part of his speech, that such speeches
as used to be made by Loa Ashley had not been heard that
day, except from the noble lord the member for Newark, and
that Lord Ashley used to make speeches in that house which
he bad now given up, and which had been proved to be
wrong. Now he (Mr. Ferrand), was prepared to challenge
the hon. member to prove that any statement Lord Ashley
ever made in that house, connected with the Ten Hours'
Bill, was not strictly true. It was not manly of the hon.
member to come there and attack Lord Ashley behind his
back.
Mr. ROEBUCK here made some observation.
Mr. FERRAND—" He could come here," said the hon.
member for Bath.
Mr. ROEBUCK—I did not ray so.
Mr. FERRAND had understood the hon. member to
say so, and the next time the hon. member interrupted him,
let him speak so as to be understood. The noble lord was
not there to defend himself, and he (Mr. Ferrand) should
be secured of ingratitude towards the noble lord, if he sat
in that house, and allowed his character to be so unjustly
attacked, when he had sacrificed his seat for the principle of
this measure. The noble lord hail published to his coesti-
enency a letter, stating his determination to support the
repeal of the corn-laws, and he (Mr. Ferranti) was justified
in saying that he (Lord Ashley) had received a communica-
tion made to him from the leading cotton-spinners of Lan-
cashire, to the effect that if he did support them in obtain-
ing the repeal of the corn-laws, they would support him in
his Ten Hours Factory Bill, which the noble lord had sup-
ported during the best period of his life. The other day in
Lancashire the noble lord attended a vast meeting, when no
man dared to eppoee him. The hon. member was in Roch-
dale, but did not meet Lord Ashley.
Mr. BRIGHT—I beg your pardon, I was not.
Mr. FERRAND—ffut why did not the hon. member
meet the noble lord ? The brother of the hon. member at-
tended, and manfully spoke before his own workmen, but he
was not able to get a single man to second him. He again
asked the hon. member what statement of Lord Ashley's
which was ever made in that house he was prepared to re-
fute ? Two years ago the hon. member made some such
statement. as these against the noble lord, who was accused
of having made some unfounded statement in that house
with regard to the children in the factories. The hon. mem-
ber for Durham had also referred to a petition which had
been presented to that house from Manchester, with 70,000
signatures, in support of a repeal of the corn laws, as a con-
ned to the petition of the operatives in favour of the pre-
sent bill, signed by 22,000. Why, the population of Man-
chester was but 262,000, and the male adult operatives
there not more than 40,000, so that it would be impos-
sible to get up a petition with 70,000 names, even if
all the male adults signed it. He trusted, when the
bill went into committee, the hon. member would get up
and explain how this petition was got up, as he (Mr. Fer-
rand) believed that 22,000 was a fair representation of the
opinion of Manchester. It had also been denied by that bon.
member that the operatives were prepared to take the chance
of the reduction of wages. He (Mr. Ferrand) had been
lately at meetings all over the manufacturing districts, at
which the question was always put, if they were prepared
for the consequenoes of a reduction of wages The universal
answer was, they were. Now it so happened that a report
of the Rochdale meeting had appeared in the hon. member
for Durham's own paper, the Manchester Examiner.
Mr. BRIGHT—It-is not mine.
Mr. FERRAND—But the hon. member-is a shareholder
or has—(Cries of " Order"). The Manchester Examiner
eondrmed the fact that the question bad been put at the
Rochdale meeting, and answered in the manner he had de-
scribed. At the very time the hon. member was makinghis
speech last Wednesday, • message was sent down to Brad-
ford, and the next morning a meeting of the operatives was
advertised by placard. It was held in the evening, in Christ
Church School, which was densely attended, and, when the
question was put about the wages, every hand was held up
for the bill. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member had eke told
the louse that the mechanics of the north were always glad
to work long hours when they could get an Menem of wages.
Bat be (Mr. Ferrand) had received a letter troth the me-
chanics of Manchester, denying the statement, end enclosing
a copy of a prise essay, issued under the &umbel of the de-
legates of the united mechanics of Great Britain and Ireland.
as to the benefits resulting from a reduction of the hane
labour. (The bon. member then proceeded to read various
entracte, with a view of showing that a compact had been
entered into between the Anti-Corn Law League and
the kaeray operatives, that if the latterwaisi supported
the repeal of the corn laws, the format with-
draw Asi to the Tea Hours Bill.
He wethl new=miattentioa et the been to a bet far
which be weld =awed whisk skewed to what extent
was
intiwidethen ea the opoentives. In ldr. Nor-
rues UM NaMetwitost, the everlethw went reseed on
Meeday int mitt • week coded fa slurs*, headed respect-
ively—then wig ware Ihr twelve boas' work and teethe
hours' welsh thew Ar Away and thaw Ow meet. The
beads wen wiled wen he Won this book. Bone
Om dews, and setha fair Me, leth the fl he
Min; Mktg the worker vends they were senetsWee As
wait Mgr, bow.) This, be •thathwil, was bed
latioddedan ; bet to arm wend ware As seal hefty at the
egaintiwo• be wed& nesthlliss tbet an Se reds= wean a
very All raft of ves the Yid In tbe Mealkenes,
lthasbwasr, awl wore adeplead,
dowaisty tae athinst lo bed seantitned, end has
meths to lake a ten sew lain seopese of its
Moth wages. wadi Oaths. smoke * a Durham now say
lath thelMeettheosethe notippend Atha Ike risk? (Hear,
kw. The WA. den w art they would we
1,014/0 bo In on. They bed been taunted
by the Chancellor dices Ilserspar with net Melee
time question, bat let bin beware,
la to silly their Jut
_thewthent, •
s wadi as be bawd in him-
' mpliallies to the Bride Haan

'Z. •

"'struck "-m
taw shorTtim
If mass wont sat tin
chorus at balmy cripples
yard, nixing the TOWS of
"5t
• ,
• ,
. ,