The Express.
London, England, 1853-05-05 00:00:00

THE EXPRESF!, -THURSDAY EVENING, MAY 5, '853.

- - -
tame right belongs to e•onelves in the dillgodd of our la-
tiour? and. that no stoppage ought to be made from the
sateen"' of worls•nen in respect of frames, house, fines, or
gas, or other charge which may be made; but that the I
geestiou of sieges, of debt, Itc., should be separate from,
each other.—We are, sir, your obedient servants,
" GEORG* BUCIIIT,
ELLIO.cy,
ri •-•" bf)...seif of the committee of framework knitter.
on J. Walmaley, M.P."
These frameworkers wets an exceedingly numerous body,
of the character represented by the hon. member for New-
port, numbering in all about 100,000 persons ; and, as that
hon. member had also explained to the house, they were
scattered in various towns and villages chiefly in Notts, Lei-
cester, and Derbyshire ; and the frames being in their
own houses, the manufacture was of a domestic character,
and overlookers or middlemen were employed. The per-
sons who were now petitioning the House of Commons
knew all these circumstances, and accepted all the cense-
queuees ; but they insisted that the system adopted was an
artificial and not a natural one, and that it was not fair to
add to their misfortunes by imported evils. And it should
be understood that the petitioners were not petitioning is
the abstract; the remedy they sought had been tried.
Some manufaeturen had already, of their own accord,
abandoned the system of deductions and charges; awl
they had found the experiment in every respect a fortu-
nate one, not at all injurious to themselves' and
greatly beneficial to their workmen. (Hear, bear.) There
could be no question that if such a general change wine
brought about, it would eh wonders to foster and to har-
monise those kindly feelings which should ever regulate the
relations between the employers and employed. (Ilea;
hear.) Ile spoke as an employer—probably of as
number of men as the hon. member for Newport—end he
spoke earnestly, and after much experience. Bat them
unhappy people in Leirestenhire bad waited kings mei
were toeing patience, and they appealed now to the um
of justice of that house, and through that house, owl he
hoped not in vain, to the good sense and Ashman,
of the employing classes. He held in his heel
a letter from a Leicester firm, which would show
to the house what excellent grounds there were
for auguring well of such a change as the bill would effect;
for it was to be observed that his correspondent had carried
on his business operations for many years without an of
those mischievous deductions of the prevalent system. The
letter, which was signed "S. Brown," for "W. Preston
and Company," said— "Dear Sir,—With reference to the
bill now before parliament, of Sir H. Halford's, to secure
the payment of wages without stoppages, I beg to say that
the firm with which lam connected have carried on their
business without charges' for seven years, and have
found it beneficial and satisfactory to all parties
concerned. " What followed was worthy of
the house's attention ; since it answered the
supposition that these framework knitters were attacking
the rights of property ; the fact being that they only re- '
gaited that there should be two persons in a harpist, and
tint an old but a bad custom, by which they believed their
interests suffered (and as he believed, also), should be get
rid of. Mr. Brown said :—" But we do not desire, sec
does the bill, in oar opinion, intend, to interfere with frame
property in any way whatever ; but simply that rent shall
not be deducted from wages, but that wages shall be paid
in full in the current coin of the realm." (Hear, hear.)
Perhaps the house might think this argument as
to the benefit derivable from a voluntary change
of system was somewhat beside the question
immediately before the house, but he thought it was not
waste of time to show that such a change was practicable,
and that where it had been tried it heel been successful.
(Hear.) In defending this bill be most emphatically re-
pudiated the idea that he was interfering with free trade, or
that he was assailing any established principle of political
ec .nomy. He was only asking the house to do in this case
what it had done with the best results in other cases. He
should now, and on every other occasion, give his hearty
support to any and every measure that would enforce and
carry out to the utmost the spirit of the Truck Act.—
(cheers)—by which he believed the working classes had
been greatly benefited, and without which he was sure their
interests would have continuously and increasingly suffered.
One word as to the manufacturers themselves. Ho was
sorry that remarks bad fallen which were unkind and offen-
sive (and untrue, too), to the manufacturers. (Hear, heat.)
He knew them well. He was not one himself, but he had
associated and mixed with them ; and he was well assured
that they were a class who, as a class, spared no pains to
secure the welfare and the social happiness of tee artisans
and those around them. (Hear, hear.) He was also per-
seeded that, if it could be shown to them that this bill was
practical, or could be so altered in committee as to meet
their objections, leaving its benefits, and depriving it of
what they regarded as its powers of mischief, the house
would hear no more of their opposition, which
was offered on conscientious grounds, and not with an
exclusive reference to their own interests. They were a
class who had often proved that they would not shrink
from raising the artisan, even at the risk of some cost
to themselves. (Cheers.) On these grounds he would
support the bill ; and he hoped that the principle being
adopted, the house would go into a fair discussion of the
details in committee.
Mr. T. EGERTON thought that the bill should be made
a local bill. It was inapplicable, or, if applicable, would
be injurious generally. In the silk trade, where gas was
necessary and was used, a small charge was made ; and, in
these caws, the bill would be mischievous. In the cotton
trade the employers had built houses for their men; and
here again the bill would do no good, and would introduce
confusion. He should like to have heard the opinion of the
government on the subject ; and he called upon the right
hon. Fresidentof the Board of Trade not to allow a bill of
this character to pass without a protest. (Hear.)
Mr. CARDWELL did not hesitate to answer toe appeal,
and would state at once the opinions he entertained on the
subject. First of all he would say that he by no means
joined in the complaint made of the excessive sympathy
distinguishing that house with regard to the poorer work-
ing classes. On the contrary, he saw with satisfaction the
eager and patient attention which the Home of Commons
always gave to questions of this kind, connected directly or
remotely with the sufferings of those classes. (Hear,
hear.) To that extent did this feeling operate
in the House of Commons, that there was generally a
tendency to depart from that which in the long run was
found the true principle, rather than to be wanting in an
effort to remedy as far as possible the evils complained of.
But this was evidently a very dangerous tendency : be-
cause they were dealing with subjects on which it was moat
fatal to blunder, since, if they made a mistake, the recoil
came upon the working classes themselves. (Hear, hear.)
With regard to this bill be would vote for it readily,
subject to certain modifications, if he thought it would
remedy the grievances complained of ; but he believed
that the direct opposite would be the result—that the
mischief would be altered, but not diminished, and on that
groand be would vote fur the amendment of the bon. mem-
ber for Montrose. (Cheers.) What were the facts they
had to deal with? In the staple manufactures of this
country they enjoyed a superiority over the rest uf the
world by reason of their mechanical powers and great na-
tural advantages. In the handloom manufactures they had
no advantages, but disadvantages, being subject to compe-
tition with the lower prices of the Continent, where the
condition of the working classes and their wages were lower
than in this country. They dare nut, then, in-
crease the disadvantages artificially, or saddle the trade
with a weight which would render the competition more
unequal. In this trade the wages were low for this reason,
that skilled labour was not required ; that any child could
go into it; great competition therefore going on for em-
ployment in it. The labourers in it resided in scattered
localities, each with a separate loom, which loom being tee
poor to provide themselves with they have to hire, sad dr
contract for that hiring was the foundation uf the evils
now represented to the house. The case, it was clear, was
not t* be met by the Truck Act. The Queen's Bench had
tried 'the point, and had decided that the Truck Act
did not apply, and on this ground, that 'the man
did not earn all, but that part was earned by the frame.
The present system was an inevitable one; the manufac-
turer must make deductions for the rent of his frame ; and
he must have overlooken, or middlemen, for what other
security but:this inspection of work done at frames scat-
tered at distances could he have that the frame would not
be wed by other persons, at less rates to his detriment?
The very nature of the case required all the securities ho
insisted on ; and what was this but a bill to take away these
securities? With regard to the interests of the workman,
such a bill could not benefit him. He must get a frame
from somebody; and there must be an inspection. What
was the position of this reprobated middle-man ? These
workmen worked at their frames at peat distances from the
manufacturer, and they had two journeys to perform to
carry on their business; one to get work, and a second to
take it back. Was it, then, better that they should make
this double journey for themselves or agree to let commu-
nications to be carried on for them by a third party, who
would undertake the same thing, at small expense to the
individuals, for the whole working community ? The
convenience and the economy of calling in a mid-
dle-man was obvious. %Hear, hear) The question
therefore was would the house f ebid these mot people,
getting the frames from those who could let them out at the
cheapest rates, and at the same time prevent the interven-
tion of middlemen who bad Laved the knitters expense ?
(Hear, hear.) Mr. Muggeridge spoke of it as an aggra-
vation of the evil in this case that mere were a great num-
ber of persons wholly unce.neee.ed with the manufacture
who made a large profit by investments in Wise frames,
and in hiring them out. Ho stated that there were but-
chers and bakers and others, among them women, who
were owners and letters of frames. But if this
were so, what became of the argument that only
the manufacturers could gain from the present
system ? Where was the proof in these circumstances
of the asserted compulsory relations between the knitters
and the employers? (Hear, hear.) To stair it concisely,
be believed that the direct effect of the bill would be this;
it would be a practical prohibition to the labour of these
people in the villages, and would cause an increase of the
labouters in tho towns. (Hear, hear) Of course those
who worked already in the towns, and under certain advan-
tages, as being nearer the employer, were somewhat dis.
posed to the bill, inasmuch as the bill would prevent ram-
petition ; hut then would the house do on injustice to the
village workmen ? Ile, of course, recognised the philanthropy
awl kindness of the bon. baronet ; he bad uo doubt of the ex-
cellent intentions with which the bill woe introduced ; but he
(Mr. Cardwell) entreated toe house to be caution. in sine
tinning such a measure. The hon. gentleman (Sir J.
wahsoley) advocated the bill, on the ground that it would
do away with the special grievances he had detailed ; but
if his argument was good at all, it would be good far a
general extension of the principle to all tr4tl, a; soil various
hon. m..mto rs had idioms this iu ceraiu trol.s no moth
:krintip:e could be safely recogoised. Wh. n they gc.t into
the discussion of such matters they found themselves
acting and talking inconsistently ; and, what had
beta said Art the come of this debit, solliciently showed