The Sun.
London, England, 1847-05-19 00:00:00

_ -
inissioners, was that of aisconr3ging the subordinate officers. 1
This statement was made by Mr. Cl.ado.ick, woo said t;+l h,
suggestions had not bee. attended to by Mr. Lewis. But it
was found, on the cross examination of Mr. Chadwick. that u.
suggestions had been offered at all, that he had only hinted a.
certain improvements, whic.i it was a v.'ry happy thing t,
Mr. Lewis did riot attend to. With respect to this prese•
Bill, he quite agreed with its provision. ; the only objection te
it was, that it jsined in one board the ex,eutive a‘ting with 'h.
legislative authority. This was a great difficulty, but it could
not be avoided. Tlie proposal of the Honourahlf,
Blember, that all the orders which it would b.
deemed expedient to make, should be collected into
one statute, and enacted, would lead to endless confusion, as
the law which would be adopted for the northern portion of
England would by no means suit the southern. Besides, how
would they deal with the case where it would be necessary, at
a moment's notice, to modify the law, instances of which
would be constantly recurring; in such a case they would give
a power of reversion to an Act of Parliament; which would be
a_far more objectionable power tV.an that granted by the Bill.
The alteration by which Commissioners had seats in that
House, was also a great improTement. He would conclude by
stating hi• resolution to support the measure.
Mr. HENLEY moved the adjournment of the debate.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL objected to an adjournment, and
hoped the Hon. Members meant seriously to discuss the
measure.
Mr. FERRAND said that it was because his Ho-n. Friend
meant seriously to discuss the question that he moved the ad-
journment, and he did trust that the Noble Lord would show
a respect to the feelings of the House and the country in ge-
neral, and not press the further discussion of the question.
There were Sy, or six gentlemen whore he knew were anxious
to address the House.
Mr. HENLEY said he would be very sorry to interfere with
the arrangement of the Noble Lord, but he had been in that
House since twelve o'clock in the morning, and he was qu'te
unable to go on at that late hour of the night.
The debate was then adjourned.
SUPPLY.

On the question being put for bringing up the report on
the Committee of Supply,
Mr. WILLIAMS objected to the vote for defraying the
expense of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, because be
thought that expenditure ought to be defrayed out of the
revenues of the Church, and not out of the public exchequer.
Lord J. RUSSELL said the vote was deliberately agreed to
in Committee after a lengthened discussion, and he had nothing
further to add to what he had already stated on the subject.
Mr. BROTHERTON said he should be compelled, upon
principle, to vote for his Hon. Friend the Member for Coventry,
if he divided the House on the vote, bat he really most object
to their spliting straws in this way. It was unworthy of a
great principle.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the vote 76
Against it . .... . ...
Majority in favour of the vote ....
The House resumed, and the report was ordered to be
brought up on Thursday.
POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL.
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
Messengers from the Lords brought down the Poor Relief
( Ireland) Bill, with the Lords' amendments, and several other
public and private Bills, and prayed the assent of the Commons
to the several Bills.
Lord J. RUSSELL moved that the 13i1l, as amended, be
printed and taken into consideration on the 31st of May. He
did not think that it would be possible to have the amendments
printed and considered by the House till after the Whitsuntide
holidays.
The motion was then agreed to.
The reports on the Transference of Lands (Scotland) Bill.
the Heraable Securities for Debt (Scotland) Bill, the Burgage
T mitre (Scotland) Bill, and the Crown Charters Bill. were
received, and the Bills were ordered to be read a third time on
Thursday next.
POOR REMOVAL ACT REPEAL BILL.
Mr. BA NKES brought in the Poor Removal Act Repeal
Bill, which was read a first time, and ordered to be read a
second time on Friday next.
The °the,' orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at Half-past Twelve o'clock.

THE EARL OF ELLESMERE AND
THE FACTORIES BILL.
[The following is a fuller report than appeared in our
r,iition yesterday:—]
The Earl of ELLESMERE sad—ln rising to dis
charge the duty I have undertaken of moving the second
reading of the Bill now before your Lordships for limit-
ir the hours of labour in factories, I should be sorry to
waste your Lordships' time with any prefatory matter
of a personal nature. I must, however, take permission
frankly and briefly to express my regret that a subject
which has of late years excited so much interest and
discussion elsewhere, but which has little occupied the
direct attention of your Lordships sitting here, should
not have the advantage of being introduced to it by some
voice more familiar to your Lordships' ears, and by some
authority to which your Lordships were more accus-
tomed to defer. My apology to your Lordships and
myself consists in the circumstance, that having taken,
in the discussions which the subject has undergone in
another place, a part which, however humble and occa-
sional, was not inconsistent with the task I have now
undertaken, I have been invited to its performance by a
numerous body of those who are directly interested in
the fate of this measure, and who earnestly desire
its success. I must also state that I ana act-
ing at the earnest desire of a Noble Friend of mine, of
whom I may say, as was said of certain great men
whose images were missed in the procession of the Roman
triumph, that with reference to this subject his absence
from either House of Parliament makes him even
more conspicuously present to the mind than if he were
present in either.—( Hear, hear.) My Lords, the mea-
sures now proposed for your acceptance have originated
in far different quarters than in the mind of one so little
entitled to your Lordships' attention as myself. They
have originated in the crowded receptacles of human la-
bour; they have been elaborated in the factory and the
alley, amid the whirl of machinery, and in those long
rows of lodging-houses which grow up around the giant
chimneys of Lancashire and Yorkshire. This Bill has
its root in the stern experience of the husband and the
father. From this lowly, but lam sure in your Lord-
ships' view, not contemptible seed, the idea has mounted
upwards in the shape of such petitions as those which
have encumbere I your Lordships' table. Men of higher
education—men whose lives are one professional and
practical exercise of philanthropy—have assisted these
men to the ears of the Lesislature by their sanction and
their advocacy: medical men in every branch of prac-
tice, clergymen of every religious persuasion. Sprint-
ing from such a source, founded on such a basis of feel-
ing and opinion, it has made its way through much dif-
ficulty against powerful opposition, .till it has obtained
the sanction of an influential portion of a Cabinet, of a
conclusiee majority of the House of Commons, and, so
supported and recommended, has reached the table of
your Lordships' House. I state these things, my Lords,
not for the purpose of inducing any one of your
Lordships to andicate your privilege of free discus-
sion or of deliberate judgment. Latest and least
of the importations to your Lordships' House, I
should be sorry to signalise my first endeavour at ad-
dressing your Lordships by prop sirg any surrender of
your independence, any infraction of your privileges.
My Lords, the principle I f this Bill has been impunged
as involving legislative interf-rence with the rights of
c-p.ral and labour. I might slur this objection on Vie
grosrd of repeated prise lent. lan prepar,d, however.
if. necessary, to cont;-nd that I em advocating nothing
inconsistent with the doctrines '.f political economy at
ad. My Lerls, 1 dislike a nrAdling Governmult. I
believe with them that for the creation of the greatest
peoducible wealth in any given community, and, there.
fare, for the widest diffusion of that material well-being
which attends the pro luetion of wealth, the policy of
abstinence from legislative meddling is the sound policy,
and, therefore, I think it incumbent on any on.) who
departs from that policy to assign distinct grounds fur
his justification. The master manufacturer and the
operative have both a right, I admit it, to say to me—
you are interfering with my free action—you are select-
in e scone from a crowd of other occupations, to make it
the subject of experimental legislation. I claim an ex-
plantation. I demand an exceptional reason for your
con.luct. My Lords, I find that justification, as most of
your Lordships will anticipate, in the inherent, inalien-
able tendencies of that agent which Watt forced into the
service of man as applied to the four great branches of
our textile industry which come under the provisions of
this Bill—l mean the tendency, in the first ir.itancc,
to w.tract to its ministration the la Ina of those
whom, in respect of age and sex, or both, nature never
intended. for hard and continuous labour ; and next, in
es tendency to meke that labour continuous, and un-
ceasioss and protracted to a limit of physical and
mental endurance which, in my opinion, no Christian
legislature can see its subjects approach without ac-
knowledging the duty of interfering, if it can interfere,
for their relief and protection.--(Hear.) It is on this
ground, any Lords, that, finding as I do, with regard to
these branches of industry, the means and opportunity
of interference, I claim the right to exercise them. I
say, my Lords, finding the means and opportunity, for
this also is an essential element of practical interference,
and is my reply to an argument which, though often
used, is, I think, singularly inconclusive to a course of
a
reasoning very commonly adopted towards any man
who is hunting down a particular grievance, and which
endeavours to divert his attention by pointing out fifty
other objects of pursuit. My Lords, there is doubtless
enough of abuse, and misery, and oppression in the
world to make a sentimental or flighty philanthropist
fat his-arms in despair. My Lords, I invite your
Lordships to interfere with these large collected ag-
gregations of labour, because theory and experience
tell me you can do so with effect—because they
are open to inspection and capable of control
because you can do muchto prevent abuse,
and, if the hard necessitye arise, to punish it.
I .ara aware that this v
alleged as a reason for feature of the case has been
ririoni-stnterference. It has been
saithat the factory system
ande Oppression are most
aection. We have
discoverable,
been repeatedly told that we 'take philosophical
mti, physical is
view of the effects of tine use of meet:inlet?
the gr..at diminisher of tIK. sum of 'lngmar al
labour, the fertile source of leisure and contentmet and
tha:: a shou1:1 be cautiou.; row we meddle with its-o,e-
--
~,,J,p;t e,e fact.; hut, I- demand your
ships' „tt,.roi,n to souse!iirrher Lets counectld wick the
employment of
that fixed and exp -nsive capital
into the scope and 4 effect of which it becomes a
duty, from which, as a legislator, I cannot esespe,
to inquire. Th-r is, in toy opinion, no grani!er result
of human intellizance than a • ve cotton mill; but I
say this of it, that from the moineniq its engine is start, d,
raised by the capital and governenl by the will„softhiet
acute and enterprisine; individual who sits init thee,
becomes the direct interest of that presiding genius thot
its motions should be as unceasing and c::atinuous as
human contrivance can make them, that there is nu part
of that vast system of wheels and levers which can
rest without loss, or, in the ordinary and average course
of commercial prosperity, pursue its motions without
gain. The human labour attached hand and foot to that
system for the most part admits not of relays. What
is the natural, the inevitable consequence of this ? Why,
that which has resulted—that with which, step by step,
gradually, cautiously, effectually, and successfully, you
have been endeavouring for thirty years to moderate
and control, in wise defiance of the abstract principles
of-porttieei eeonomy. That the strong imptilse of pia