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

Mr. FERRAND explained that what he meant to say was
that he was obliged to admit that the factory operatives were
unanimously in favour of a Ten Hours' Bill. The working
populace of Sheffield entirely differed with the Hon. Member in
his view of the question. The Right Hon. Baronet the Member
for Tamworth had informed the House that he felt it his duty
to vote against the Bill, in consequence of his anxiety for the
interests of the factory labourers. By the permission of the
House he should like to read the details of the present state
and sufferings of those operatives. The extract to which he
had referred was from the writings of a Lancashire cot-
ton-spinner. Out of the mouths of those manufacturers
who opposed this Bill he would judge them in the British
House of Commons. If the statement was true, and there
was no doubt of it, he would ask if there was any Hon.
Member who had the audacity to stand up and say, that he
was prepared to perpetuate in a Christian and civilised land a
state of suffering and degradation such as that which he
was about to read to the House, in opposition to the state-
ments made by the united operatives of the north of Eng-
land. Thisgreat Lancashire cotton-spinner stated that, as indi-
vidual manufacturers externally engaged in trade, they should
not be suspected of wilful exaggeration of the evils of this
system when they made the following statement. They should
exaggerate nothing, extenuate nothing, but simply state the
amount of evil that exists, and make suggestions for its
cure. (The Hon. Member then read several extracts, which
stated that children of 10 and 12 years of age, after being
employed for a short time in factory labour, lost the elastic
step of youth, the blooming cheek, and the vivacity
of intellect, under the severe employment and the prolonged
confinement, often resulting in permanent debility or pre-
meture death.) The gentleman who thus spoke of the
factory system was no other than Mr. Greig, one of the
largest cotton-spinners in Lancashire, who at the time he
made these statements as in favour of the relaxation of the
hours of labour; but now his mind had been poisoned by the
principles of political economy, and he was associated
with a small, and God be thanked, a decreasing band,
of cotton-spinners in Lancashire, who denied the
factory operatives that protection to which they were
fully entitled. Mr. Greig went on state that from long
hours of work, and from its severe nature—rendered more
severe and exhausting by its often being performed
in a close atmosphere—the workers found it neces-
sary to resort to the use of artificial stimulants;
that many of them receiving the highest wages spend the
greater portion of their leisure, more particularly on
Saturday evenings and during the Sundays, in be-
sotting themselves with ale, and beer, and gin. The quan-
tity of gin drunk in this way was enormous; and it was
painful to see children, even girls, being initiated into
this practice. Ardent spirits were not the only stimulants
they resorted to, as many of them indulged to a
large extent in opium, which they took in the
form of pills, and in other forms, which they called
anodyne, which was cheaper than gin. It was mach in
use when wages were low, but now it would be an habitual
stimulant. The general hours of work were from half-past
fiive in the morning until half- past seven or eight at night,
with half an hour for breakfast, an hour for dinner, and half
an hour generally for tea, leaving twelve hours a day for
clear labour. The labour of spinning was most laborious,
and perhaps was only exceeded in that respect by mowing
alone; and few mowers worked twelve hours without inter-
mission. It was impossible anybody could work for twelve
hours in this way without injuring hie constitution.
Farm and other labourers seldom worked more than
ten hours a day. Walking for twenty hours was
considered a most intolerable punishment for witches,
but they never could undergo their punishment longer
than twelve. Many of the Members of that House
were arguing about the great disadvantage of losing
a farthing a pound on the cotton manufacture by
reducing the hours of labour, in oppositon to the far more
important question, namely, the sacrificing of the lives of
millions of the people of this country. They said that it
was the duty of the British House of Commons to refuse
this Bill in order that the superabundant wealth of the
manufacturers might be madelgreater than it was. There was
not a cotton-spinner in Lancashire who durst attend
a public meeting in any one of the large ma-
nufacturing towns, and there openly state, in the
presence of numbers of the factory workmen,
similar to that which had been stated in that House ; and it'
there was one Member of that House connected with the
cotton trade who was prepared to dispute the policy of grant-
ing this measure before the factory workers of the north of
England, he challenged him to go down to the town
with which he was connected, where he (Mr. Ferrand) would
meet him, and discuss the question with him at a public
meeting; and he pledged his word, that although attempts
had been secretly made to induce the factory workers in many
parts to make statements in opposition to the Bill—and he
should prove it to the House before long—he should show that
the operatives themselves were anxious to work no more
than ten hours a day, and that if the House would
not legislate for them they would legislate for themselves.
It was further said by Mr. Greig, that the fourth cause of the
ill-health prevailing m the manufacturing districts might be
traced to the weakened and vitiated constitutions of the
women. They were employed after their marriage and dur-
ing their pregnancy, and that was known to every one, who
had considered the subject, to bring on a weakened and
debilitated condition to the children, so that when
the children began working themselves, they were pre-
pared at once to succumb to the evil influences by
which they were surrounded. These were the facts
delivered by Mr. Greig, guaranteed by him, and which he
had published to the world upon his high authority. Was
there a Member in that House who could gainsay any one of
them, or any longer maintain in the House the factory
system, which had been carried on by the sacrifice of thou-
sands of the people of England? The manufacturers had also
said, in a statement which had been circulated among the
Members of that House, that if they carried the Ten Hours'
Bill, let the Ministers be responsible for the consequences,
and they had gone so far as to threaten to close
their mills for the purpose of creating events similar to
those which occurred in 1842. Was that the way for men
who had amassed enormous wealth out of the bones and
sinews of the, starving people of England to conduct them-
selves ?—was that the way in which they should set an
example? After they had voted—disgracefully to them
selves—and had carried the corn-laws, they still opposed the
Factory Bill, after they had promised to give their support
to it.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT—No.
Mr. FERRAND—The Honourable Member for Durham
said "No." He (Mr. Ferrand) believed that they
did, and if they did he called on them, as men of
honour, to redeem their pledge, and if they did
not do so they ought to be branded with infamy
and disgrace. It was not the Ministers that would be re-
sponsible. It was themselves who would be responsible.
The manufacturers had declared through their representative
in that House, that if they were left alone, and legislative
interference were not brought to bear upon them, they would
immediately arrange the thing between the masters and the
workmen—that they would introduce the Ten Hours' Bill
themselves. Had they done so? They had broken their pledge
and promises, being determined that this disgraceful state of
things should continue, and it was therefore the: duty of Parlia-
ment to interfere and to protect the weak against the strong.
Who were the parties who interfered and told them that they
should not come to that House to protect men? Did they
come to protect men-?, No; they came for the protection of
for
this and children, who were compelled either to work
this period or starve to death. It was their machinery which
ban
destroyed the system of manual labour and the d
weavers. Many of them had been starved in the ountry •
and he had been told, upon a very competent authority, that
in a few years machinery would destroy the labour of 70,000
persons more. What were the manufacturers doing at
thi present moment? Their mills were not running six
hours a day. To effect good to these mills, their employment
ought to be steady and regular; and they ought not to starve
the people for one half of the year, and work them to death
during the other half; and he had received accounts from
Manchester, which said that there was a probability that the
great majority of the mills would soon be entirely closed, and
yet, during this state of things, it was proposed to retain the
power of working the people for twelve hours a day. The
first medical men in England had declaredthwatonioe
year.
was capable of working twelve hours during the whole
They were longer than any horse or man could bear it; and
women and children were compelled to bear it, and were dying
by thousands. Even the men could not bear the factory
labour beyond the age of 45. The Hon. Member for Mon-
trose had said, leave the women and children to themselves,
they would settle the matter with their masters. van;
man suppose that when a mother went to the mills, receiving
only Bs. or 10s. per week, and returning she found her
three or four children crying for food, that she would not
work her fingers'
ends raw, and herself to death, rather
than sit down and see her children starving? He had
even conversed with these women themselves, and
they had stated to him that it was little known
what their sufferings were. When they returned
weary and fatigued, and saw their children in want, they
would work, as long_ as God gave them health and strength,
to support them. The Hon. Member for Durham, on Wed-