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

Obtniag

LONDON, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 1847.

The House of Commons met at twelve o'clock.

Lord DUNCAN, in reply to the attack made upon him
last night in the House of Lords, by the Earl of LUCAN,
explained that the charges which he was supposed to
have made against the landlords of Ireland were all con-
tained in the Blue Book published by the authority of
the Government ; while at the same time he stated that
his constituents would not be satisfied to pay taxes for
the relief of the poor in Ireland, unless a similar tax
were levied upon the Irish landlords.
The adjourned debate upon the Ten Hours' Bill was
then resumed by
Sir A. L. HAY, who opposed the measure, as one
fraught with danger to the manufacturing districts.
Mr. BERNAL supported the measure.
Mr. SNARMAN CRAWFORD, believing that the opera-
tives themselves were in favour of the Bill, would give it
his support.
Mr. DENNISTOUN felt convinced that if they passed
this measure, they would, before many months had
elapsed, find it necessary to retrace their steps.
Mr. FERRAND most energetically supported the mea-
sure. He had never meta with any manufacturer who
dared fairly meet his work people, and argue the ques-
tion at issue.

Mr. P. BoarawacK supported the second reading of
the Bill.

Sir 8.. H. Nous considered the supporters of the
measure had every encouragement to go forward.
Sooner or later the passing of such a measure was ine-
vitable.

SirG.STIEICULAND was decidedly in favour of the Bill.
Lord EBRINGTON and Mr. NERDEGATE were both in
favour of the measure.

Mr. MANSLAND was in favour of giving the labouring
classes more time for relaxation, but he was adverse to
the interference of the State in the master.

Mr. T. DuricomnE designated the eleven hours' pro-
position as absurd. The operatives were in favour of a
Ten Hours' Bill, and that was the measure he should
support.

Mr. B. ESCOTT proposed to adjourn the debate, a pro
poposition, that was met with loud cries of " Oh ! oh
from all parts of the House.

Mr. SHAW and Mr. LABOUCHERE both opposed the
adjournment.

Sir R. PEEL maintained his former opinions, and
would give the Bill every opposition in his power in its
future stages.
Lord G. BENTINCR would vote in favour of the Bill.

Mr. BRIGHT seconded the motion for adjournment.

On a division, the motion for adjournment was nega,
tived by a majority of 275, the numbers being—

For the adjournment — 7
Against it
The House then divided upon the question '• That the
word • now' stand part of the question"—when there
appeared—

For the word " now" 195
Against it
Majority —loB
Ater which the House adjourned.

Our expectations as to the generosity and humanity
of Parliament in sanctioning the second reading of
the Ten Hours' Factory Bill have been virtually
realised. The consequence of that emphatic decision,
especially considering the magnitude of the majority,
108, must inevitably be the final acceptation of the
measure. Like the Honourable Cu 4.IILES VILLIERS,
in regard to the abrogation of the corn-laws, Mr.
FIELDER is at length witnessing the triumph of the
cause which he has so consistently, so continually,
and so energetically advocated, and he is witnessing

its triumph in the scene of such boisterous and re-
peated discomfitures, namely, the Legislative Cham-
ber at Westminster. Somewhere about this time
twelve months ago it was our pleasant duty to offer
our congratulations to the Honourable Gentleman
the Member for IVolverhampton on the success
of the principles which his eloquence and ardour had
at one time almost singly sustained against a for-
midable and apparently unconquerable opposition. It
is now our agreeable duty to tender equally cordial
gratulations to the Honourable Gentleman the repre-
sentative of Oldham. Throughout an opposition,
than which there has never been a stormier, Mr.
FIELDEN has maintained his position unflinchingly,
unscared by contumelies, undaunted by numbers, un-
appalled by the most inimical divisions. He has
laboured not at the behest of any potent or influen-

tial party, not for the furtherance of his own pecu-
niary interest, not for the acquisition of any mere-
tricious popularity—but for the poor, for the helpless,
for the destitute women and children of Great Britain.
Aided by the philanthropy of Lord ASHLEY, and a
worthy corps of fellow-labourers in those fields of
suffering and abandoned humanity, Mr. FIELDEN
has striven against ridicule, against argu-
ments, and against the combined influence of a
powerful, because opulent, holy of opponents.
Happily, however, his exertions are approaching their
termination ; the boon for which the voices of so many
thousands have appealed in vain, is in a fair way of
being granted by the Legislature. Having declared
themselves so decidedly in favour of the compulsory
restriction of labour .hours, the representatives of the

ople cannot with any decency retrograde in their
movement of benevolence.

In the success of the Ten Hours' Bill our gratifi-
cation is altogether unalloyed. By its approval no
individual interest is sacrificed for the advantage of
the minority, no political engagements are broken, no
one principle is abandoned for the trial of some
merely specious legislative experiment. We have
observed that no individual interest is sa-
crificed for the advantage of the minority,
and we enunciate that opinion deliberately, from our
conviction that the emolument of the masters cannot
in any degree be diminished through the diminution
of the time allotted for work to the female and infant
operatives. Under the existing regulation the ener-
gies of those operatives are incessantly crippled by
their constant vigilance and occupation ;
.and we are
persuaded that it would baffle the arithmetical cepa-

bilities of the most ingenious dissentient to calcu-
late the amount of injury inflicted upon the em-
ployed by the abstraction of one or two hours from
their diurnal labour. It is indisputable that
the employment afforded to the industrious in
manufacturing towns is:variable and intermittent,
that it fluctuates with the fluctuations of the demand.
At one period the operatives are taxed to the fullest
amount of their bodily vigour, at another, when the
markets are glutted, and purchasers indisposed to
barter, the operatives are thrown wholly out of em-
ployrsent. By the limitation of the hours for manual
exertion in the factories there must result a certain
amount of security to the employed as to the perma-
nence and continuance of their employment, and to the
employer the result must necessarily be, in the long
run, the spinning, or weaving, or printing of as much
materials as upon the former and less equable
system. Quod erat demonstrandurn. We have ob-
served, likewise, that no political engagements are
broken by the present alacrity of the House of
Commons to forward the Ten Hours' Bill unmuti-
lated through its remaining stages, and in this must
be recognised an agreeable dissimilarity to the cir-
cumstances under which the corn-laws were
abrogated, and free trade rendered the commercial
text of the Constitution. In addition to this we have,
moreover, remarked that no one principle has been
abandoned for the trial of some merely specious legis-
lative experiment by the partial sanction already
given to the second reading of Mr. FIELDEN'S Bill.
As well might we designate the prevention
of cruelty to animals a legislative experiment as the
reduction of factory labour from twelve hours to ten.
As well might we designate the former imposition of
a deodand, or the present demand of compensation to
the relations of a deceased person, slain accidentally
or through lack of precaution, a legislative experi-
ment. As well might we call the infliction of a
penalty upon the vendors of poison a legis-
lative experiment, or the punishment of a
master-sweep for cleansing a chimney by
means of a climbing-boy, a legislative experiment;
••
terious to the health of the community a legislative
experiment. Upon its own merits, apart from every
interested consideration, is the Ten Hours' Bill being
judged in Parliament; and, providing those merits
continue to be regarded with impartial scrutiny, that
vexed question must inevitably be settled before the
close of the present session.

The debate on Lord GEORGE BENTINCeS Railway
Bill has terminated in the manner which every
rational man must have anticipated. A majority,
consisting of 322 out of 440 Members of the House
of Commons, have refused to sanction the second
reading of a measure the most impracticable in its
character, the most reckless in the manner in which
it deals with the financial affairs of the entire nation,
and the least calculated to attain its professed object—
the relief of the really destitute and suffering portion
of the Irish population—in proportion to the enormous
expenditure to be incurred, that was ever brought
forward by the recognized leader of a strong nu-
merical party. It might, indeed, have been termed a
Bill for the encouragement of railway speculation in
Ireland, and for the relief of distressed shareholders,
and reimbursing them the sums they have wasted in
wild and reckless dealing, or rather gambling, in
scrip, from the National Exchequer. Great sacri-
fices have been made to feed the hungry in that
country ; much that might properly have been
chargeable upon Irish estates has been provided for
from the public purse; but it is rather too much to
suppose that funds are also to be provided for all who
choose to invest their money in any sort of speculation
in Ireland, more particularly when the persons chiefly
interested are to be found, not in that country, but in
England. The calculatiOn of the noble projector of
this notable scheme was, that while Government re-
ceived only a fixed interest for the money advanced,
lower than that at which they could hope to obtain,
the amount necessary to be raised in the market
when a new State loan of such magnitude was re-
quired, while in addition to a certain loss, they took
upon themselves the entire risk of failure, all the
benefit was to be given to those who advanced but a
small portion of the required outlay, who would re-
ceive no less than from 8 to 10 per cent. dividend
thereon, or, in other words, would have every 1001.
increased to the value of 2001. or 2.60/. It would be
more simple, and fully as efficient, to enact that every
holder of Irish railway stock should receive a certain
bonus or bounty from the State equal to the entire
amount of h's nominal capital—a measure which,
though vastly agreeable to the capitalist, would
scarcely be so satisfactory to the hard-working and
tax-paying portion of the community.
We are not disposed to underrate the advantages
that would be conferred on the sister kingdom by ex-
tending to it the benefits of a well-arranged and
prudently-devised system of railways. Nor do we
say that Government should not, under any cir-
cumstances, interfere, and afford assistance and
encouragement to useful projects of that description ;
but if the interference was to have been to so vast
an extent as that proposed—if everything was to
have been done by the State, the State should
surely have received the benefits that would be
consequent on such a gigantic outlay. A few short
years since, when it was proposed that the nation
should construct railways in Ireland—when the bold
and comprehensive proposition of the late lamented
Mr. DRUMMOND was brought forward, and there was
a loud outcry against such an interference with pri-
vate enterprise and the legitimate employment
of private capital, and against the undue influence
which Government would thereby obtain—the
clamour prevailed, the Government withdrew their
proposition, they abandoned the field to that private
enterprise ; and behold the result-123 miles of
railway only have been constructed in Ireland! True
it is, that Bills have been passed, the legislative
sanction has been obtained for a much greater dis-
tance, but, as if the full, the only object was attained,
when authorised to commence operations, all further
proceedings were dropped, and matters were suffered
to remain in state quo, the projectors looking for
public assistance in order to effect that which they
should never have interfered with unless fully pre-
pared to carry out, on obtaining the necessary
powers. But aid was offered in a legitimate
manner, the Executive announced that the sanc-
tion of the Board of Works would be granted
to presentments made at sessions for the earth-
works of railways. Judging from the readiness to
make any presentments manifested throughout all
parts of the country, we can scarecely suppose that
if any such had been sought for by the directors, it
would have been refused ; and yet we believe in one
instance only was advantage taken of the offer. In
fact, is ars is
tiesunnfegolreteutneadtetl the as
to avail
avai lc
themselves e i every Iofrish
the
op po matter,r-
ot ut
hnei tri eass s
iws
tiat hn
cine
fart h e i
ver
yp ccnwde rt,
hl)while
dthey
reasonable
expectation. We cannot regret the length of the
discussion, although much valuable time has been
consumed. The triumphant and overwhelming ma-
jority must satisfy all parties that, if the projectors
desire to succeed, they must lay their own shoulders
to the wheel, and that legislative aid, to the extent
they have looked for, is wholly impracticable: We
trust, also, that it will have the effect of inducing the
Senate to withdraw the powers they have already
granted, unless means are speedily adopted to carry
the authorised works into execution. The companies
are not to prevent others from doing that which they
themselves are unable or unwilling to effect.

` The case of the policeman Amos, to which we have
already alluded, was further investigated and finally
adjudicated on by Mr. BROUGHTON yesterday. With the
observations of the worthy magistrate in delivering his
judgment we fully concur. He recognised the vast
importance of the case, both as regarded the adminis-
tration of justice and the conduct of the police force
generally, the public confidence in whieh would be
seriously affected, if a charge of such an aggravated
character, involving a breach of duty, a crime of the
most serious description, followed by the grossest
perjury, were fully established and proved. On full
consideration of the entire evidence on both sides,
however, Air. BROUGIITON came to the conclusion
that no jury would convict the prisoner, whom he ac-
cordingly ordered to be discharged.
The observations which we thought it our duty to
offer on the subject are not, however, in
any degree shaken by the final result. The
simple fact that a magistrate came to a

.(i,..