The Sun.
London, England, 1863-12-04 00:00:00

The Child in the Chimney.

(From the Examiner.)
Few people who remember what good ground there vies
for the Act of Parliament, passed 20 years ago, prohibltins
the employment by the master chimney-sweeps of Yellllg
children to climb up the chimneys and " small boys for
flues," can desire otherwise than to support the efforts of a
society that has been doing all it can to make the act effec-
tive, Instead of few people we should have said nobody, if
we had not met recently with three manifest exceptions in
the Mayor of Newcastle and the Aldermen Sillick ara
Dodds. At Newcastle the law for the protection
of children againet this improper and now ull'''
necessary use of their young lives is said to be very
much set at defiance. An officer of the London
and Birmingham Association for the Protection of
Climbing Boys, has, therefore been to Newcastle,
and on Thursday in last week four master sweeps
were summoned to the Mayor's police court for defiance of
the law. The terms of the Act are clear, and the lows/A
penalty for offence against it is declared to be £5, the highest
£lO. Now let us see how this law was administered ill
four cases by the Mayor of Newcastle and the Alderraell
Sillick and Dodds.
In the first case, James Frame was charged with having
employed a very little boy to sweep the chimney of a butcher
in New Bridge-street. Evidence having been given--
The Bench retired to consider their decision, and on their;
return into court the Mayor, addressing the defendant, sell
that the istrates had some doubt as t his uilt, alei
they were m
i agnclined to give him the benefit of that doubt,
though they were very much of opinion that he had ere:
ployed the bey as alleged. He must be very careful thin"
he was not brought back again on such a charge, for if he!
was he would not be dealt with so leniently. He would he'
fined 6d.
The three worthies at once give us the measure of tile!'
wits. They were "very much of opinion" that the eel
was proved, but they had some doubt, and were inclined t:.
give him the benefit of it ; so they compounded betwee_tc
opinion and inclination by substituting for the minitellth,
legal fine of £5 a fine of sixpence. What right had tby.
to fine the man sixpence if they really ',had some. don Di'
as to his guilt, and were inclined to give him the benefit °
de
that doubt ?" If they really had doubt, they were bong ~
whether inclined or not, to give the accused the benofit 0;
it. But the course of the other three cases will sugges I. tils
what they were in this matter most inclined to, was frar
tration of the law. bat
The next charge was not against James Frame, - f
against a Robert Frame, for using his nephew, a chile: 0
• to
ten, instead of a machine. The boy was seen to go 01,0
the house with a sweep's climbing cap on his head, te
defendant was seen to come out and look up at the chiele:r
pot, the boy's hand-brush was seen thrust out at the
WO
in evidence to his employer that he had reached the
. tt): ';
The officer who saw this, testified farther that he WI inj:e r
ur"
the house, heard the boy working his was' doer°, va., th 0
him come out from the fireplace into the rec
tclerolB
boy, washed clean, was produced in court. . e I
Aos not 100 k
Dodds said—" 1 think from his appearance he " -e
re that he
as if he swept chimneys." The child stoutly 0/11).
i ...ideal:Lent
did not go up the chimney, and the mayor and
..,
on the strength of such evidence, dismissed thewst?" 'of the
In the third case, against another mastersl3, „, but
name of John Frame,two witnesses proved the offer tior.
the lad who swept the chimney had not received his
mons to appear. That case, therefore, was aclical u
The fourth, case was distinctly proved :
Alexander Lumley, a sweep, was then c chimneY• A
mitting a boy named George Stoker to go up 8 .
Boner av'e
Jane M'Dowell said that on the 23d ult. the pri
ep . _
a little boy came to her house in High Dridge to swoeup T'.l
chimney. The boy went up. She saw the boy g
vi„. if;
chimney, and she also saw that they had no machinel'e
ever. Wit"
of the last
Francis Peacock confirmed the evidence
barged with par"
ness. •
not in die
M`Dowell at all, and afterwards said he
idwast be able c'
The prisoner affected ignorance of having ever seen Wig'
town that day. He admitted that he would "t
le oieß
obtain witnesses to prove the alibi he had s p
yfined
defendant 2s. 6d. llid not the
ort ?
case the magistrates considered proved, and thee . tile
i-i and "odds are
eider of Newcastle and Aldermen
aibiai a
In this case may we trust the report
an
ground for 33:014,_
sider the sweep's asseveratiobtnefie
t•ot a doubt, only a (WO"
inclination to giveho the
doubt as half-a-crown to sir'
condr.eed the case proved," as ,fr
pperonrer?tioniefd
tthoeyt
aggraiated as it was by a 11° 1
-be meant lent contempt of the Witte
defence, what
couldencourage master sweeps to laugh at t,-t
They could o and help to re-establish the old cliral 'l'l3:
reporter says theydid,
Act of Parliamentin
.Nee.vcastle by' the imposition, in a '7"4:13-6
system in
mitigating circumstance, of a half-crown. l'ioo
boy
without after if
14.Tht from and the '
o shall compel or knowillf ~,..
aoulfnl
oldweuri
July, 1842,
. sac4ch2t ;
lwdahnoiyrc hp,
oerusuo declares,gn
person
who
one years to ascend or descend a chimney, or enter a Ho,
under the age of twenia.re,
for the purpose of sweeping, cleanipg, or 4 coring,' file lialo id
or for extinguishing a fire therein, shall be liable to a Pell
of not more than £lO, nor less than Le." aiog
There was an old custom of sweeping chironeys by Should
through them a goose with a string tied to its leg. f:Toki.
that custom be revived, we commend the Mayor of New'
of
castle and Alderman Sillick and Dodds to the awns i_:. to
all persons troubled with foul chirankeYs. There
_i!ewles:tio
protect even geese, but if the wisdom. of the-Na_a froex,,
bench be transmitted from mayor to .mayor,t !"disero i
alderman to alderman, we see no reason whyt„
at
'`g gooso,o‘_,
housekeeper should not take a sixpenny .pull
her chimney's for a fine of half-a-crown a I when, at the worst, oho might have them
....--
feree----- _ _ --.—_-e „ A yearsv.ot
The Court Journal. Establishhic: 0-*
coutsit' A 001
See the Court ToAirnal of Saturday,
interest, and id.rfit rys
amount of exclusive news of public Theatrical, Na
'''':; t: be
original Courtly, Fachionable, _
oh
pits, sze. ; ottoired,
and Sporting Intelliwence, b
Caner.—r rice 5d.; :la by
ell
found in any daily or week
cliY pspstroet, Strand ; e -
6d.—W, Thome,s 26, BrYL
,g.e,l_,. stations.
wi3oSta
News-agents; and at the Ityl:ll7ee ,
ENCIL oCULPTOIt:, 01001
M. FOYATIEB, TUE
of Arc," ice., was recently acas," " Cincinnatusf _ oitaelt
heie studio.
chisel has produced allhPiot!! iee throt,o.
" SPartarried off:euddenly by e'''
of apoplexy, while Wee, in