The Sun.
London, England, 1853-07-06 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JULY 6, 1853

SHARE MARKETS.-(THIS DAY.)

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

BRITISH RAILWAYS.

Shr. IP,

id.l RAILWAYS.

Leasing
Compans.

Closing Prices
this day.

Business
this day.

rid I RAILWAYS.

Closing Prices
this day.

Business dons
this day.

HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY.)
JUVENILE MENDICANCY BILL.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY, in moving the recom-
mitment of this bill, observed that the subject of juve-
nile mendicancy, at all times one of great importance,
became still more so, at a time like the present, when
they were about to abolish, at all events to a considera-
ble extent, the system of transportation. People were
weary of speeches and pamphlets respecting secondary
punishments, and, indeed, it would be much wiser if
they were to inquire whether some steps could not be
taken to diminish the amount of crime itself. Now, the
most prolific source of crime was juvenile mendicancy :
for though they ought not to consider the class to whom
he wished to call their lordships' attention as exactly de-
linquents, yet they were in a state in which they must
infallibly become delinquents at no distant period. In
fact, that class, namely, children who had been trained
to beg by their parents, or those who had the custody of
them—formed the seed plot of at least two-thirds of the
criminality of this kingdom. The persons most to blame
were the parents, next society, and, least of all, the un-
fortunate children themselves. From the statements of
90 thieves, who were living in one reformatory institu-
tions, it appeared that 62 of that number had begun to
steal when under the age of 15 ; and that 56 had begun
between the ages of 12 and 16. He (the noble lord)
believed that if an inquiry were instituted throughout
all the gaols in the kingdom, the result would be to prove
beyond a doubt that a vast proportion of all the crime
that was committed in this country had been perpetrated
by persons who had been led into evil habits at an early
ago. He (Lord Shaftesbury) had put the following
question to 100 City missionaries and Ragged School
teachers :—" How many persons do you think who have
lived an honest life up to 20 years of age, afterwards
fall away and take vicious courses ?" The answer he
had obtained was in every case, "not two in a hun-
dred." (Hear, hear.) The class to which he was
calling their lordships' attention might be divided
into two classes, mendicants and vagrants. (Hear,
hear.) The former of these had their different grades,
honours, and emoluments. A juvenile mendicant might
attain to be a begging-letter writer; and he could assure
the noble earl opposite (Lord Aberdeen) that he had
few more comfortable things to dispose of than a suc-
cessful begging-letter writership. (Laughter.) Many
of these children were orphans ; some having lost one
parent, some both. It was a remarkable fact, but no
more remarkable than true, that there was no more pro-
lific source of juvenile vice, misery, and suffering than
the harsh and domineering demeanour of step-mothers,
many of whom in the lower grades of life would not
allow a step-child to remain with them in the house.
(Hear, hear.) But it was also true that many artisans
in the receipt of large wages were in the habit of turn-
ing their children into the streets early in the morning,
forbidding them to come near their home till late at
night, and telling them to live in the meantime as they
could. The noble earl having substantiated this state-
ment by extracts from the report of the Rev. Mr. Clay,
the chaplain of Preston gaol, added that a City mis-
sionary had told him that he could enumerate no fewer
than 100 families in which the parents lived in idleness
and luxury upon what their children picked up in the
course of the day's vagrancy and mendicancy. The
practice of such persons was to send out their chil-
dren with chalkstones, cocoa nut husks, and the like,
and to threaten them with the most brutal ill treatment
unless they brought home a certain sum, to be made up
either by selling, begging, or stealing. One great reason
which had been alleged against legislation with a view
to prevent such scandalous misconduct on the part of
parents was the presumed extent of the evil, which had
led many persons to doubt whether it was not too large
to be dealt with at all. It was, however, consolatory
to know that the extent of the mischief had been
greatly exaggerated. From the second report of Cap-
tain Hay it appeared that the number of children at
large in the metropolis, living in idleness, without edu-
cation, and neglected by their parents, who were, gene-
rally speaking, in the receipt of wages sufficient to
maintain them, was nearly 20,641 under fifteen years of
age. The number of practised and trained mendicants
and vagrants who frequented lodging-houses, did
not, however, exceed 3,098. Of these the number who
had parents able to contribute either wholly or in
part to their maintenance and education was no fewer
than 2,106. This return was confirmed by the inquiries
which had beem made by a person whom he (the noble
earl) had employed last year to investigate the subject.
That person said that he knew himself no fewer than 200
practised medicants and vagrants, whose parents were
in the receipt of at least 16s. per week--a, sum that
ought to enable them not merely to give their children
sustenance but education. He really did not think,
then, that the number of juvenile mendicants either in
London or throughout the country (for the proportion
would be found the same in most of the large towns)
was so large as to discourage legislation. The whole
number of professional thieves and burglars in the whole
of the metropolis was under 6,000 ; and, therefore, he
thought that the estimate of 3,098 mendicant children
was very likely to be correct. It was true they some-
times heard it said that there were 100,000 persons in
London who rose every morning without knowing where
to get a meal, but be believed that these statements
were immensely exaggerated. He did not think they
had ever been true, and certainly they were never less
so than at the present moment. They could not ascer-
tain the number of offenders from the number of of-
fences, for the latter was swelled by several offences
committed by one person. It was sometimes said that
poverty was the cause of crime and beggary. Such was
not the case. Serjeant Adams had told him that the
ability of persons who sent their children into the
streets to have maintained them without doing so was
the rule, and not the exception. Mr. Clay had asked a
great number of thieves a similar question with respect
to stealing; and they said they only knew one case in
which crime had been the result of poverty. (Hear,
hear.) One of the great causes of crime was the
reckless and careless manner in which property was
exposed. Thus it appeared that there were in a
single year in Londen, 1,479 cases of stealing goods
exposed for sale ; 596, stealing from unfinished
houses ; 211, stealing from carts ; 228, stealing linen
hung to dry; and 1,920, stealing in consequence
of doors being left open. When they considered
the hardships to which poor children were exposed, the
hunger they actually suffered, and the brutality to which
they were exposed if they did not take home a certain
sum, was it to be wondered at if they succumbed to the
temptations thrown in their way. (Hear, hear.) From
the testimony of a number of professional thieves who
had been examined on the point, it was said that the
reason why children were sent out to beg generally lay
in the idle and debauched habits of their parents, that
children were hired for begging purposes, sometimes at
as much as 2s. 6d. per diem, and that children often
picked up as much as 3s. a day. The existing law of
vagrancy was utterly inadequate to meet the evil, for
what was really wanting was that the children should
be removed from their parents, and that the latter
should be made to pay for their support. That was the
object of his (Lord Shaftesbury's) bill ; and that, he
thought was quite in accordance with the practice of the
courts in cases where parents or guardians had shown
themselves unfit to have the care of young persons com-
mitted to them. The law which he asked for was de-
manded, not for the individual rights of the children, but
for the exigencies of society. Children were now brought
up by their parents to be pick-pockets, and burglars, and
cut-throats ; and it was a perversion of language and of
facts to maintain that in taking away these children from
such parents they were refusing them the enjoyment of
any right that they possessed of anything which was ac-
corded them by the law of God, according to the princi-
ples
of justice between man and man. Bringing up
children in this way was a nuisance to society, and which
he considered ought to be removed as they would remove
any other nuisance. Such parents as be had referred to
were not Christians, were not men and women ; they
were absolutely beasts, and having renounced their
rights they ought not to be allowed to resume them ex-
cept under the authority of some competent persons, who
should be able to declare, on due examination, that the
children who were restored to them would be brought up
so as not to be an annoyance to society. Society had a
right to take away children from their parents in order to
bring them up properly, but that did not relieve the
parents from their responsibility for the maintenance of
their children. He knew an instance of a boy who was
found lying on the steps of a house. He was in a fever, and
a gentleman who was passing had him conveyed to the
Fever hospital, where he was placed under the care of
the physician to that institution, Dr. Southwood Smith,
who, when the boy recovered, ascertained his story. He
was sent out by his parents to beg, and when he was
taken ill, he had been wandering about the streets with-
out any sustenance. The boy was subsequently placed
in the Refuge, and when he was recovering, the mother
came down and demanded to have him restored to her.
It happened that he (the Earl of Shaftesbury) was pre-
sent, and be was afraid he had not the law on his side,
but he threatened,to prosecute her for deserting the boy,
and in consequence she went away without him. The
boy cried bitterly in his fear that he should be delivered
up to his mother. He was now in a respectable sphere
of life, earning very good wages in Nottingham, and
he had sent for his mother, who lived with him, and
conducted herself respectably. One objection h e had
heard to this bill was that the workhouse, in which the
children would be placed, partook of the character of a
prison, and another objection was that the number would
be so large that they could not get sufficient work for
them. As regarded the first, it was only as against the
intentions of the parents to get possession of the child-
ren that they would be restrained. With. regard to the
second, he thought it would be worth while to run some
risk. He was convinced, from the most minute in-
quiries, that nothing of the sort would occur. Their
lordships had heard that a large portion of the parents
were perfectly able to maintain their children, and de-
pend upon it the terrors of the lay would clear the
streets of nine-tenths of the mendicants. He might
state that he had the concurrence of several of the police
magistrates of London, who had written to him to state
their views. Amongst them were Mr. Henry, Mr.
Painter, Mr. Corry, Mr. Broderip, Mr. Long, and Mr.
Bingham. The great demand for labour which now
existed had taken away the pretext for begging. The
police were never more active and efficient, and he might
say, in reference to this subject, " Now is the accepted
time, now is the day of salvation." Ho considered this
measure as entirely one of mercy and of prevention, and
he was sure that if it passed it would anticipate, to a
great degree, tho jailer and the hangman.
The house then went into committee on the bill.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said after the interest-
ing speech of the noble earl it might seern very prosy to
come down to the details of the bill, but that was neces-
sary. In the first clause the words " any child" were
used. Surely there ought to be some clearer definition

as to the persons who were to be brought under the ope-
ration of the bill.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY observed that the Va-
grant Act contained no definition whatever.
Lord CAMPBELL also thought there ought to be
some definition. Who could tell what a child was ?
Why, Childe Harold was a child. (Laughter.) He
earnestly recommended his noble friend to reconsider the
bill, and any assistance that he could render him should
be at his service. He should like to see the object of
the bill carried out ; but this was a bill that would not
work.
Lord BROUGHAM, while aggreeing with the obser-
vations of the noble earl, said he thought the best course
would be to withdraw the bill for the purpose of remodel-
ling it.
The Earl of HARROWBY thought the difficulties in
the bill might be surmounted, and suggested that it
should be referred to a select committee.
Lord CAMPBELL said there was a law in Glasgow
which enabled the magistrates to summon before them,
and to imprison for any period, not exceeding sixty days,
the parents or other persons having control of children
who sent them out to beg, and that law, he believed, had
worked well.

The Earl of SHAFTESBURY said he had brought
forward the measure for the sole purpose of exciting dis-
cussion. He wanted to bring before the public an enor-
mous amount of evil, the length and breadth of which
was not fully understood, in order that it might excite
the attention of the active spirits of the country. He
was now willing, either that the bill should be thrown
out or referred to a select committee.
The bill then passed through committee pro forma.

PUBLIC WORKS LOAN BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
WHITTLEWOOD, OTHERWISE WHITTLE-
BURY, FOREST BILL.
The amendments to this bill were considered, and
agreed to.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of,
and the house adjourned at 25 minutes past 7.

HOUSE OF COMMONS--(YESTFMAY.)
ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS.
Mr. COLLIER moved for leave to bring in a bill to
transfer the testamentary jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical
Courts to the Courts of Common Law and the County
Courts. After sketching what he had done on a previous
occasion, and referring to the promises of Government, he
proceeded to say that though he had no hope of carrying
his bill this session, he now felt it to be his duty to intro•
duce it. He had no more to do with the subject of abases
but would deal with remedies alone, and he remarked that
he addressed himself only to the testamentary jurisdiction
of the courts, for as to their other jurisdictions, the only
mode of treatment which would be satisfactory to the
country would be the abolishing of every ecclesiastical
court in the kingdom. His proposal differed from that of
the Solicitor-General, inasmuch as the latter designed to
do away with all but the diocesan courts, whereas he
would do away with all. He would abolish altogether the
testamentary jurisdiction of the county courts. He pro-
posed that all wills about which there was no dispute
should be proved in those courts. He would create county
districts, corresponding to the circuits of the county court
judges. The undisputd will of any man should be proved
in the circuit in which he dwelt at the time of his death,
and thus he would get rid of the legal difficulty of bona
notcr,bilia. He would establish a system of registration ;
every will should be registered in the county courts, and
transmitted to a registrar-general in London. Each
county court judge should appoint a registrar out of the
present ecclesiastical courts, whereby men of experience
would be gained, and compensation be saved. The juris-
diction of the county courts should extend over real and
personal property. Where a dispute arose, it should, where
the cause in dispute was under 3001., be tried in the locality
'where it occurred, and he would give the county courts an
equitable jurisdiction. He considered the technical difficul-
ties of testamentary questions to be over-stated, and he re-
ferred to the old historical character of tho county courts
in proof of the efficiency they had possessed. He would give
jurisdiction in higher cases, and also appeals, to the superior
courts of common law, which should retain their power
over real property, to which jurisdiction should be added
that of the ecclesiastical courts as regarded personality.
He would appoint an officer, to be called the clerk of pro-
bates, to each of the superior courts. The jurisdiction
should be concentrated into one court. Compensation
should be given to those who were deprived of offices, but
not to practitioners ; and proctors should be admitted to
practise as attorneys in all the superior courts. Dwelling
upon the necessity of the same sweeping reform in the law
which had been adopted in other institutions, he urged the
subject on the consideration of the government.
Mr. HUME seconded the motion.
Lord PALMERSTON supported the motion with groat
pleasure, and complimented the ability which had been
' displayed by Mr. Collier in dealing with the subject. But
he dwelt upon the complicated and difficult nature of the
question, and, after stating that the government were quite
aware of necessity of practical remedies, said that they
had not felt that they should be justified in legislating
without great deliberation. He had said that government
had intended to bring in a bill on the subject, but, regard-
ing the hopelessness of passing it this session, and the de-
sirability of having the report of the commission now
sitting, they had thought it better to delay introducing
their measure until the early part of next session.
Mr. HADFIELD would have liked a more specific
explanation from the government as to the promised re-
form.
Sir B. HALL urged that the admitted difficulty of the
question was the reason why government should not have
left legislation to an independentmember, and he instanced
various cases of ecclesiastical abuse in proof that remedy
was imperatively demanded.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that all pa'ties
were agreed in the necessity of reform, but urged that
no one could blame the government for waiting for
the report of the commission, after which it would
be their immediate duty to prepare a measure on the
subject.
After some observations from Mr. DUNLOP and Mr.
PELLATT,
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
THE HOURS OF LABOUR IN FACTORIES.
Mr. COBBETT then rose to move for leave to bring in
a bill to limit the hours of labour of women, young persons,
and children, in the factories of the United Kingdom, and to
provide for a more perfect inspection of the said factories.
The hours of women and children were to be restricted to
ten hours on five days of the week, and to seven and a-half
hours on the Saturday. This would have the effect of re-
storing the Ten Hours Bill of 1847, and of including in
that bill the children of eight years of age. He had been
strongly urged by a large number of his own constituents
and others in the factory districts, to bring in a bill to
shorten the hours of labour in these factories. Ho then
explained the state of the law as it now existed on this
subject, and gave a retrospective glance at the progress of
legislation in connection with factory labour. In 1833 an
act was passed which made the factory day 15 hours, viz.,
from half-past five to half-past eight. In 1844 another act
was passed, by which the labour of young persons, between
and 18, and of women, was restricted to 12 hours in the
day, but it permitted children from 8 to 13 to work 64.
hours a day, so that there were employed two sets every
day ; and there were, in point of fact, by this means, two
factory days • 1847 an act was passed, limiting the period
of labour to ten hours a day in the case of women and
young persons ; but as children could work 6i hours under
the act of 1844, and thus two sets could be employed every
day, the millowners were thus able to keep their factories
going 12 or 14 hours in the day. This led to the adoption
of what was called the "shift" system, the millowners
availing themselves of the letter of clause 26 of the act of
1833, which did not particularly define that the labour of
a women or young person should be taken in ten " conse-
cutive" hours. By this means the act was successfully
evaded. The larger body of millowners chose to adhere to
the evident meaning of the act, and were thus subject to
great disadvantage in competing with those who pursued an
opposite course. Much dissatisfaction ensued, and the result
was an appeal to the Barons of the Court of Exchequer, who
decided that although there was no doubt as to the intention of
the act, that those who extended the hours came within the
literal meaning of the enactment. There was,consequently,a
great desire on the part of those interested, to reform the
law in this respect. The hon. gentleman then referred to
a great meeting which had been held, April 14, 1849, on
which occasion the hon. gentleman, the member for Ash-
ton-under-Lyne, had made a speech to the delegates then
assembled, to confer as to what should be done after the
foregoing legal decision. The delegates repudiated the as-
sertion as to the alleged evil consequences which were said
to have arisen from the shortening of the hours of labour.
(Hear.) He was satisfied that if hon. members examined
the reports which had been made by the different inspec-
tors on the subject, they would be convinced of the utter
hopelessness of securing the benefit of a Ten Hours' Act,
unless by some such measure as that which he now pro-
posed. They would feel that some such alteration was
absolutely necessary, in order to prevent the cluing and
systematic violations of the Ten Hours Act which were now
going on every day. (Hear.) The hon. member then re-
ferred to the evidence given before the Factory Commis-
sioners of 1836, by Mr. Cheetham, the member for Lanca-
shire. who laid stress on the necessity of imposing a re-
striction on the motive powor, in order to secure the effici-
ency of the ten hours' system, and also to the bill intro-
duced in 1835 by Mr. Hindley and Mr. Brotherton, with
the view Of restricting the hours of labour in factories.
The third clause of that bill proposed to limit the hours
of labour for all persons under 21, to ten hours a day; and
the 4th clause provided, that the hours of the working of
the machinery should be the same as those fixed for the
labour of the children. There could be no doubt that a
restriction on the motive power was necessary, to carry
out the intention of the ten hours' system. (Hear.) This
question was now making a great stir in the manufactur-
ing districts, and had met with the cordial support, not
only of the workmen, the managers, and the overlookers
of these factories, but also of many master manufacturers
of great consequence and opulence. Numerous petitions
had been presented in favour of the measure from these
different classes, but not ore had been as yet presented
against it. None of the unfavourable predictions which
bad been made respeekting the system had ever been real-
ised, but the work which had been turned out in the shorter
period had equal! that which was produced under the
longer periods which were allowed before the introduction
of the Tea Hours' Act, and the wages earned by the work-
men had been quite as great, and in many instances higher
(Hear, hear.) Some alteration was proposed by the
bill to be made both in the amount of the fines and the
mode of recovery. He believed that the fines which he re-
commended would not be considered unreasonable, when
they considered the imperative necessity of preventing the
recurrence of these offences, by inflicting a penalty which
was commensurate to the crime. The hon. member, hav
ing referred to some statistics showing the injurious effects
of the prolonged hours of labour in factories on the health
of the work-people, concluded by moving that leave should
be given to bring in a bill of the nature he had described.
Mr. FIELDEN had much pleasure in seconding the
motion of his hon. and learned friend tho member for Old-
ham. He was himself extensively engaged as a manufac-
turer ; he had 1,300 or 1,400 men in his employment, and
felt a very deep interest in the question before the house.
He believed the suggestions which had been made that
evening, with respect to the limitation of the hours of
labour in our factories, by his hon. friend, were of a cha-
racter precisely similar to those which had boon 'made in
the report of Mr. Horner, and in the propriety of carrying
out these suggestions he (Mr. Fielden) entirely concurred.
Mr. WILKINSON thought it desirable that those who
were engaged in our manufactures should not work for so
many hours in the day as was the case at present ; but he
should by no means like to interfere in the matter by any