The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-04 00:00:00

THE SUN, LDNDON, WEDNE!SD..4.Y EVE

would remedy the evils which it wi 'S admitted now ex-
isted. The bill would enable the vorking man to get
his frames where he pleased, to g to the cheapest
market and make the best bargain in I, could.
Sir J. WALMSLEY deprecated th e introduction into
this discussion of a political theory. The necessity for
some such measure as this was evince d by the fact that
deductions were now made from the •eekly wages of the
working men to the amount of 25 pei 11 cent., under the
pretext of frame-rents, lights, &c., so That the skilled
hands could not obtain more than Gs.. or 7s. a week.
It was impossible for any man to exist ei i this pittance,
and the consequence was that many of tb em were drove
to the union for relief. In the year :1840, out of a
population of little more than 50,000 persons, there
were in Leicester 10,895 persons receivii ig relief, at an
expense of 30,0001. ; in 1847 the number had increased
to 15,988, and the expense to 37,0001. What this bill
asked was not to affect uncertain rate of NIA ages—because
working men knew very well that wat ;es depended
upon demand and supply ; but that their • wages should
be paid in the current coin of the realm. j (Hear.) He
had that day presented two petitions from. his constitu-
ents at Leicester—one from the ratepayers and the other
from the working men—in favour of this-. bilL They
entirely repudiate all desire to inter fere in the
rights of property, or to prevent masters obtaining
a proper interest on the capital expended in the
purchase of machinery, but their object w:as to put an
end to the excessive rent charged on their f rames, and
the other deductions charged on the workmen's wages.
Many manufacturers had ceased to make these deduc-
tions, and the effect had been most benefi clad on both
sides.

Mr. T. EGERTON said this bill would b,e most inju-
rious to the silk trade, and he thoug'nt it ought
to be made a local bill. In its present slaape it would
most injuriously affect the large bodies of -workmen en-
gaged in the cotton and silk trades.
Mr. CARDWELL thought much'naischief and not good
would be effected by this bill, and therefore he should
support the amendment. He believed that its effects
would be a prohibition of labour to the workmen in the
country, and confine it to the workmen in the towns.
It was not a question of whether the case came within the
scope of the truck system, but whether, -when wages were
the joint earnings of machine and man, an arrangement
should be made between the parties, which being most
beneficial to the master should enable him to let his
frames at the cheapest rate to the working man. He
strongly advised the house to reject the second reading
of this bill.
Mr. NEWDEGATE supported the bill.
Mr. GARDNER said that the talents and philan-
thropy of the hon. baronet would be better employed in
endeavouring to persuade the working classes of the ne-
cessity of some legislation of this sort, and of the advisa-
bility of bringing up their children to some more profit-
able trade.

Lord J. MANNERS supported the second reading of
the bill, and declared that it was approved of by the
majority of the working classes who were in any way in-
terested in the measure. The masters were di-
vided on the subject, but, on the whole, the great
mass of the petitions were favourable to the bill, and
the house ought to have no difficulty in passing the
second reading. The supporters of this bill had been
denounced by the opponents of the bill as the rabble of
grsit towns, but as a country gentleman, and a member
of the Tory party, he utterly repudiated that idea, and
hoped the working classes would now be able to distin-
guish between their friends and their enemies.

- Mr. WHALLEY said the middle class was just as much
entitled to consideration at the hands of the house as the
working classes, and he could see no reason for inflicting
injustice upon the former for the sake of benefitting the
latter.

Mr. CHEATHAM opposed the bill, on the ground
that it would be an unjust interference with trade.
Colonel BLAIR supported the bill.
Mr. MUNTZ said this was one of those questions
which the house could not understand, because it con-
tained no practical men. (A laugh.) During the last
45 years no man had done more to benefit the working
classes than himself. He had made great sacrifices in
their favour, but if they anticipated any benefit from this
bill, he was very much afraid they would be disappointed.
He was apprehensive, however, that they would be just
as much disappointed if the bill was thrown out, and he
would, therefore, suggest that the dispute should be
ended by referring the bill to a select committee.
Mr. L. HEYWORTH argued that the house would
do more good to the working classes by extending the
principles of free trade, and removing the restrictions
on commerce, than by wasting time on this useless bill.
Sir H. HAFORD, who had charge of the bill, said
he should be quite ready to send the bill to a select com-
mittee if the house would only consent to read it a second
time.
The house then divided, when there appeared—,

For the second reading
Against it

Majority 6l
The bill was accordingly thrown out.
COMBINATION OF WORKMEN BILL.

On the motion for the third reading of this bill,
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL opposed the bill. He
had understood that this bill was intended to interpret
the law of combinations as it now stood, but upon look-
ing over the bill, he found that it went a great deal fur-
ther, much further, indeed, than public safety or expedi-
ency demanded. He must, therefore, move as an amend-
ment, that the bill be read a third time this day six
months.

Mr. BUTT seconded the amendment.
Mr. H. DRUMMOND supported the bill.
Lord PALMERSTON opposed the bill on the same
grounds stated by the Solicitor-General.
Mr. M. CHAMBERS said when the bill was first in-
troduced, it was supported by the Government, on the
ground that it simply explained the law as it stood, and,
could do no harm. Indeed, it was said then that the
bill was so unnecessary that it would be only encumber-
ing the Statute Book to pass it, while now it was said
the bill not only explained but entirely altered the
law. Now, there must be some inconsistency in this.
First it was said the bill was unnecessary because it
simply explained the law as it stood and was well
understood, but now it was said that the bill went further
and entirely altered the law. He contended, however,
that it did no such thing ; it simply explained the law,
so that the workman should be removed from a state of
doubt and uncertainty, and that, he insisted, was only
just and fair. Two learned judges, one at Liverpool and
one at Stafford, had laid down two different rules as to
the meaning of the law, and all that this bill would de was
simply to remove the doubt which this difference of
opinion had given rise to. All that this bill provided for
was this. In a time of prosperity, and while trade
was flourishing, or at any other time, the bill provided
that it should be lawful to meet and discuss the affairs
of their trade, and afterwards to communicate
the result of their deliberations to their fellow-
workmen. Now, one of the judges had laid it
down that this latter proceeding was contrary to law,
but it was no such thing, and all that this bill did was
to declare as much. _ _

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE complained of the course which
the Government was taking. It was most unjust for
them to reserve their opposition until the third reading ;
but since the question in dispute appeared to be simply
one of interpreting the law, he called upon the house
to follow the dictates of common sense, and send
the bill to be disposed of by the Lord Chancellor and
the other law lords of the other house. _ _

Mr. HUME said it appeared to him that the law
was involved in great doubt, and as the working classes
had evinced such a strong disposition to obey the law,
it was only ht that the legal doubts which surrounded
them should be cleared up.
Mr. WILSON suggested that this debate should be
adjourned.; the question was one of so much importance
that it required further consideration:
Mr. HUME moved the adjournment of the debate.
Mr. GEACH said the masters had a right to meet
and combine for the protection of their own interests,
and why should not the workmen be possessed of the
same privilege ?
Lord J. RUSSELL could hold out no hope of the
bill being supported by the Government on a future
dayM.
r. S. WORTLEY hoped the noble lord would throw
no obstacle in the way of the adjournment of the
debate.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE could see no necessity for ad-
journing the debate. It would be much better to divide
upon the principle of the bill at once.
Mr. HUME wished to withdraw his motion for the
adjournment of the debate.
Mr. KINLOCK said there was no body of men so
dangerous as the peaceable persuaders of working men,
and as this bill would have the effect of encouraging
their nefarious proceedings, he hoped the house would
unanimously reject it.
The house then dvided, when there appeared--
For the adjournment lO2
Againstit

Majority
Itbeaidnjourgnnoed.wsix o clock, the Speaker declared the
house

STATE OF TRADE.

(From the Manchester Guardian of this day.)
MANCHESTER, May 3.--We are informed by the Euro-
pa's advices of the 20th ult., that the total receipts of cot-
ton at the American ports amounted to 2,884,303 bales,
against 2,521,268 atthe corresponding period of last year;
leaving an excess of 363,035 bales. The southern
markets were rather dearer ; strict middling being quoted
101 e. to 101 c. per lb. ; freight, id. to 5-16. The fall-
ing off in the receipts, according to the above accounts,
is not equal to that which, we were informed by the
previous steamer, had been telegraphed. But the har-
dening in price at the southern ports has had the effect
of sustaining the firmness of the Liverpool market, in
which there is, too, rather more inquiry from the trade.
In this market the sellers of yarns and goods have been
so far influenced by the same cause as to be, in general,
harder to deal with than they were last week. Buyers are
freer at giving out orders, at fully previous rates ; but they
are disposed to pay even the small advance asked for yarn
and cloth, which has therefore been only partially ob-
tained. On the whole, the market must be reported as
rather dearer. For the East, rather more business has
been done. •
ROCHDALE, MAY 2.—The piece market has been more
inactive, fewer buyers have attended, and a more limited
amount of business has been transacted than on the
previous Monday. For what has been sold the manu-
facturers have obtained good prices. English wools are
scarce, and the dealers continue to demand a small
advance.
HALIFAX, April 30.—Very little business has been
done to-day in our piece hall, either in plain or fancy
goods ; and there is no noticeable change in yarns or
wools, The high prices tend greatly to check transac-