The Sun.
London, England, 1847-02-10 00:00:00

- .
that they ought not to interfere, and to allow the labourers
to remain at the mercy of tCcit. employers; but were
du tiotiiirti.: I; , -t,,
interfere, he was at a loss to understand why they had in-
terfered with various things,and were continuing to interfere.
If the interference proposed by the Bill be not satisfactory,
let them point out to him, if they could, a more advisable, a
more safe, a less objectionable mode of intervention, or which
had more noble or more glorious reasons for interference.
tireless the factory operatives came before them and declared
that all their past legislation ou the subject had been pro-
ductive of the desired good, and that there was no need of
the propo;:cd interference, or that lieger would result to
them funs it, they were bound to pes, the Bill. Ile onelit
almost to apologise for touching this part of the subject
after the eloquent speech of the Honourable Gentleman the
Member for Edinburgh last year.—(Hear, hear.) De was
glad that that city had, by its representative, spoken in
favour of the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) In a late number of the
Edinburgh Review he found an article, from which he would
read two or three passages which appeared to him " germane
to the matter." It stated that the question,like others, must
be argued upon its own merits, and that the time had arrived
when the argument in favour of the reduction of the hours
of labour in factories to ten hours, could not be answered by
mere general doctrines. Now, he put it to the candour of the
House whether- that proof had; not been furnished? The
Honourable Gentleman talked of Russia, and Germany,
and America, but since 1639 no person under sixteen years
of age, in Germany or Prussia, was allowed to work more
than ten hours.—(Hear.) Throughout Prussia the average
hours of work of all classes was 11 ; and then the case in
America to which he referred was not a good example in
favour of his argument, as the committee came to
the opinion they did owing to the pressure
of circumstances which could not be Controlled.—(Hear.)
What country entered most into competition with us. Was it
not America? They compelled the Americans, against their
wills, to employ their labourers longer than they desired, by
enforcing their competition. He considered that the
statements which he heal taken the liberty to
read must satisfy every gentleman that their
foreign trade had not suffered from a reduction
in the hours of labour, and no case had been made out to
show that their foreign trade would suffer. He would there-
fore submit that the time had arrived, for the sake of the
working men, and for the sake of the working women of the
north of England, and also for the sake of the master manu-
facturers themselves, that this great question should be finally
set at rest. He would ask that House of Commons was it
prepared to throw back to another Parliament the settle-
ment of the question which had enlisted in its favour the affec-
tions of the working men and women—which came to them
supported by the opinions of the clergy, the medical profession,
and all the enlightened and impartial, which was based upon the
experience of the past, and which appealed to past results
for future beneficial effects? Would the House of Commons
reject such a measure as the present, because some
Honourable Gentlemen are pleased to assert that
it does not altogether steer with their notions of
political economy ? He trusted not ; but should it
be so, and should the House come to a conclusion
adverse to the second reading of the Bill, the Gentlemen on
his side of the House would retire from the contest
undismayed and undeterred, cheered and encouraged
by the reflection that they had done their duty,
and that the Tory gentlemen of England had maintained
their historical position—(Laughter)—and had, consistently
with it, fought the battle of the poor" against the rich, of
their poorer fellow-subjects against the mighty and the
strong.— (Hear, hear.) He trusted that the Bill
would pass into a law, and that this protracted
struggle would now be terminated ; and if such
was the case, he could assure the House the measure would
be received by a grateful and loyal people amidst the accla-
mations of millions.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that if
the Noble Lord had abstained from those allusions which
he had deprecated in the commencement of his speech, he
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would not have addressed
the House. He had been willing to believe that the question
might have been discussed without any party feeling being
expressed. And if the Noble Lord did take credit for his
party, he would surely allow him to claim, for the Gentle-
men with whom he acted, the merit of a measure which
gave to the mass of the people the main article of
subsistence at the cheapest possible rate. lie did not wish to
lursue the subject further, or to say much upon the present
question, which had been so repeatedly before the House. On
the last occasion that the Bill was isetore the House, it was
opposed by the Governmeut as a Government measure.
His Noble Friend near him, and the Right Hon. Baronet
near him, would support the measure under certain modifica-
tions, but lie supported the same opinion upon the
present as upon former occasions. And he considered
himself bound to stand up and declare himself, so
that the question might not go forth with the
weight of Government authority. He was as much a friend
to the poor man as any Gentleman in that House, and if
he were disposed to overlook the immense interests which
were involved, and to consult those only of the working man,
he would not give his consent to such a measure,
as he believed it would be most injurious in its resuls. He
had no hesitation in granting a limitation to the hours of
labour for children, but he would oppose any interference
with those of adults. By such a measure they would take
away one-sixth part of the earnings of the labourer.
By diminishing the hours for labour they would increase
the coat of production, and that cost would either fall upon
the profits of the manufacturer or the wages of the artizan.
He would take the cases of the different mills. In the first
mill all the operatives signed in favour of long hours; in the
second mill, 169 signed in favour of long hours, and 75
against it; in the third, 59 only signed for long hours, and al-
though an announcement was made by the masters, that in
the month of October following they should commence
working short time, before that day of working short time
came the workmen sent a deputation to the owners request-
ing that they should work for long hours. In the fourth
mill it was agreed also to work for long hours;
for in consequence of working short hours the wages of the
people would have been reduced. In one mill many of the
operatives were so anxious to earn high wages, that they
continued working at tea tinte when their hours were re-
duced. These parties worked by piece work, and in their
anxiety: they worked during the half-hour allotted for tea,
thus working the same time as before, only in a smaller
compass. In these instances the experiment had been
fairly tried, and the question had been fairly .put
to the workmen, and they preferred long hours
with high wages. If any of the operatives were anxious for.
short hours it was in the full belief, and in which belief they
would be disappointed, that they would continue to receive
the same amount of wages. In another mill which he would
mention 400 hands all signed in favour of long hours, and
in another a majority of 50, in a third a majority of 40, in a
fourth a majority of 50, and in a fifth a majority of 103,
signed in favour of long hours. In a sixth mill 276 signed
for long hours, and 125 against them. It was
long hours were preferred by
and
they
workmen
, oo rf
ki
were
moewa s
err
nek t
when
theirlohduenitwould
atbht
eet
followed
od;
they
demurred conviction
mwd iueddr r thatnebdoyt
tca a
oo
narseimadreduc-
tion
measure
tiuohrnee
fore ri
tsnokh,
of the
nhen bt elief, that
his
f interesthsew awi
meansereinacf
acevdoeurtoo
of the ht
he i
sr emq ueeasstu
roe!f
rat heec
hwor km
moree
gn
e,
which would inflict an injury. He would, therefore, by no
nevereanllyif-tthhwaeyn
he believed them to be. He was really so little able to ad-
dress the House, that he would not venture to make
many further remarks. The question concerned
not only the interest of the artizans in the
mills, the interest of the manufacturers, and the
large interests of all persons dependent on the cotton
mills, and of all dependent on the production of the raw ma-
terial consumed in the mills, and of all persons who were en-
gaged in the prep trati,,n of the material : it affected also all
those employed in the after processes, and if they reduced
the raw material consumed in the mills, and there became in
consequence a deficiency in the production of the manufactured
produce, the various stages it had to go through subsequently
they would affect the interest, not only of the manufacturers
themselves, but the interest of large bodies of men on either
side, who had no opportunity of expressing their
opinions, but whose interest, nevertheless, was ma-
terially injured. He thought that these were con-
siderations of vast importance, which ought not to
be left out of the question. lie had taken it upon the mix,
rowest grounds—those grounds upon which they generally
agreed, viz., that the interest of the workmen was materially
atlected, and it was upon those grounds that he felt it to be
his duty to oppose the measure.
The Marquis of GRANBY said that the patient endurance
of the operatives, and at the same time the conciliating tone
they adopted towards their masters, would naturally cause a
desire to grant their wish. The Right Hon. the Chancellor
of the Exchequer had said that the wages of the opera-
tives would be reduced. He was ready to admit that,
if they reducer' the number of hours the operative
had to work, the master manufacturers would find it neces-
sary to make up the deficiency by employing more hands.
He thought, likewise, that if they did employ more
hands, the number of workpeople, as an inevitable conse-
quence of the principle of competition between the masters
would be benefited. He thought that this measure would be
conferring a great boon on the operatives in the manufacturing
districts, and it would not at the same time materially re-
duce their wages. He: was for some time per-
plexed by the argument, that if they did not
reduce the wages there would be no ether
means of raising the same quantity of manufactured produce
as they did at present. He thought that with regard to the
women who v. ere now labouring twelve hours per day in
, those factories, the reduction of their hours of labour would
not be followed by so material a reduction in the , produce
as was anticipated. The labour and wages would be more
L equally distributed over the surface of the manufacturing
I population, who would thereby be materially benefited. On
there grounds he should give his support to the Bill.
Dr. BOWRING said that he acknowledged the philan-
thropy of the Noble Lord, but it would not be what was called
philanthropy to suppport that which would bring misfortune
upon the labouring community. The discussion was one
which should be entered upon free from all:prejudice, and
with minds inaccessible to all facts likely to prejudice the
judgment. He did not approve of the present measure, for
he felt convinced that it would not be of any practical
utility to the poor.—(Hear, hear.) He had heard
one of the principal manufacturers in the boroughs
he d the honour to represent offer to his workmen
to ha
engage them foz eleven hours a day, but he did not
attempt to disguise from them what the result of the altera-
tion would be. He told them that if they did not produce the
same amount of work as in the twelve hours he could
not be expected to pay them the same amountod
He (Dr. Bowring) understood that a large
influential, the most intelligent, and the loat wealthy of
theealthymmanou-
st
manu-
facturers bad been testing the consequences of the Bill should
it become the law of the land, and they all agreed on this
point, that it would occasion a general reduction in the
value of produce in the cotton manufactures. He
spoke not of the silk nor of the flax manufacture, but confined
his attention to cotton alone, and the return showed a di-
minution in the value of production to the extent of 121 per
cent. Now he might just inform Hon. Members that the
value of the cotton manufactured in this country exceeded
30,000,000/. ; the number of bales required fur working up
amounted to a million and a halt; representing in value
15,000,000/. sterling, and before it left the manufactory the
united cost of labour and ci'pital would increase the sum to
30,000,000/. sterling. The statement added, as the result of
a limitation of the hours of labour, that the annual loss
would be from 1
this 10,8 would fall. It ap-
peared
would inquire on whom,Boo,ool to 2,000,000/. sterling. Now he
and
three parties. The first was the. consumer, perhaps
distributed in this way at the
to him that it could only be borne one of
it might be more generally distr _
least amount of individual sacrifice; but the question was
them.
be charged
con-
tented with the extra price which would
of last year, taught
would the consumer pay. this loss—would they rest
They had already, by their measures
pTh • had
buy in the cheapest and sell in the dearest market. e 3
the people of the country that the only true princi le was to
decided that thee were entitled to the benefits of that
principle, and the people had a right to require that
they should give effect to it.—(Hear.) The consum
therefore would pay no portion of the 2,000,000/. sterling.
But then they might sav, 'The manufacturers are gorged
with enormous profits, the manufacturers must pay, and
they are affluent and successful men,
wrest, therefore,
from them a portion of their ill-gotten gains." But was
it the fact that the gains of the master manufac-
turers were so large as to enable them to continue
manufacturing, when they by their legislation ex-
acted from them an amount of 2,000,0004 sterling

liesulted. With regard to children between eight and
twee„; 1,1 .1,. ell tie- tit 1
be legally required to do, and the result was that those
children who laboured for six hours during the day
had their education attended to, while the means
of education, and the character of the education U-
se% had greatly increased. He must admit the many in-
stances of liberality, on the part of the owners of factories,
111 providing the means of education for the children ern-
Ployed. And it would be unfair, unjust, and untrue to at-
tribute any want of feeling to those who opposed the Bill,
on the green'Chet it would not promote that end. He (sil-
'G. Grey) thought that while the children between eight and
twelve years of age only worked for a certain time, while
those from thirteen to eighteen worked the full period of
adults, the transition from a state of partial inacti-
vity to a state of labour was injurious, and a practice
that ought to be remedied if it were possible.—(Hear.)
With reference to adult labour, he could not concur in:the
View taken by the Hon. Gentleman as to the mortality oc-
casioned in the manufacturing districts by the present hours
of labour. He adverted to documents already before the
public to prove his statements, but there were also statistics
to prove incontestably that in large towns, where there
Were no manufactories, there existed an equal amount
of mortality. He considered, however, that an advantage
would be derived from a decrease of the hours of labour, by
allowing some time at least to the labourers—not to say a
word about recreation—but for receiving mental and reli-
gious instruction, which was". virtually denied to them by the
Present system. With regard to women, he considered there
was a great disadvantage in their being brought away from
their homes; as, in his opinion, it was destructive of domestic
and social economy. With regard to health, he did not consider
that the Hon. Member was justified in stating that the hours
of employseent were so very pernicious as he stated before.
The mortality in large crowded towns, as compared
With extensive rural districts, did not present any
such difference. (The Right Honourable Gentleman
then read a number of documents to prove his statements,
and showing that in Maidstone, York, Northampton,
Wolverhampton, Coventry, and Nottingham, there was no
difference in the bills of mortality, as compared with Mac-
clesfield, Preston, and Chester and Liverpool. The increase
of mortality was solely owing to crowded lodgings and per-
sonal uncleanliness. Facts certainly existed which demanded
the serious attention of the Government, and called
upon, ;them for remedial measures. He had stated
that the opinions which he had expressed were
his own individual opinions. The Noble Lord, in his
answer to certain questions, stated what he thought to be
essential for the general agreement of a Govern-
ment, but he at the same time claimed for the
Members of his Government freedom of opinion as
to matters of detail. Now, the present question
Was one which was essentially a matter of detail. lie had
given his vote on former occasions for shortening the hours
of factory labour, and he would have no objection
to an eleven hours' Bill. 'He did not doubt that
a difference of opinion between the members of the
Government might exist upon the present question.
He maintained his opinion, which he had never
shrunk from avowing. He was not insensible to the
difficulties and the magnitude of the interests involved.
They should proceed with caution, and with great
deliberation, if they attempted to touch them. He should
vote for a second reading of the Bill, but he should
vote against the prospective clause, to limit' at the end of a
year the period of labour to ten hours. He was not prepared
to go further than what he stated, or to agree to any Bill
which would not be modified according to the manner he
proposed.
Mr. BANKES said he did not advocate the present Bill
for the purpose of giving any opposition to the Government.
He was rejoiced that acme members of the Government were
in favour cf a modification of the present system. Although
they were not prepared to go the whole extent which the
Hon. Member for Oldham required, he was authorised to
state that those who sought for a ten hours' Bill,
would not be coatented with an eleven hours' Bill, but if it
Was the pleasure of the Government to pass such a measure
it would be a matter of satisfaction to them, as it was a step
in a right direction ; and with reference to e success cf au
experiment it might not be unsatisfactory to have a trial
for a year or two of such a measure before the public. He
concurred in the regret expressed by the Right• Hon. Baronet,
that this matter had not been made a subject of private
regulation, but he could not say that he, for
one, was disappointed. But he had high authority
for saying that such a result had been expected by one of the
principal opponents of the measure. He did not then see the
Hon. Gentleman in his place, but he believed him to be in
an adjoining chamber; he alluded to the Member for Dur-
ham. (At this moment Mr. Bright entered the
House, and took his seat amid considerable laughter.)
On the 23d of May the Hon. Member for Durham stated in
his place that the proper mode of proceeding would be for the
operatives to seek a private arrangement with the em
ployers ; and he admitted that they ought to have by
some means or another an alteration in the present sys-
tem, which he said they would have had
had other means been taken to procure them. Now, would
the Hon. Member for Durham say that those means had
failed? Had there been even a proposal from the manufac-
turers to the operatives? The Lion. Member had been the
subject of many questions by reason of the high and prominent
position in which he had placed himself as candidate for one
of the great manufacturing cities of the empire. Amongst
other tions which were put to him, as lately as the
month of December last there was this—" Do you consider
that time should be allowed for education with regard to
young persons employed in manufactories? " In answer to
this question, the lion. Member said—" Well, I am quite
certain that men who work ten hours are more likely
to be educated than those who work twelve hours. I only
differ as to the means of effecting such an arrangement.
If it were the fact that no effort had been made for this pur-
pose what chance was there that that arrangement would be
made now. There had been time for making the experiment,
and since the Hon. Member said that it ought to have been
done, what chance he again asked remained that it would be
done at all? The Hon. Member for Durham was
now a candidate—undoubtedly he had every right
to be so—for the representation of one of the
largest and most commercial cities in the country, the
city of Manchester. He might not have been in the House
when a petition was presented, signed by 200,000 persons
residing there, and with the leave of the House he would
read the prayer of that petition. The petitioners said that
they deeply sympathised with the factory workers in that
large and important manufacturing city, many of whom were
of tender years, shut up in a close room for a period in each
day that was quite incompatible with their nature, and they
added that, owing to the long hours of labour, these young
Persons were debarred from all means of enjoying the bene-
fits of religious or secular education ; that, in consequence of
the long hours of which the petitioners complained, the fac-
tory operatives were in a worse position than any other
artizans, by which their physical frame was deteriorated,
and if no relaxation were afforded, they would be mere
representatives of the human body, without any of
the vigour which should accompany it. They prayed
therefore that the Legislature would pass a ten hours'
Bill without further delay. These sentiments emanated from
200,000 persons, whom the Hon. Member for Durham sought
to represent in Parliament. True, they had no votes, but
they were still the persons whose opinions and feelings he
would represent. If the Hon. Member would, therefore,
wish to please his future constituents, let him vote for this
Bill, and thus render himself a more worthy candidate for
their suffrages than he was at present.—(Hear, hear,
and laughter.) The Hon. Member said last year that
this was a fit and proper measure, which ought to be by some
means adopted. There might be persons in Manchester,
perhaps, mere powerful than the individuals whose names
were appended to this petition, but he would not for a
moment suppose that this consideration would influence his
conduct now. He had, however, to recollect that it was the
expressed opinion of the Hon. Member that this measure
ought to pass ; and, as it could not pass in the way of adjust-
ment and regulation between the employers and the operatives,
he (Mr. Bankes) called upon the Hon. Member now to fulfil
the pledge which he gave, and to carry out the measure by the
only means left open, namely, a legislative enactment.—
(Hear, hear.) There had been circulated a pamphlet, which,
although published two years before, had only been sent to
him that day. That pamphlet contained grave charges against
a most honourable person, and containing such charges, he
thought that it ought to have been circulated earlier, if at
all. It was entitled " A Report of the Central Committee
of the Association of Millowners engaged in the cotton trade."
Now, he (Mr. Bankes) would not allude to the personal
charges which that circular contained against this honour-
able person, but he would to one passage which he
happened to glance at, for he had had no time to examine
carefully the contents of the document. That passage stated,
" It is useless to discuss whether the present arrangement of
twelve hours for five days, and nine hours on Satur-
day, is precisely the best limitation for labour; it is
the limit which Parliament has long since established," &c.
Now, the House would permit him to ask why it was " use-
less to discuss?" Could there be a better occupation of their
time than to discuss whether that which was found a benefit
to the people to a certain extent should not be further ex-
tended, if any further additional benefit could be conferred?
Could they be better employed than extending a measure
which had been already found good still further ?
The quotation went on, " Usage and habit has accommodated
itself to this period." Why that was said of the slave-
trade, " usage and habit" had existed there for a long
time, but that was no reason why that habit and usage
should be permitted to continue.—(Hear, hear.) "On the
continued certainty of this limitation, the master manufac-
turer had based his calculation of profitable returns." Why
what right had the master manufacturer to base his calcu-
lations on this limitation ? Had not this been a constant
subject of inquiry, of proper inquiry year after year ? Had
it not been constantly agitated in that House, and most
justly agitated? Was there any reason why the
master manufacturers, when the former law was
passed, should speculate upon no further alteration
of the law in all time coming? The Honourable Mem-
ber for Montrose had been pleased to say that he had got
one besetting sin, and that was his universal advocacy of
all reductions in taxation and retrenchmentsb in expenditure.
But the Hon. Member had another sin, and that
was his determination to look with suchtiinngtensity on one
side of a luestion, that he omitted altogetheren. Member to look at the
other.—(Hear, hear.) Now, when e n
Montrose supported the former Bill of
; r
doubtless thought it the concentration of all human
he
wisdom—(Hear, hear. and laughter)—but he forgot that
these Acts limiting factory labour had been passed—passed
with complete triumph—Acts reducing the labour of these
under thirteen years of age from 74 hours a week to 36, and
persons above that age from 74 to 69. All these concessions
had been universally admitted, by every one but the Hon.
Member for Montrose, to be attended with the happiest suc-
cess, without any counterbalancing inconvenience to any of
the parties interested. But, said the Hon. Member for Mon-
trose, these persons are blind to their own interests; but if
they were ignorant it was the duty of the Hon.
member to educate and prepare them properly. At that
time, when an extended measure of education was being in-
troduced into the other House of Parliament, surely some
arrangement should be made by which the artizan in com-
mon with all classes in the country might be benefited. The
measure (as far as the factory workman was con-
cerned) was an insult to him, for they provided a large
fund for educational purposes, from the benefits of
which he would be altogether debarred. The Honour-
able Member for Durham bad admitted that the
man who worked ten hours bad more time for the purposes
or education than the man who worked twelve hours. Had
the man who worked twelve hours any time for education at
all? He was compelled to devote twelve hours to work, and
he required two heurs for meals—where then could the time
for education be found? The Hon. Member for Montrose
bad put a hypothetical case. " you cannot," said
he, " pass an equal law for the limitation of labour,
because the labourers are of different conditions in life.
One has a father and mother, and another is not
burdened with either." He ( Mr. Bankes) said, give
them all the advantage of the same law. lie could see
no distinction that could be safely made between the one
labourer and the other. The House would remember that
when this measure: was first brought before them they
were shocked at the recital of the cruelties perpetrated in
the factories; they had heard of the physical deformities
which resulted from the nature of the employment. He
(Mr. Bankes) had always heard and read those statements
with much pain, and with a belief that, while the manufac-
turers were not guilty of the cruelties imputed

to them, the offences themselves were greatly exaggerated ;
but reithee could be shut his pyPq to the c,141-mem-es which
would follow the wadi et esasatis... Ise essts ss, a SS.s.
to the physical, as well as the moral deterioration which
would result from this course; and if Government did not
apply the remedy, to whom were they to look for it ? He was
of opinion that this was the fitting opportunity for
the enactment of such a measure. If they passed the
Bill at this period it would entail no inconvenience
en the manufacturer. The Hon. Member for Durham
had been unable to carry into effect a measure
which he himself declared was fit and proper, and therefore
it behoved the Government to interpose and rectify the
grievance. He would give his cordial atsetit to the second
reading of the Bill.
Mr. MARK PHILIPS said that the lion. Member for
Durham had had a speech made at him as candidate for
Manchester, perhaps tue House would allow him as repre-
sentative for Manchester, in esse, to say a few words for him.
He trusted it would not be considered he did not sympathise
with the workmen in factories if he did not coincide in the
opinions of the Hon. Member who had last spoken, but he
(Mr. Philips), as the representative of a vast commercial
interest, could not let his feelings run away with his better
judgment. He thought that any interference between capital
and labour would tend to the most mischievous consequences,
for the House might depend upon it that one-tenth of the
manufacturing power of this country could not be repressed
without the workmen's wages suffering in the same proportion.
Why was the Government to stop short with reference to
agricultural labours? He believed the present was such a
departure from proper legislative interference, that he could
not but augur the most serious results from the adoption of
the measure.—(Hear, hear.) He did not like the proposed
"nibbling," piece by piece, of the measure, such as that
alluded to by the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State
fer the Home Department, to reduce the hours to eleven in-
stead of ten. If the experiment were to be made,
let it be made at once, upon a bold scale; he
would much rather at once give his support to the
ten hours' measure than to such a meddling system of legis-
lation proposed by those who had not the courage to go at
once to the completion of the full measure, but who stopped
at a sort of half-way house.—(Cheers.) He believed that
great ignorance existed on the part of Hon. Members with
reference to the subject of factory labour. It was not for
him to catechise Hon. Members on the subject; if he did so,
he might, in all probability, be told " that he had better
mind his own business, and give them credit for
the knowledge they possessed upon subjects which
even the most experienced manufacturers and inhabitants
of the district were unable to obtain." It was quite true that
the measures which had been passed for the purpose of re-
stricting labour in some factories had been attended with
some success ; but he begged most earnestly to protest against
the arguments urged by the Right Hon. Baronet the Secre-
tary of State for the Home Department, that because partial
success had attended the measures passed for the protection
of women and children, that therefore future legislation for
adults should be equally successful. SS ith those views, seeing
nothing but mischief attendant upon the passing of these
measures, and not at all underrating the comforts of the
working classes, or being one whit less desirous than the Hon.
Gentleman who had last addressed the. House to see educas
tion afforded to the people, still he was obliged to weigh
carefully both sides of the question, and he had come to the
conclusion that nothing but mischief would result from the
interference by the Legislature in the large manufacturing
districts of the country.
Lord JOHN MANNERS was quite surprised to hear the
Hon. Member for Montrose say that the present measure
was advocated upon party grounds. He did not think such
a charge ought to have been made. The slightest
reflection upon the history of the question would
suffice to show that such a charge was totally
unfounded. No one could look upon the past
history of the question without seeing that never was any
question of great national polity supported upon such dis-
interested and honourable grounds, and carried on in such a
manner as to be in every way worthy of the great cause
itself.—(Cheers.) The great cause had been going on for
years, though warrior after warrior had fallen in the
glorious struggle. Sir Hubert Peel first advocated
the question, died, and left the cause to the
care of Sir J. Hobhouse ; he carried it on for some time, until
it was taken up by Mr. Stlaler. That great advocate of the
cause died, and left the conduct of it to Mr. Oastler ; he, in
his turn, gave place to Lord Ashley, who carried on the war
to the very verge of victory, when circumstances oc-
curred which prevented his proceeding further with
the measure, and he resigned hia glorious charge to
the Honourable Member for Oldham (Mr. Fielden).
Still they found the same resolute, indomitable persever-
ance in the great cause. And now, in this year, 1817, they
found the great question again brought forward, and boldly
advocated by its indefatigable supporter, the Hon. aiember
tor Oldham (Mr. Fielden).—(Cheers.) Well did Lord Ashley
say in that House, and truly, "that it was possible, nay,
probable, that the efforts of her Majesty's Ministers would be
successful, and that they would carry their motion, but
for how long? If the Government would wish their
victory to be complete, they must extinguish those senti-
ments which had given rise to his." In that sentiment
was to be found the feeling which nurtured and fed the in-
domitable courage of the supporters of this measure.—
(Cheers.) And so long as men had eyes to weep, souls to
pray, hearts to feel, voices to raise, and hands to lift up, so
long would the struggle be continued, until the arduous
contest was consummated by the glory of a triumphant victory.
The Right lion. Baronet, the Secretary of State for the
Home Department,had used what he called am
old arguments,"
those arguments were year by year becoming weaker and
weaker, and he hoped those arguments, the fallacy of which
had been so long exploded, would be consigned at once " to
the tomb of all the Caputets."—(Cheers.) The present was
the most favourable time for the passing of this law, in con-
sequence of the depressed state of trade in the manufacturing
districts and the high prices of corn. The mills
were now working short time. When, howeveNthe current
set in the other way, if this measure were passed, then
stability and security would be the result, instead of a wild,
insane, and reckless re-action, which had before been the
bane of the prosperity of our manufacturing districts.—
(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord then went on to quote
from the circular of Messrs. Parkisson and Taylor, to
the effect that stocks were daily accumulating, and would
before long press heavily upon the market, even in the
face of increasing prices in the raw material. This
state of things would no doubt be followed by a serious de-
pression. What was the effect of these rapid alternations of
prosperity and depression in the condition of the workman?
—during one week he had nothing to do, and the next week
he was torn and racked by fatigue. In such a state, was it
possible for the working man to contract habits of sobriety
or forethought, or to perform his duty to his country
and the society in which he moved?—(Loud cheers.)
It had been said by the opponents of this measure, that so
much work could not be done in twelve hours as in ten ; even
it' it were so, the greatpractical result would be, that if this
Bill were passed it would spread a larger amount of labour
over the working classes, and thereby equalise the amount
to be performed. It had also been said that it was
wrong to interfere in manufacturing speculations. Nothing
could be a more decisive refutation of that argument than
the declared official value of the exports of the country, as
given in a work recently published by Mr. MCullock, from
which it appeared that in 1831 the total value of the cotton
exports amounted to 17,182,7361., in 1832 it amounted to
17,344,5761., but in the year 1842 the declared value
of the cotton exported was 21,770,127/. This
would
.at once dispose of the argument of the mischief of
legislative interference in manufacturing enterprise (for since
the year 1832 the hours of labour had been reduced for all
persons above 13 years of age from 74 to 69 hours, for all
persons under 13 they had been reduced from 74 to 36, and
in every case the best possible results had followed the adop-
tion of the measures. Looking then at the inevitable past,
and relying upon practical experience for the future, they
were justified in calling upon the opponents of this Bill to
make out a most irresistible case, to demonstrate by facts
and figures, which could admit of no dispute or cavil, that
the wages of the workmen would fall in consequence of the
passing of this measure, which was another of the arguments
used by the opponents of the measure.—(Cheers.)
But, even if this fall of wages were to take place,
it would be in some sort compensated by
giving to the workmen facilities for household economy,
and for the mental and moral improvement of the inmates
of
the cottage.—(Hear, hear.) The people working in the fac-
tories were told that, with the repeal of the corn-laws the
chief element of their expenses would be materially
reduced. (Hear, hear.) How those promises had
been fulfilled, the present prices would abundantly testify.
If the corn-laws were to reduce the food of the people at
least one-third, surely they were entitled to have their hours
of labour relaxed. He was willing to leave this matter to
be decided by the practical experience of the operatives
themselves, but yet it was a difficult question, and one on
which it would be difficult for them to deal
with their employers. Fortunately, Lancashire and York-
shire were not exclusively populated by manufacturers;
others lived in them who were competent to judge by their
knowledge of the condition of the operatives. There were
intelligent Dissenting ministers—there were the Dean of
Manchester, the Vicar of Leeds, the Rector of Brad-
ford, all of whom were competent arbitrators, to
whom he should feel satisfied to leave the decision of the
matter. Now, when they came forward and told them that
for the sake of their spiritual health it was necessary to pass
this Bill, and when the surgeons in the large towns said it
was necessary for the improvement of their physical
condition, and when they and the landed proprie-
tors were unanimously of this opinion, lie considered
it was incumbent on the House to comply with their wishes.
He had been entrusted with a letter on the subject from Mr.
Fletcher, the well-known surgeon of Bury, which set forth
the great mortality that to k place amongst those employed
in factories, compared with those engaged in other occupa
tions. It stated that out of every 100 deaths a fraction over
61 were children under two years of age; that the mor-
tality amongst those employed 10 hours in fac-
varies was 33% per cent., whilst it was but 20
in other occupations. From a report which was presented to
the House in 1834 he found that out of I,COO deaths in Man-
chester, 424 were children under two years of age ; that in
Liverpool the number of children under two years of age, out
of 1,000 deaths, was but 362 ; whilst in London, out of 1,000
deaths, only 308 were infants under that age.
(Hear, hear.) This showed the great want of sanatory
improvements, and that the mortality against these child-
ren would be less if they were taken more care of by their
parents. The subject had been submitted to them in every
possible way : they bad been shown how the homes of
factory workers were left comfortless, in consequence of the
protracted' hours' of labour—how the Saxon mother
refused to be comforted because her children could not par-
take of it—(Hear, hear)—but then when one died she
tkhjhle.evwtehn_ul
tte.riatiat had ceased to suffer from prolonged and severe
ea, and that it had gone to join the army of innocents in
e a ri:u
sufficient
) case I e wouldhad
notas k
beenthem
House
made
e
.out for passing
for the recreation and instruction in vain for them to
fptahr
ek s
people,and sift htehneseyudrnhai
of their advantages.P
not at the same time irnosvmtirideuirascotvuioiedene?—(Hear, hear.) It was
'They
rhethem with a tew hours to par-
takewas the means only that were objectionable,
wweaLatrheromnasatbelrescahaadncteheir
sv ere agreed
butto i
ft
bethoughendt
ytoifrie'dhuce
an
labourersarra ng arrangement
gUsing
possiblyco
thoehreet
alterahire h:vsouopidinisoigna, easphoecaiadll manufacturers touorrearswi
within
hLi
oantcha -e
limit he thought necessary, and a
million as the guarantee that theiyywouelwdnfo7fiiquarter of a
the condi-
tions.—(Hear.) But he should think the acute labourers dupes
if they consented to any arrangement unless thevliPrieds
ample security that it would be carried out. That -House
was not in the habit of waiting until rival steamers in the
Thames had agreed to regulate their speed in the pool, to
adopt measures to compel them to do so, supposing
such a step were necessary ; or until master-
builders agreed to improve the sanatory regula-
tions of the houses they build ; chimney-sweepers not
to use climbing-boy's; proprietors of collieries and betties to
prevent the harnessing o: naked women.—(Bear, hear.)
They did not stop until the proprietors of slaves in the West
Indies could make sonic arrangement with their slaves for
their emancipation; in these and a thousand other instances
they did not want for the parties to come forward, but
brought the "imperial majesty of the law," to whom all
were subject—the lowest as well as the greatest—
and which has for its object the vindicatisn of the tights of
those ordained by God." —(Hear.) It was all Nary well for
the Hon. Member for Montrose to say, in accordance with
the doctrines of that school Qf philosophy to which be belonged

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 10, 1841.

annually. It was not likely they would do so,
and therefore after all the loss would fall upon the opera-
proceeded to show by the evidence of Mr. Gregg
that the profits of the manufacturer, after deducting
the 5 per cent, interest on his money did not exceed 2%
per cent. If the consumer and the capitalist would
not pay, the burden must fall on the labour—
ing population, and thus, instead of granting a
boon, the House would, by passing this measure,
take away from them the means of education and the
ability to procure the comforts of existence. The workmen
were, in effect, to be told that one-sixth of their earnings
was to be witleirw.vn, and hewever willing they night
be to work for the extra hour, the manufacturers
would have no power to accede to their wishes
by this enactment of the Government. He (Dr. Bow -
ring) had during his whole lifetime been the advocate
of the working man ; he had ever sought to obtain for him
an influence in that House of which he was as yet de-
prived; his sympathies were all enlisted on his side, and
it was for that_ reason, it was because he thought the present
measure was calculated to lower his condition that he would
oppose the further progress of it.
Mr. P. HOWARD, in rising to support the measure said
that he would not detain the House with any lengthened
observations. He could perceive that they were desirous of
testing the question by a division, and he should
therefore, not trespass for any time on their attention.
The House had already seen that any arrange-
ment between the employers and the employed
was out of the question, and it was therefore necessary for the
Government and that House to legislate upon the
subject. He had hoped that the manufacturers
of England would have copied the example of the
agricultural party, who make a great sacrifice for the good of
their country—(Laughter)—end he might yet ask them to
make some little sacrifice, to offer some tribute on the altar
of their country. He would give his most cordial support
to the second reading of the Bill.
Mr. MUNTZ took the trouble to go to Manchester to sa-
tisfy himself of the position of the working classes
and the manufacturers, and the result of his in-
spection was, that all the changes which had been made
were entirely tbr the benefit of the manufacturers, and not for
the workmen.—(Cheers.) The alteration in the speed of
the machinery, and the number of spindles had been in-
creased threefold, and the quantity of work done
was of course double. Though the manual labour
employed was rather less. It was therefore self-evident
that a young girl attending to those spindles must
have an increased amount of duty to perform. The
question was, was this a sort of labour for such persons?
It was said the labour was not hard;' granted. He would
like to know how Hon. Members would like to be kept walk-
ing up and down a slippery floor for 13 hours, in an atmo'
sphere ranging from 65 to 80 degrees? Why it would be
bad enough to shut an Hon. Member up in a hothouse
heated to 80 degrees, even if he had nothing to do.—(Cheers.)
Why, the people of Birmingharenwould be ashamed to see
such persons as these factory-girls in their town.—(Cheers.)
Mr. BRIGHT—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. MUNTZ—Did the Hon. Member suppose that none
but a cotton-spinner could tell whether a girl looked healthy
or unhealthy?—(Laughter.) The Hon. Member himself got
up a petition in the year 1833 in favour of the Ten Hours' Bill,
and paid all the expenses of it himself. If the Hon. Member
had altered his opinions since that time, he ought to explain
the reason of his change to the House.—(Cheers.) The
manufacturers complained of being compelled to work only
ten hours a day; why, upon an average for the last ten
years, no mills had worked more than ten hours a day ; they
could not,therefore, lose anything by 1 he eassing of the present
measure. It had been said that if any difference was made
in the hours of labour a difference would also be made in the
rate of wages. Was that so? The Hon. Member for Dur-
ham (Mr. Bright) paid for wages to his card-loom hands, in
the year 1820, Bs. per week ; in 1830, Bs. ; in 1844, Bs. 6d. ;
in 1816, Os. Did this, then, bear out the assertions of those
manufacturers? It was only fair to ask the Hon. Member,
or some other Hon. Member, to explain to the House
how it was that such an amazing alteration had taken place
since the year 1815, when only 6,000 bales a week of cotton
were spun, and in the present year the quantity spun was
30,000 a week, being an increase of five times the quantity.
It seemed extraordinary that while there should' be
this increase the value of the goods produced should
have also been one-third less, contrary to the
opinions of those ' feelosophers " who maintain that
nothing but the application of the principles of
political economy should be allowed, and that all in-
terference should be deprecated, and yet that, in spite of the
interference of the Government, there had been an increase iei
npnaildyas—to the workmen.—(Cheers.) The
In the year 1815 ... .. 6,000 bales.
etloinesurainteptoiof
1846
The price of the raw material was—
nmo'atgcurestt
In 1815 ls. 7%d. per lb.
1846 ....... .. .
The selling price in
1815 3s. 3d. per lb.
1846 lod. per lb.
The number of revolutions per minute of the throstles of the
machines was in the year
500
1815
1846 .
The number of spindles to each mules was in
1815 lBO
1846 5OO
These were facts demanding the most serious attention of the
House.—(Cheers.) The rooms in which the operatives were
of the most unhealthy nature, no current of fresh
air was allowed, and it seemed to be necessary
that the unfortunate creatures of factory labour
should be kept in a state of continued perspiration, in order
the better to perform their work.—(Cheers.) Since he had
had a seat in that House, he had never given a vote against his
conscience, but he never gave a vote in that House with
more honesty of feeling than that which he should give
upon the present occasion in support of the present mea-
sure.—(Cheers.)
Mr. BRIGHT hoped, after the pointed allusions which
had been made to him by the Hon. Members for Dorsetshire
and Birmingham, and by several other Hon. Members, that
the House would allow him to state the grounds on which he
was compelled to differ from many Hon. Gentlemen on this
important question. In addition to the means of
judging, which many Honourable Members possessed
from political economy and - from other sources, he
possessed this additional ' knowledge. He had lived
all his lifetime amongst the population for whom
they were legislating ; he was very largelycomrcted
with this particular
trade, and had not a farthing in the
by no belief
op-
position to the Bill he was actuated
that it would injure his property or
prospects,
measure was
world beyond what was invested in it; but in his
because it was clear to him that if the
I_o,oo
really calculated to advance the interests of the co
0,000
spinning and other textile employments, that his interests
would favour of a
would be consulted. The agitation in factories i
persons more or less dependent for their support up.on: otton-
Ten Hours' Bill had been conducted on the political economy
of the Hon. Members for Birmingham and Oldham, and.?t
the late Michael Thomas Sadler, on those principles of poll-
tical economy which that House last session declared un-
sound and rotten, and which, if persevered in would
injure the great interests of the country and de-
stroy the manufacturing and commercial supremacy of the
kingdom.—(Hear, hear.) When it was first commenced it
professed to have only the labour of children in view, and
Lord Spencer brought in a Bill with that enew
but last session. The late Secretary ,of State for the
Home Department carried a Bill through the House,
which limited the labour of children under thirteen years
of age, to six hours a day • but not satisfied, those who pro-
fessed themselves the friends of the workers, now asked the
house to interfere to prevent young persons from 13 to 18,
and women of all ages, from working more than ten hours
a day ; but their object really was to interfere with
the
hours of work of persons of all ages, and of whatever sex.
engaged in labour in this country, in the belief that the pre-
sent rate of wages would be maintained—a higher rate than
their labour cow d command in the free markets of the country.t
Many. of the exaggerated statements which bad been I:rittie
n rward by Lord Ashley had not been urged c)
House on that occasion, but the Noble Lord, the M embermfor:
Newark ( Lord J. Manners), had read a letter
more worthy of belief than official documents !
fut'i;olm them
Fletcher, physician, in Bury,which however he did nef:lt.:csßidne3r,
persons appointed to make such investigations.
ds
was less
it appeared that, in 1831, the mortality
in
Ilf?stol for the
than in 1801, and less than the mortality in —rtiess than iii
same year. The mortality in Blanchester
Liverpool, and, in short, themortality in larg:e
Irilich there were
towns was not larger than in other towns ie
blished a book on
no manufactories. Dr. Phillipps, who had
Puthose engaged in
" scrofula," had stated that the health of
the rest of the
factories was not worse than the health of
ens. It was
population employed in large manufacturing tos d
was long an
stated that the labour of women in factorieswomen being so
severe, but lie considered the fact
of
the work was not
asanufaczuring
employed was conclusive evidence that
laborious.—(ob.) If Hon. Gentlemen doubted this, let them
was correct. If
make inquiries, and they would find that he
did not women
it was so severe as it was stated to be,
whdywith spades ?
forsake it, and work as stonemasons an
to it. They
was superior. They naturally -
turlhere they were
must turn to those employments —Oh, oh,) They did not, becaused
d which were light.
sheltered from the weather,
baad been equally con-
The experiments in France_ . injurious in factory-
elusive, that there was nothing
ourable Member then
labour for females. The Hon a
report of the
read a long extract
fr7:311111 appointed by the Con-
committee on the Ten Hours
12th of March, 1845, which
gross of Massachusetts on the.
e es did not injure the health of
factory work
went to show that manufadr fie
d i report further stated, that
those employed in them. And
in these countries for
labour far those IV°
°him not be misunderstood: lie
textile exceededae. Let lt'll
Twelve our a our i, he was
was not advocating a.e
ad-
d arguing against the state-
in the town of Lowell the hours appointed for manufacturing
only defending himself
behalf of the present Bill ; and let
merits put forward i
3 e is
t fronl the systemy •
now complained of.
of age were exem
nt to school after he Yoe fifteen
information might be obtained
He himself never Tee
Held himself F.
and beto be a proof
years of ag, t!""
every person TO earn at fourteen
the Hon. Member recoiled that ldren up to thirtesen 'a
to thir-
teen
system their forefathers
cated and immoral, he would tell them
used to put o i e employed ' f • *
that t los ~, in menu act
And to show . ones were
domestic servants, and
UUrmnder the old • up
a:Bd
most t the
divided the community
that Dr. Peirce had
tnhoatt
ssyo.omw earsiet kn
1,!:: clanef:e
artnuf
Worst of these were
grooms, such
: athe habit of e
lgentlemen in that
House were in
In Number
nineteen in that
class
persons. Now, when he (Mr.
twenty werefemales engaged in factory la-
number twen
la-
bour. There was not a magistrate in any manufacturing
and amongst the
town that could not bear witness to the sobriety and good
conduct of these operatives. The Hon. Blember said that
11.tistss
a petition from Manchester, signed
he presented
by twenty-two thousand
Bright) presentedpetition ' a in favour of the repeal
of the Corn-laves, the same Honourable Member
would not pay the slightest regard to it. He
was as much in favour of paying attention to the wishes
of the poor as any man, and 1 e would go farther than the
Hon. Member, for lie was prepared to give them votes,
by which they would be enabled to send men to that House
to represent their feelings and wishes. But it the short time
was enforced, they would be obliged to receive , less wages.
He could not conceive a guilt more dreadful than the prac-
tising of such a delusion on the working classes, a delusion
likely to bring upon them the most serious disappointment,
and greater evils than any other measure had ever inflicted
upon them. He had in his hand a publication called
"The Ten Hours's Advocate," dated December 5, and
that publication asserted that it had, from its first con-
nexion yi ith the question, advocated the fact that the effect
of the Ten Hours' Bill would be a diminution of wages
in the same proportion as the reduction of time, as any
circumstance that lessened the supply of article increased its
value in the market, and that there wet e numerous instances
where the hours had been teeluced and the rates of wages were
advanced. Mr. Oastler said, in speaking of Mr. 3
Ackro •(.1 in
Halifax, that if he were one of the ' operatives, and he
were asked to sign for the Ten Hours Bill at the
present rate of wages, he would not do so, as any re-
duction in the hours would be followed by an increase
inn order to show hew these persons endeavoured to persuade
the working clannsei that they would have the same wages.

PETITIONS ON PRIVATE BILLS.
(Room 22, before Mr. Examiner SMITH.)
OPPOSED LIST.
CALEDONIAN RAILWAY (CLYDESDALE BRANCH).
In this opposed case, it was found that the standing orders
had not been complied with in one or two unimportant
instances.
Liverpool, Manchester, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne Junction
Railway (Alteration of Main Line and Hawes Branch, with
power to purchase, rent, or use the Northern Counties Union
' Railway, and amendment of Acts).
In this case the opposition was withdrawn, and the cus-
tomary formal proofs having been put in, the standing orders
were declared to be complied with.
.Caledonian Railway, Extension of the Motherwell Branch
of the Clydesdale Junction Railway to Aberchenheath Mi-
neral Fields.
In this case also the standing orders were found to have
been complied with, except in one or two unimportant in-
stances.

CALEDONIAN RAILWAY (BRANCHES TO
CANOBIE, &c.)
This case was then gone into. One allegation was sus-
tained, impugning the accuracy of the levels, and the case
was adjourned.
(Room 23, before Mr. Examiner MAT.)
OP?OSED CASE.
London and North. Western, Wolverhampton and Porto-
bello Branch, and Birmingham and Wolverhampton, and
Stour Valley Station, arrangement and purchase of branch
from hEoxlmililn,
earn
i‘diaa3m, amendment of
occupied v
o Acts.lith this opposed case.
It was memorialised against by several parties. In the course
of the day several allegations were sustained, but none of
them appeared to be of a fatal character.
The case was adjourned.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.
Cur.— to 1 agst Mendicant (taken)-25 to 1
BETTING AT MANCHESTER.—TUESDAY.
Lamb-27 to 1 agst Bedlam-30 to 1 agst Camera
The Flitch-33 to 1 agst Punch-35
Obscura-30 to 1 agst
...
to 1 agst Antler (taken)-40 to 1 agst The Duke of Rich-
mond-45 to 1 agst Bourton-45 to 1 agst Crim. Con.-50 to
1 agst Mickey Free-50 to 1 agst Fitzallen-50 to 1 agst
Sting-50 to j. agst Inheritress-400 to 18 agst Sir Tatton
Sykes and Bourton (taken)
METROPOLITAN STAKES.-15 to 1 (Inca on the field.
DERBY.-15 to 2 agst Van Tromp (taken)-1•? to 1 agst
Epirote (cff,l)
_a g C3s t3HTEt
018 i TeIEL ta
12 to 1 agst Planet (offd.)-16 to 1 agst
agmCst Sister to Cobweb colt-35 to 1 agst Wanota—
Glentilt-25 to 1 apt Conyngham-33 to 1 agst Al!ertonian
40 to 1 agst Red Hart-40 to 1 agst Christopher-40 to 1
agst Projectile-1,200 to 200 agst Epirote and Planet (taken)
—6 to 1 agst Jahn Day's lot (otld.)
THE OAKS.-8 to 1 agst 4 lementina (offd.)-10 to 1 agst
Slander k ofid.)-10 to 1 agst Farmer's Daughter-12 to I
agst Ellerdale.

PRIVY COUNCIL.-(THIS DAY.)
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council sat again
to-day to hear appeals. The Lords present were Lord
Brougham, Lord Campbell, the Master of the Rolls (Lord
Langdale), and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Cornwall
( the Right lion. Thomas Pemberton Leigh).
TILL HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY or GRENADA v. CHIEF JUSTICE

The Ten Hours'Advocate said that when children were made end cross-examined at some, length, with the object of , the defendant was the Mr. Cc.
to work only six_ hours, .their wafles had been
increased. ; showing that the adreilisements v-Pre ordered on behlilf 'of Ito the resolution in the mpir•
tJUCII Wsc• 1101 tl,O C• 1,:, 'Ol. 1171 ,1% er.Y.•ll,l''. - • ' !7 • 1;1 i :,,,. i:, S cererniftee,rie I! ~ , e. cr tbi. , e,_,.. Oe iLe 1..:0111, i•, l't, t-I
•were reduced in exactly the same pi °pore, a,, tee • visional directors- The evidence, I.ee evel, mild nut shuts was railed whether the evil
time was reduced; and a child twelve years and eleven that any particular distinction was kept up between the two jury, to fix the defendant of
months old, and working only six hours, received only half bodies. The only material point elicited was, that the five present at the meeting.
or the wages that a child 13 years and one month old re- original projectors, in consideration of having a certain num- On counsel being heard a
ceived. With regard to the case of foreign competition, he her of shares allotted, or a certain amount of money paid The LORD CHIEF June
believed that it was not properly understood by the Hon. them out of the deposits, would bear the directors harmless at some length, decided tin
Member for Oldham. He had in his hand a statement-of the in the expenses. The shares had never been allotted, and for the purpose.
raw material consumed in. the manufacture of this country. the arrangement was not carried out. • Mr. Sergeant CHANNEL.
In the cotton trade alono 600 millions of pounds of cotton No, &spite being raised respecting the fact of the adver- 'consented to be non-suited.
were used, ard in She wool and worsted there were not, tisements having been inserted in the newspapers by Mr. The plaintiffs were non-suited accordingly.
less than .260 millions of pounds used. In the flax trade! Barker, GILES V. BLAXTON.
there were 177 millione of pounds imported, and in the! . Mr. Sergeant Ernes submitted that no evideece had leen . This Action was brought by toe same plaintiffs against
silk 600,000 pounds, making in all 1,000,175,000 potinds. I adduced to fix the liability on the defendant. No proof was another provisional director of the same company.
given that any credit had been given to the provisional di- The circumstances of the case being similar to the pre-
If that were divided by six, it would give a diminution in!,
the consumption ,of the raw material of 176,000,000 of , rectors. If any credit was given it was either to the secre- ceding one the record was withdrawie
pounds, and how was it possible to dis•pense with one•sixth : tary or the committee of management. It did not appear
of this deScription of munufactiire. The 'difference in the that the secretary, who gave the orders, had ever been ap- QUEEN'S BENCH.—(THIS DAY.)
revenue would alone amount to 7,000,000/. annually. ' pointed by the provisional directors; for the meeting at
That was a question worthy of the consideration of the which that gentleman and the solicitor were appointed was (Before Mr. WIGHTMAN and a Special Jury.)
Chancellor of the Exchequer, as it would-make a reduction of. only a meeting of certain gentlemen favourable to a parti-
KNILL v. LOVEGROVE.
7,000,000/. per annum in the expenditure. He had attended cular line of railway. Any appointment of officers or orders
Counsel, Sergeant Shee and Mr. Lush for the plaintiff ;
many meetings at Manchester, and was aware that not one emanating from such a meeting, therefore, could not bind, andhllfr. Knowles, Q. C., and Mr. Miller for the defendant.
single individual of the working classes would accept of this the provisional directors who might be afterwards published
firsts r
,thne Gloucester
breachau sosefgs
goodnstivtairdaewtnii
an action brought by the plaintiff, a bankrupt in
allegedfa thh i,si
againstast tnoereneesyst a
rb the defendant
yTdheee
Bill if he did not believe that no reduction would take place in connection with the company.
fveinncldganece
in
in the rate of wages, Many of the work -people he employed Mr. KEAN followed on the same side.
had petitioned that House in favour of the Bill, and- Mr. Comm:mai contended for the liability of the defendant
he was glad that they had done so, as it showed that on the grounds set forth in the evidence. This case was dif- before the Bankr
upt Court of an act of bankruptcy executed
b li •
provisional directors, foss the were independent, and could act for themselves.. ferent from the ordinary cases of . . y nill ; second, the use of fraudulent pretensions that all
' b the creditors were re d
That was the case in many of the largest and best establish- much as no distinction had been shown in practice here e- y and willing to accept a composition
of 4s. in the ound 'a
ments in their trade • but he warned the House, that if they tween provisional directors and the committee of manage- in consequence of which Knill executed
a • deed ofP wort
encouraged the working classes to come to that House for went. In fact they acted as one concern. Again it had whereby 200/. was recovered,
a sum representegdage'a
legislative enactments to limit their hours of labour, and to been clearly shown, that the defendant had given his consent sufficient for that purpose;
fix their scale of salary, that every manufacturer would be to be a provisional committee-man ; that his name had been but it afterwards turneds out that only of the
five
creditors agreed to accept the
obliged to unite in self-defence—(Loud cries of "Divide, inserted in the prospectus by his instructions; that a cor- ceomposition, and only two
of these received payment to th
divide")—sod that, he was sure, would do away rection of his name was made in his own presence;asired in
costa,
of 17/. the rest of
the 200/. being swallowed up
with the good feeling which at present existed and that as . provisional director, he had the defendant's own
he bad
tetween the manufacturers and their workmen.—(Renewed to have 150 shares allotted. Besides bill of costs amounting to 108/ , and the' 1 plintiff, now bereft
of his money, was in no better. condition
cries of " Divide divide.") He would not detain the House, given on several other instances proofs that he took
was issued; thirds the want of due vigilance an when the "
but he understood that it was intended to bring forward in a lively interest in the company's proceedings. He sub- otn the part of
the defendant in endeavouring to bring the re
Committee a clause to limit the hours of working to eleven witted, also, that the meeting on the Bth of October was rest of the credi-
tors to an agreement to accept the
and not ten hours. Now he thought that the House would clearly a meeting of provisional directors, for though they composition of 4s. in
the pound.
at once concede that the workmen were right or they were might meet in the first instance as gentlemen in favour of a
The evidence, which occupied the Court the whole of the
wrong in this demand—if they were right it was a cowardly particular scheme, they resolved themselves before breaking
day, was multifarious and every uninteresting. It failed to
shrinking from their principles for Hon. Members to up into a provisional committee, and made the appointments
prove the first allegation of a breach of good faith, and there-
depart from their principles, if wrong, they had only to op- as such. The acts of the officers, therefore, were to be taken
fore that part of the case was abandoned by the plaintiff's
pose the Bill altogether. He could not consent to the second as proceeding from the instructions of the provisional corn-
counsel.
reading of this measure. mittee ; and as advertising was absolutely necessary for for-
Witnesses were called on both sides, who showed
Sir ANDREW LEITH HAY moved the adjournment of warding the scheme, that was clearly a liability incurred at
the debate. their instance. that the plaintiff, aware that some of his creditors would
. not accede to the composition of 45., agreed to pay a com-
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that he rose only to say a few Mr. James and Mr. Parry followed on the same side. . .
of 10of them, andpressed the d f
position s, to two
words to the House, in consequence of the attack which had Mr. Sergeant BYLES replied, recapitulating the objections
dant toget the fiatsupersededandsaid, with
;
been made upon him a few minutes before six o'clock. he had previously advanced. regard to his creditors he would take his chance.
If the Hon. Member for Durham (Mr. Bright) had intended The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said, a great deal of what had
If the plaintiff was deceived by the representations
to have made this attack, he (Lord J. Russell) thought been advanced on this occasion was inapplicable to the pre-
of his attorney into the hope that the sum re-
it should have been made at five o'clock—(Continued cheer- sent case. There were certain points on such questions as
ing)—and he really thought that the Honourable Mem- these, settled as law, till reversed by the House of Lords— covered under the mortgage-deed would be sufficient
ber, in his anxiety to :make the best ;defence on behalf an event which lie apprehended would never take place. If to obtain a settlement from his creditors, this
of the cotton manufacturers, had departed from that be differed ever so widely from what had been already de- was not an issue in the trial. The fiat was ultimately super-
candour and courtesy to which Honourable Members cided, in his individual capacity, he would in law and pro- ceded, and about 15/. were paid to the creditor therest of
.
themoney being swallowed in s'
who might differ in opinion from him were fully entitled. priety be bound to give effect to it; but lie saw no ground, ..l up costs, but the plaintiff
The Hon. Member said that this was a question of whatever for difference. Much had been said about the hard- found himself no better situated with regard to his creditoil
principle, he (Lord John Russell) did not view it as ship of the plaintiff having no responsible party to proceed than when the fiat issued.
such. He conceived that the difference between against, if these provisional directors were not liable. But in The •after consulting about '
jury
for the defendant.
ten, eleven, and twelve . hours was a question of a great number of those cases, he must remark, the actions
degree, and not a question of principle. This was no new were not in reality brought on behalf of the plaintiffs, The Court rose at six o'clock.
principle, as the Hon. Member had been pleased to allege. but only to enable the projectors of companies
The limitation of the hours of labour had been introduced to save themselves from liabilities incurred, and to saddle
before into that House, and it would be found thattit was them on other parties. He did not, however, say that this
carried out in the statutes of the realm.—(Hear, hear, was the case with the present plaintiff, who was a trades-
and cheers.) Neither was it a change in the old law, man, and had, no doubt performed the services for which he
for the old law protected apprentices against their mas- sought to recover. It was settled as law that an individual
ters: it was, therefore, no question of privilege; it consenting to be put on the list of provisional directors did
was merely a question whether the Legislature should not, therefore, pledge his credit for any debts that might be
throw the shield of protection round the younger workers. contracted in forwarding the objects of the company: It
That was a mere question of the day, on which the mem- had also been settled that the taking of shares as a provisional
hers of the Government might differ without at all director did not establish a liability. Now the present
differing on any principle. It' the Honourable Member action was brought by an advertising agent, and it would
differed from that principle : if he thought the Legislature be necessary to refer to the evidence which bad been
were wrong in the course they had adopted, he should have adduced in support of the liability, in order to discover it
proposed the repeal of the laws on the subject. He knew there was no exception to the rule. The evidence had
not that it was necessary now for him to enter into this shown that the defendant assented to be placed on the pro-
question. He had stated what he thought was • visional directory, and that he had also consented to take
the general principle, and if this debate came to be 150 shares, though it appeared shares had never been issued.
adjourned be would not detain the House by any length- It had next been shown that he bad expressed himself as
cued observations. But if the House were pleased willing to have his name advertised as a provisional director.
to listen he would not address himself more than Now, these in his (the Lord Chief Justice's) opinion, did not
a few minutes to the question. He considered ,ral.o the case out of the decision which the superior Court.
then, as he had already etated, that it was not a question bee come to, theietbre did not establish the legal liability et
of principle, but of degree; and that young persons of 13 the defendant. In reviewing the oilier parts of the case, he
years of age, working twelve, thirteen, orteurteen hours a day, did not think there were any circumstances to alter
were taxed too much, because their bodily frame was not this view of the matter. The meeting of the Bth of
sufficiently matured. He considered it was too much to give October seemed to hint but a meeting of certain gentlemen
time for their moral or mental improvement, and he conceived desirous of forwarding a particular railway scheme, and they
that it was so far a question of degree, inasmuch as a shorter appointed the provisional directors, but at this time they
period of labour would be more fitted for them. The were not directors. Neither did he think the circumstance
Honourable Member for Durham had expresied a of the defendant promising subsequently to settle the matter.
fear of foreign competition. That was another of such a character as to give any other complexion to the
question, and with regard to it he would only say case. The evidence of that was not very clear, and was given
that the same objection had been urged in every by Mr. Garbett, who, it should be observed, bad been iriti-
previous arrangement that had been made from 1831 mately connected with getting up the scheme.
to the present time, and he was happy to say that the The Learned Judge
having gone over the evidence
in de.
manufactures.
of the country were still flourishing, tail, gave it as his decision that there was not sufficient evi-
wl le the factory operatives had been greatly benefited. deuce to go to the jury, and that the plaintiffs should be ron-
Thei limitation of labour had given them three or four months suited, or else a verdict to go for the defendant, in order to
in the year for the purposes of improvement. He would not admit of a bill
.of exceptions.
have troubled the House so long but for the attack of the Under the direction of his Lordship, a verdict was returned
Hon. Member for Durham.—(Cheers.) for the defendant.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the Mr. COCKBURN, on behalf of the plaintiffs, then tendered a
House Adjourned at Six o'clock. bill of exceptions to the ruling of his Lordship.

Circulars have been issued calling a private meet-
ing of the Irish Members on the subject of Lord Georg*
Bentinck's measure on the railway grant for Ireland.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Feb. 9.
PAROCHIAL FUNDS.
Lord BROUGHAM quite concurred in the opinion
xpressed by the Noble Marquis upon the talents and
abilities of the writer of that letter, his respected and
reverend friend, Rev. W. Herbert.
Lord COTTENHAM would not enter into the ques-
tion whether the duties enjoined by the charter were
performed or not, because there was no information on
that subject. The statements niade with regard to ti is
had been very contradictory. The charter said that
peculiar duties were to be discharged ; but if these du-
ties were performed, there did not appear to be constant
e..sidence enjoined. If they omitted to do their duty,
:here was in this respect, he apprehended no distineti. n
between them and the other large corporations of this
country. In Henry the Eighth's time, when monaste-
ries and religious houses were dissolved, the rectories
which formed a part of them fell to the ground, and b. -
came the property of private individuals. Others of
them remained ecclesiastical corporations, and were in
appropriate rectories to the present time. In the neigh-
bourhood where he lived there were four contiguous
parishes, the duties of which were discharged by a Dean
and Chapter. The revenues of each of these parishes
amounted to n) less than 8001. a year, while the salary
of the clergyman, who did the spiritual duty, was only
401. He was not able to say what was the amount of
the revenues of the other parishes ; but they were, no
doubt, in the same proportion. The law gave the Dean
and Chapter that discretion, for it presumed they would
be so disposed to superintend the spiritual instruction
of the people as to render any cognizance of the law un-
necessary. They had the law on their side, and from
the best judgment he could form on the matter they
were as well' entitled to the tithes and rectorial revenues
as their Lordships were to their estates.
Lord CAMPBELL wished to make a single observa-
tion. There was a difference between what was called
appropriate tithes which were held, as lawyers called it,
in lay fee, and ecclesiastical property to which duties
were annexed. He differed with his Noble Friend with
regard to the point of residence. These duties as: en-
joined by the old charters made residence necessary,
and there was a penalty annexed if the duty so enjoined
was not observed. Now, that penalty supposed a duty
to be performed, the non-observance of which was
visited with the penalty. Now, it appeared to him from
the lucid statement of the Noble Lord who Introduced
the subject, that a duty was imposed and that it should
be performed. No blame, however, should be attached
he believed to the parties involved in the petition, to
whom the cause of religion and education was so muds
indebted.
Lord COTTENHAM disclaimed expressing any
opinion as to whether the duties were performed or not.
He expressly avoided making any reference to that.
His observations were confined to the property in a
legal point of view.
Lord STANLEY would not presume to deal with the
legal question, but he could not help urging upon their
Lordships that 3 and 4 Will. IV., c. 113, rated pro-
perty, like that in question, as rectorial property.. What
he wished to urge upon their Lordships was, whether
the requirements of the charter were satisfied, and
whether they acted the part of good citizens, by the
way in which they performed their duties. It was for
their Lordships and the country to consider whether
this was a state of the law which ought to be considered
incapable of a remedy. Were the inhabitants of Man-
chester, and other populous places, who had levied
upon them 5,0001. or 6,0001. a year for the purposes of
spiritual instruction, to be deprived of that spiritual
instruction, and to see the funds placed in the hands
of persons who did not recognise any corresponding
claim upon them, but to expend them as they thought
proper, and where they thought proper, without fulfilling
the duties for which the funds were raised, and to see
them liable, in addition, to have them taken up by the
ecclesiastical commissioners, and diverted from recto' ial
to chapter purposes. They were anxious to see the
matter properly arranged before the final establishment
of the see. They said the funds were rectorial funds,
and that they were improperly applied. He was sur-
rised that they should avail themselves of a technicality
a the charter to evade the proper performance of their
uties.

BAIL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before the Judges in Banco.)
SHANKS V. SWEETLAND.
Mr. BUTT, Q.C., who appeared for the plaintiff, said that
this was a motion for a new trial instituted by Admira
Shanks, for the recovery of a right of way over a piece of
land adjoining a tenement and some mills, occupied by a
person of the name of Reed, who was himself a tenant of
111 r. Sweetland. It appeared that the piece of land had been
for a considerable time in a state ,of waste, and un-
occupied for any useful purpose. On the farther side
of it there was a small stream of water which was used
by Reed as a convenience, and it was necessary to pass
across this land of Admiral Shanks' to get to it. The con-
stant exereise of this custom for a length of time had
induced Sweetland and Reed to believe that the easement
was vested in the proprietor pro tempore of the tenement, and
that with the easement the real:property came also.
Mr. Sergeant KINGLALE, on behalf of the defendant, said
that if there had been no grant of the right of easement,
there had been an open use of the right of way
for time that was legally immemorial. During the
trial in the court below both the tenant Reed, and also an
old man long resident in the neighbourhood, named Wollen,
had declared that, so long as they had known the premises,
this right of way had been enjoyed without interruption.
The cause had been put to the jury, under the direction of
the Learned Judge who tried the cause, for them to return
a verdict, on the ground that if Reed went over the land be-
lieving that he had the right, if not to the possession
of the land, at least to the easement of passing over it. That,
be (Mr. Sergeant Kinglake) submitted, was an erroneous di-
rection, for the principle on which the jury ought to have been
directed to return their verdict was upon the point as to whe-
ther there was an open possession or not. He contended that
there had been this open possession, and that the • plaintiff
ought, therefore, to be nonsuited.
Mr. MosTaGuit Saran tolloWed on the same side, and
contended, that the mere belief of any man could not be
taken, for unless there were facts to confirm the existence
of that belief, and that an uncommunicated belief was
an improper ground on which to found a decision, and that a
cause, which rested on such evidence, ought to be stopped,
in limine. Both Reed and Wollen had shown that there
had been an occupation for above forty years. There was
the actual occupation of the 'right of way, and the whole
difficu!ty of the case arose out of the testimony of Reed, who
had testified that the tenant was in occupation of the land.
That was clearly going too far, and as it the case with the
testimony of willing witnesses in numerous instances, was both
wrong and mischievous. But this in no way shook the real
merits of the case, for it had been decided by the Court in
the case of Bright v. Walker, that the right of easement
should, in the words of the Act be claimed as such, and not
as a right to the land. They also stated in their judgment,
that this right must be used openly, not by stealth, but hi
the face of tie whole world. But the jury in this case had
given their verdict even upon the weakest ground; and he,
therefore, submitted that it ought not to be reversed,
sitnply, because one witness had made an injudicious
statement, and be did not hesitate to assert that
if it were reversed the Court would be destroying an Int-
meme number of rights in this couutry, for witnesses could
always be found to come up and make an overstatement.
Mr. BUTT, for the plaintiff, contended that there had been
no sufficient evidence given to prove the right, for there was
other land beside that which had been adduced.
Mr. JuStice Cot.xenDGE said that if there had been no evi-
dence to go to the jury, he wondered that the counsel on
the trial did not turn round and tell the jury so at the
time.
Mr. BUTT resumed, and went through the evidence, en-
deavouring to show that it was either insufficient or con-
ffiellifg;•and thus either way constituted a sufficient cause for
making the rule absolute for setting aside the verdict.
An argument was raised as to what was the land. over
which this right of land was claimed; when it was estab-
lished that the piece of ground over which this right had
been exercised, although unquestionably the property of
Admiral Shanks, was separated from his other-property by a
wall, and lay on the aide of the ground which was occupied
by Reed. 44

Lord BROUGHAM said that he had seen in the blue
book two letters, which complained that Captain Wyt.ne,
one of the superintendents of the relief rate, had im-
posed upon its funds two persons who were in the elNir
receipt of 601. a-year each, as well as several other per-
sons who were in easy circumstances. He had -he.ird
from private sources, from persons who were interested
neither one way or the other in the matter, and who
only know. Captain Wynne in his public capacity, the
highest testimonies to his private character. That
might be all very true ; but they had only to deal with
that Gallant Officer as a public man, and it was neces-
sary that the country should have some certain know-
ledge of the way in which this money was applied.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE perfectly agreed in
the supposition that there ought to be every care for
the proper application of the money under the Labour-
rate Act, but this much he could say that no set of men
could have discharged their duties better than the
superintendents under the Labour rate Act, and
he could - affirm, from the information trans-
mitted to her Majesty's Government, that Cap-
tain Wynne had discharged his duties with
great diligence, fidelity, and di:cretion. That of-
ficer had evinced the greatest courage in the discharge of
his duties, and far from being instrumental in imposing
persons on the rate who were not entitled to it, be had
absolutely removed more than eleven hundred persons
from the rate whom be thought ineligib)e for the relief.
Lord MONTEAGLE could bear ample testimony t?
the ability and zeal with which the supaintendants
ned
discharged their difficult, arduous, and trying
.deutwiek.-.1,
could, from his own knowledge speak as to h
in
carry out the wishes of their supeerai
which a great number of gentlemet.iaraha.dandifatvtobuorjedbatdo
thheeitrhajtudegampte9nit
theyin any w
were
ee
notinstance bea_en.
ci.mistalkt
migihnt
had been guilty of wilful negli-
gence, so, Set,
„ imposingulesspersons on the rate, without ascer-
Wynne had been misbhtlaoknewn in his views, but even if that
if-rombisiersorial knowledge whether they ere
to the relief, he ought to be exonerated
from all blame.
entitledgtaet nn ci
Lord BROUGHAM thought the evidence ought to
neg, o r no.
be produc"d upon which the report was made. Probably
Captain Wynne was right after all.
The subject then dropped,
The Earl of EGLINTON presented a petition from
the distillers of Syecatohitlneatßnoditt
iasngocawoinmsbtte r
yf tohr
atee r epaadlruel
icsast imodenantoyt
than
ht,
nme
cdutyoul
do
bn rum.intr
odußc
Scotch spirits.
The Earl of CLARENDON said the petitioners had
waited upon him, and his Right Hon. Friend the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, and he must confess that they
did not make out any case why they should have addi-
tional protection.
Lord MONTEAGLE said be had a petition from Ire-
land of precisely -the same effect as the one which had
just been presented. The case of Ireland, howeier, was
harder than that of Scotland, for Ireland had no draw-
back, where Scotland had.
After a few words from Lord STANLEY mil Earl
GREY, the subject dropped.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

The Learned Judges consulted together, and then
L.brd Chief Justice DENMAN said that they conceived that
this trial had not been quite satisfactory, on the ground of
insufficient evidence of Reed's occupation, and they therefore
decreed that the rule for a new trial should be made absolute,
the costs to abide the issue.

EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings at Nisi Prius, before the LORD CHIEF BARON and
a Common Jury.)
CARMAN v. JOHNSON.

Mr. Martin appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Willes for
the defendant.

This was an action for the recovery of the balance of a loan
made by the Metropolitan Loan Society, for which defendant
became security.
A verdict was taken for the plaintiff for 511.35. 4d., with
leave to the defeudant to move to enter a nonsuit.

JAMES V. MAN/i.

Mr. Martin and Mr. Howorth appeared for the plaintiff,
and Mr. Humphrey and Mr. Prentice for the defendant.
This was an action to recover compensation in damages
for an injury sustained by plaintiff's cab from a collision With
defendant's cart on the 7th July last, in Piccadilly, in conse-
quence of alleged negligence on the part of defendant's
servant.
A number of witnesses having been examined on both
sides, a verdict was given for the plaintiff for 121. 10s.—
costs, 40s.

COMMON PLEAS.—(THIS DAY.)
GILES AND ANOTHER I'. COMFORT..--TI" TIINIIRIDGE WELLS
AND RYE HARBOUR RAILWAY.
This was an action brought by Messrs. Francis Giles and
Alfred Giles, engineers, to recover 1,5601. for work and
labour done in surveying the line, and preparing the plans
and sections of the Tunbridge Wells and Rye Harbour
Railway Company. This was the first
doefld3anats pleaded
sbeyd
the same plaintiffs in this Court. The fen
the general issue.
Mr. Sergeant (Mennen and Mr. Pigot appeared for the
_
plaintiffs; and Mr. Cockburn for the defendant, who is a
merchant in the city of London.
opened the ease,
Mr. Sergeant CHANNELL having
pro-
ceeded to call his witnesses.

From the evidence adduced it appeared that the scheme
was projected hi the latter end of 1845, and that
in pursuance of a resolution of a meeting of the
provisional directors, held on the 26th of October, the plain- HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 9.
tiffs were appointed the engineers, and instructed to pro- NAVIGATION LAWS.
ceal with the work. The defendant hadprevious this
consented to be a provisional director f he to
of 1 Mr. liICARDO, in continuation, proceeded 410 say•-•
Mr. `homes, in his evidence, further statai that many
which the present one emanated, age sohaaresschadmbeeeonn‘ al- 1
lotted to him. It was further alleged that he bad been
sacrifices were made by the home merchant wad mana•
present at the meeting of the `A-' th of October, and torturer for the purpose of encouraging nitwit sme coin•
moved a resolution. The fact of consenting. to ' mer ; and he considered that some sacrifice should be
become a provisional director and to taking shares was clearly I made for the general security of the country • ; but the
preyed, but the seeretury of the company coald.uot say that 1 question had never been put in such a, light et: ~.„ riwi•

Dc
ars. mfort wbst narvatattached
I 1' Po
.s th
[CE, e!
,at th eff yam Jie
-
- 1
on b o f • en
t