The Sun.
London, England, 1847-03-17 00:00:00

C'ttrbf Mbttton

SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock.
IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
FACTORIES BILL.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
Mr. DENNISTOUN rose to bring forward the motion of
which he had given notice, that the House should not resolve
itself into a Committee until this day fortnight. He said, 1
notwithstanding the violent denunciations of the Hon. Gen-
tleman, the Member for Knaresborough (Mr. errand),
against those who opposed this Bill, he should not
be deterred from bringing forward his motion, and of stating
the reasons which led him to do so, together with the
reasons why he could not agree to the Bill ; but at the same
time he must disclaim any intention of wishing to defeat
the measure by any factitious opposition. He should not, at
the moment the House was about to rise, at six o'clock,
move an amendment, as had been done in the former
discussions of the measure.—(Hear, hear.) When he
looked at the history of the various proceedings which had
taken place on the subject of a Ten Hours' Bill, he was fon-
ciblysled to the conclusion that lion. Members had but a very
faint comprehension of the measure. He had taken the trouble
to look through" Hansard ;" he there found that three years age
when they divided on the Ten Hours' Bill introduced by Lord
Ashley, that the numbers were 186 to 183, and on the
Twelve Hours' Bill (as we understood the Hon. Gentleman)
the numbers were—for the Bill, 188, and against it 181.
Shortly after a Bill of the same class—a Ten
Hours' Bill—was introduced, and the same House
of Commons, who had decided against a Twelve
Hours' Bill, voted against this Bill by an overwhelm-
ing majority of 297 to i 59. And now the suppoters of the
measure had increased from 159 to 195, whilst the number
of opponents of the measure had been reduced from e 97 to
87; therefore, it appeared to him, that the House had not a
very definite notion of the question. Then he declared that
the title of the Bill was a dishonest owe, as it was termed a
"Bill for limiting the hours of labour of young
persons and females in factories." He therefore wished
to put this question to those who had charge
of the Bill : " Will the Bill net also affect the
labour of adults—of men ?" They must know that if they
limited the hours of children and females to ten hours a day,
that the men would be prevented from working more than
ten hours a day. They could not work without their aid,
and therefore they must suspend their labour at the same
time. He said, theretore, that the Bill was nothing more
than " a delusion, a mockery, and a snare," as it could
not fail to have the effect he had pointed out. lie was
not one of those who admitted that former legisla-
tion had been beneficial. They had lately interfered with
regard to children, and the result of that interference was,
that at the present moment there was not employed in
Scotland one single young person under the age of thir-
teen. He wished to know if it had in any way pro-
moted their interest. On the contrary, he had in his
possession an advertisement, inserted in a Glaseow paper,
calling a meeting to take into ccnsideration the lamentable
condition of the children who infested the streets of this, the
second city in the empire. All illegitimate interference with
labour on the part of the Government was, in his opinion,
most objectionable. They had interfered in favour of the
agriculturists by their abolitices of the corn-laws. They had
itterfered in favour of the shipping interest by the navigation-
laws. In the West Indies, their sugar duties were interfering
with them, and, again, there were the enormous duties they
had imposed upon silk. He would ask the House who had
been the parties? Who had come there year after year (as
an Hon. Gentleman opposite had expressed it) whining fur
protection, but those very parties on whose behalf they had
attempted to interfere? They had not only interfered with
protection but they were now about to interfere with the,
rights of those who had never before asked anything at
the hands of that House. He had been very much struck
with the mode in which the Right Hon. Member for
Tamworth put the case as atiacting wages, but he had very
mach understated the case. He said that their interference
would be equal to an income-tax of 12 per cent. on wages,
but it was in reality equal to an income-tax of 16-a per cent.,
and more than that, for when they placed an income-tax on
alt property above 150 L, they did cot, at the same time, tie
the hands of all the parties who were liable to it. On
the contrary, it was only an inducement for further
exertion and more determined energy to make up for
that loes. They were not only puffing a tax of five-
fold upon the labourer, but they at the saute time tied his
hands, and said that no powers of his should be exerted be-
yond ten hours of labour. That was neither more nor less
than a boon to their foreign competitors. He did think that
the House stout(' be more cautious before it gave in to a
notion, which he knew was very preydeete that this
country, in its manufacture of cotton, was infallible in its
supremacy, and that no foreign na: ion amid touch them. He
believed that a more fatal delusion never went abroad ; and he
might say that the trade of a country once gone, was gone for
ever. Let the House look at the manufactures of Flanders.
What was the situation of Bruges and Ghent ? At one time
they possessed the whole manufacture of lace. They
had lost it, and had never since been able to
recover the loss. They might say that there
men had not the industry and energy of these ef thin coun-
try, but they stood neaay equal to this country in the manu-
facture of cotton. Wtott was the state of the cotton trade
towards the close of the last century, and he might say towards
the close of the war? Why, this country possessed almost
the entire manufacture of cotton, but, from one cause
or another, competition had gradually sprung up, so
that, at the present moment, in the article of
cotton, instead of being the sole manufacturers, their foreign
rivals managed exactly to compete with tbem ; that was
to say, that they manufactured the same amount of cotton,
and they were encroaching upon 'this country 'at a great
rate. There were many causes for that. They had great
water power and less cost of the raw material, but they were
about to step in and make an artificial restriction, which
would act as a boon to thiit country. He had
got a statement of the usual hours worked by
tive of their chief competitors, America, France,
Prussia, Switzerland, and the Tyrol. They worked upon
the average 14 per cent. more than this country. But, said
the Noble Lord, they could not refer to America, because he
understood that during six weeks or two months they had
holidays allowed to them. Ile would then strike out America
altogether, which worked 13 per cent. more than this country,
and there remained still an advantage of 14 per cent. in favour
of the remaining countries. They proposed to add la per
cent. more to that advantage, making 30 per cent. in their
favour. But, if they looked et it in another point of view,
the magnitude of the interest involved in this country was
something enormous. Let them see what was the money
value of the manufactures of thin country? He should take
it at the moderate estimate which he bad put, namely.
112,000,000. Now, if they struck off one-sixth of
that amount ; they would strike off nineteen millions per
cent. How would that effect the export trade? He believed
that the great bulk of it would come into other hands, and if
their exports did increase to nineteen millions, or in what.
ever proportion they increased, he would wish to know what
would become of their imports, and what would become of
the enormous amount of trade they would be compelled to
forego. He thought that the last Ministry had well and pro-
perly resisted this infraction, and, in point of fact, the present
Government, although the Noble Lord at the head of it was
not opposed to it, those who were at the present time more
perfectly responsible for the finances of the country were in
opposition, to it. What did the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer say? There was no man in that House more opposed
to the views of the promoters of this measure. What said
the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Right Non.
Member for Cambridge, and what said the one before
him, the Right Hon. Member for Portsmouth? What
said Lord Monteagle and Lord Ripon ? Why they were all
opposed to it. The Secretary of the Board of Trade, Lord
Clarendon, the Secretary for Ireland, and the former Presi-
dent of the Board of Trade—every one of those, with a regard
for the finances of the country, were diametrically opposed
to it. Notwithstanding all that array of authority they had
determined to proceed. At all events those opposed to
the measure would have done their duty in warning
the House of what in their opinion would to the inevitable
result. On them alone would rest the responsibility. He
would make a short statement with regard to the amend-
ment as pi oposed to her Majesty's Government. He had
given the subject his best attention, and he must
say that it appeared to him, as he would show, a
very feasible one. His only objection was that the
House was going too far, because in point of fact, they
were to admit the principle of the ten hours
altogether as applied to the number of hours to be wrought
in a week or in a year. The advocates of this measure said
that no female or young person should work more than 59
hours in a week. He took that principle, and agreed with
it—all that he asked was that they should concede that
which appeared to him to be the principle of the Bill.
That they should be allowed to work during the
three days as much as
,twelve hours at a time,
binding themselves not to work during two con-
secutive days more than twenty hours—that was twelve
hours one day and eight hours on the succeeding day. Their
object was to be allowed to work their machinery during three
d y 3 for twelve hours, so that by a system of relays the pro-
dective powers of the country woule not be trenched upon.
If that ro:nt were conceded it would meet their views almost
to the letter. That was a fair proposal, and they would do
s e'l at once to agree to it. He called upon the House, how-
ever, to delay the measure for one single fortnight. The
lion. Member for Knaresborough said that it was a most un-
fair thing to delay the passing of this measure until after
Easter. He would ask the lion. Member for Oldham
if there was the slightest chance of any further stage
being obtained for this Bill before Easter? Even under the
most favourable circumstances, they could not: get be-
yond the Committee • and when the report was brought
up there would be a discussion upon that. Under the most
favourable circumstances, they could not bring up the report
before Easter. He proposed that they should go into Committee
that day fortnight, so that the manufacturers of the country
should have time to consider the provisions of the Bill. They
would be able to say " aye" or "no." If they agreed to it,
it would be preferable that the measure should have
the general concurrence of the masters and men,
and there would be less opposition in the House than there
was likely to be if they went on at present. It would be
difficult to explain, to such an audience as he then had, as to
the proposed mode of working the mills by the system of
relays; and how that system was to be got up. In his
mind it was perfectly practicable to use such a system,
and they would not require more than 20 per
cent., or one-fifth more of the amount of labour. Sup-
Posing that a mill at present employed 100 operatives,
Under this clause, the same mill would be obliged to employ
120, and of course their wages would continue to be the
time. The mode in which this was to be brought about
be wand explain. Supposing that 120 hands entered
the mill on the Monday morning, sixty of these hand; would
work the entirethe
clay, and the rest would be divided into three
hour of breakfast the first 20 labourers would
retire, and their
and at three o'clock would
be
taken
by
the reserve twenty,
places Wren by
the
tweet
second twenty would have their
aity which bad worked for the first
three hours. It would
and therefore
to explain the system
properly to the Hou,ssec,o
on.,,ere) ,froje he could not proceed
with it.—(Cries of
would be again re-
lieved by another reserve, so that etslei thirdl branch would
only have worked eight hours. The rees
t;ieurs,Was and
xsaiexttl sixty
)hfitnhgat was,
that
Oil' of the 120 sixty worked fur twehalleet
worked for eight hours. The next day
versed, for those who worked twelve hours on the Monday
rweould work only eight hours on the Tuesday,
who worked eight hours on the Itfruulay woarekdt,thel se.
hours on the Tuesday. Thus the thing would go twelve
on until
the Saturday, when the hours were restricted to nine; but
the same principle could be applied to those nine hours. se
that the whole 120 would only have been working seven
hi ors per day during the week—an amount considerably less I
tl an the pro} wed Ten Hours' Bill. In a short time he
thouget that the system . would work so well that they
weak( be enailed to carry it en with 116 instead of 120.
'He had endeavoured to make the system as distinct as pos-
sible, but if he had been at all obscure it was owing to the
diFfien'ty of explaining these operations to such an assembly.
had done his duty, and felt greatly obliged for the atten-
tion with which he had been heard, and would conclude by
Moving that this Bill be committed thii day fortnight.

Mr. FINCH had anticipated, when he saw the notice on
the paper, that this motion was merely a factious opposition,
but he saw that the measure was a bona fide
one, and he believed therefore, whether the House
accepted or rejected it, the mover and his motion were both
entitled to respect. The Hon. Member for Oldham had him-
, self allowed that the system of relays, although very ob-
jectionable
on many accounts, was at least an advantage.
The Hon. Member who had just sat down bad stated that
the children in Glasgow were previously neglected, but that
was not an uncommon occurrence, and he did not see
that the Ten Hours' Bill would at all affect the evil
of which so much complaint was made. It had been
urged that with respect to young females they did not attend
to them after the business Of the day was concluded ; but it
, was plainly evident that, according to their constitution and
the state of their health, they would either partake of
domestic enjoyment or have the opportunity of improve-
ment in the lecture-room or reading classes. They
would, by shortening the hours of labour, give
them the opportunity of attending on Sunday-schools,
of which, from being so wearied and jaded by their weekly
labour, they could not now take advantage. By passing
this Bill, then, they would be very largely advancing the
morality of the people, for they would be affording to those
young persons the opportunity for acquiring domestic habits,
and thus not only enjoy a great benefit themselves, but also
enable them to confer benefits on others. Then, with regard
to wages, the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth,
had indulged in a long disquisition on the effect which this
reduction of time would have upon wages; but a greater Nl-
lacy had never been put before an intelligent assembly.
That Right Hon. Member had entered into a calculation to
show, that, by this reduction, the working people would be
obtaining two holidays instead of one; but the fact was,
that they were absolutely working seven days a week,
instead of six ; and the whole of the calculation on the reduc-
tion of the wages, by a sixteen per cent. income-tax, fell to the
ground. By a reference to the work of Mr. Porter, it would
be fOund that wages always bore a relative amount, not to
the time of the worker, but to the importance of the business
which he had to perform, and he ( Mr. Finch) was prepared
to show that, according to the evidence of expe-
rience, the reduction of the hours of labour would
in no way affect the rate of wages. The Right
Honourable Baronet had talked of giving the people cheap
mutton, cheap bread, and cheap beef ; 'out this had better be left
to the people themselves, who, if they were allowed sufficient
opportunity, would be able to take care of their own interests
in these matters without the intervention of the Legislature.
In America the manufacturers did not suffer by limiting the
hours of labour, and in point of machinery, coals, and capital,
they were in a much worse position than the manufacturers
of this country. He had no hesitation in saying that the
manufacturers of this country would have as much work
cone by working ten hours a day as by working twelve
hours, and 114 hoped the House would carry the Bill as a
Ten Hours' Bill.

Mr. AGLIONBY said that the principle of the Bill had
been debated over and over again, and been decided upon
by the House. lie did not think it necessary, there-
fore, to take up the time of the House, but would im-
plore them to go at once into Committee. The
Hon. Member for G'asgow had stated no adequate reason
for postponing the Bill. Enr a fortnight, and he hoped his pro.
position would be rejected. He thought it better therefore
to proceed with the question at once, and any amendments
Hon. Members wished to make could be discussed in Com-
mittee.

Lord J. RUSSELL agreed with the Hon. Gentleman who
had just spoken that the best course for them to adopt would
be to go into Committee at once. Had he had an opportu-
nity of stating his opinions before the House rose when the
question was last under consideration, he would have made
some remarks on the general question. It was
not, however, the fault of the opponents of
the measure that he had not had that opportunity.
The Honourable Gentleman who spoke towards the close
of the evening, had been carried away by his argument,
and was in consequence induced to prolong his speech till
nearly six o'clock. He was quite willing to forego the oppor-
tunity he had at present to enter into the question, and
he did so for the purpose of preventing delay and
avoiding a fresh debate. The House had pronounced
its opinion on the measure twice—first, on the second
reading of the Bill ; and, secondly, on going into Committee.
Ile took the question, then, as decided, and he thought it far
better for them to go into Committee at once, when any
amendment the Hon. Member for Glasgow, or any other
Hon. Member, might propose, could be discussed. He
thought his Hon. Friend who had spoken last had made a
mistake with regard to the proposition which he stated as
having been made by the masters, and that it could not
be regarded with sincerity, inasmuch as it was made at the
eleventh hour. He (Lord John Russell) thought that so far
from its being a proposition of the manufacturers, it was a
proposition of one gentleman— (Cries of " three ")—engaged
in the cotton manufactures. He thought it, therefore, un-
fair to charge them with bringing forward the question of
relays, or of introducing it at the eleventh hour. He
thought it quite unnecessary to discuss that propo-
sition now, and considered that the best course for
the house to adopt would be to go at once into
Committee. It was true that great anxiety and great ex-
pectations were felt on the subject, and he trusted they would
lose no further time.

Mr. FOX MAT LE said, when the Hon. Gentleman got up
and used arguments for not delaying the further consideration
of the Bill, he thought he should refrain from introducing
topics in his speech, which would have the effect of giving use
to argument. The lion. Member for Cockermouth stated that
the object of the amendment was to cause farther delay,
and that the minds of its advocates were so fully made up,
that it was quite useless to make any proposition to them
to forego the Ten Hours' Bill, and, secondly, that the propo-
sition now made was not a bond fide one, inasmuch
WI it was made at the eleventh hour.—(Hear, hear.)
The parties who had made this proposition were not only
honourable men in their calling, but also gentlemen who had
done all they could to carry out in their manufactories the
provisions of the Factories Bill.

•
Mr. AGLION BY said—Directly the opposite.
Mr. FOX MAULE—Then his ears never so mistook any-
thing which bad ever been stated in that House. He thought
that the proposition showed something like a desire upon the
part of the masters to meat the wishes of the men ; and he
thought it desirable to secure the willing co-operation of
both masters and operatives in carrying out the provisions of
the Factories Bill, should such pars into a law. If good
feeling were not established between the masters and opera-
tives the greatest mischiefs would result from the passing
of the proposed measure.
Mr. AGLIOXBY rose to explain. He denied having
made any reflection whatever oa the character or conduct
pursued by any manufacturers with respect to this measure.
Mr. BROW:tilt: thought that by passing this measure an
injury would be inflicted upon the country, equal in its ex-
tent
to that produced by Louis XIV. upon France, by the
banishment of skill and labour from that country, while the
cruelty inflicted upon the operatives themselves would be of
the most serious and alarming kind. It was an undeniable
proposition, that a few hour's employment would be remune-
rated by low wages only. The present measure proposed to
rob the poor man of all the capital which he possessed, viz.,
his labour, and he should therefore feel it his duty to oppose
the further progress of the measure.
Mr. PETER BORTHWICK opposed the amendment.
The object of the amendment appeared to bins to have been
proposed for the purpose of obstructing the progress of a
measure which hal virtually received the sanction of the
House.
Mr. BRIGHT wished to make a few observations with
respect to the petition which had been presented by the
Noble Lord at the head of the Government. Some time ago
a memorial was presented to the Noble Lord and his col-
leagues, signed by nearly 400 master spinners largely en-
gaged in the cotton trade, representing, he might say, five-
sixths of the capital invested iu that trade, and employing over
120,000 persons; but the Noble Lord, he was sorry to say,
did not accede to the proposition which it contained. But,
to• day, he had presented a petition in favour of the Bill,
which he stated was signed by manufacturers in Lancashire,
York, Chester, and Derby. The first name in the petition
was that of the brother of the Hon. Gentleman the Member
for Oldham, to which no one could object. Next came
the names of several persons who were stated to reside in
Rochdale; but, with the exception of about twelve, he was
in a condition to say that he never bad the felicity of know-
ing that they were spinners. One signed himself John
Scholefield, a flannel manufacturer, who stated that he em-
ployed six persons.—(" hear, hear," from Mr. Ferrand)—
! another, Josh. Wild, of Great Bolton, waste dealer, who em-
ployed four persons; but the majority of them employed
no more than two persons, and but few of them employed
three. Some of them signed theMselves grocers and
drapers. At any rate the majority of those who had signed
the petition had little or no connexion with steam-power,
or in the capital invested in machinery, or any of
those trades which the Bill was proposed to affect. He
complained that such a petition had been presented by the
Prime Minister, because a petition presented by one in that
high office carried with it much authority. Perhaps not
one-hundredth part of the capital invested in the cotton and
other trades was represented by them. Either the Noble
Lord must have been at a great loss for supporters, or he had
been grossly deceived ; certainly it did not convey the views
of those engaged in that trade. He also complained that the
Noble Lord had not discussed the principle of the Bill. On
the first occasion he was asked to discuss it, but he declined
to do so; he was in the second stage sought to do so, but he
again declined. Now they were about going into Com-
mittee he still adhered to his resolution not to speak.
He should not complain of this if the Noble Lord were not at
the head of the Government. He admired his talents and
his courage, and he, and those on that side of the House who
felt disposed to support the Noble Lord's Government, felt
grieved at his silence as to the grounds on which he sup-
ported the Bill.—(Hear.) He stated it did not resolve itself
into a question of principle but into one of degree;
but, whether it was a question of principle or of degree, the
Bill would, if passed, have the effect of stopping the ma-
chinery of the country to a great extent, and therefore
WAS one of paramount importance.—(The Hon. Gentle-
man then read a long extract from an article in the last
number of Cliambers's Journal, entitled " Two Days
in Dundee," by William Chambers—all of whose
writings, he said, could be relied upon—to show that
many parents had removed their children from the factories,
where they were earning 18.3 d. a week, for the purpose of
being sent out to beg. The industrial schools gave three
meals a day, and this led them to consider the question
whether this quantity of food, and what was made
by begging, was not of more value than the wages
they received. This showed that interference with
labour would do no good to those persons, whilst it would
do incalculable mischief to the employers. By the returns
of the factory inspectors, it appeared that from the year
1835, when this system of agitation commenced, down to
1839, there were 30,000 fewer children employed under 13
years of age. Mr. Owen was more entitled to the
authorship of this plan than any :other person, as he
had suggested it years ago. From a paper he had
received from the United States, it appeared that a com-
mittee of Congress had, on his instigation, been appointed to
consider the subject, but they had reported that they could
not conic to any conclusion on the subject. The Bill would
wantonly interfere with the capital of the country, and with-
out the aid of the great manufacturers, legislation could not
be carried on at all ; and if the master-manufacturers thought
proper to enter into a combination against this Bill it could not
be carried out. The Hon. Gentleman the Member for
Knaresborough had stated that if it was not passed the
working classes would revolt ; but they had found that every
seduction of the hours of work had been accompanied with
a reduction of wages, and many of them anticipated
a like result from this measure. Why should the
manufacturers of cotton, who were anxious to make up
for the losses of this year by working more hours during
1348 be prevented from doing so ? He believed the
e nployers would rather have a ten hours than an e!even
hours' Bill.—(Hear, hear.) The employers who approved
of. it, simply did so in order that it might be
decided e di t.7t(
tj,,olet(ll‘l maintain
erd
;and if it was found a good principle they
011:,s,ier,—h(ehaire.a)r,
hlelaer,.
)forThonees,peneicshheodf
the matter
the lion. Gentleman the Member for Salford (Mr. Brother-
ton) had a great effect upon the House; but since that Hon.
Gentleman was
thetakeniplaee,
employment aent employede in a factory a great change had
persons
had been passed forbidding
and
the
majority
VI:II-teen for more than six
who were apprenticed, dthe young persons in
other
rs a
trades,day
in
neriev under thirteen.
is country under
They had snore persons then in shops'
the ages of fourteen than they bad their factories. They s

were in a temperature not less injurious, and engaged in work -
hardly less hurtful than in the factories. He had a strong
feeling for the working classes, and he would rather
oppose them than deceive them, for he had a
regard for his own practical experience and con-
scientious convictions. He believed that the Bill
was one which would be injurious, and therefore he
should support the motion of the lion. Member and any
other vote which would retard the passing of this measure.
Her Majesty's Government had voted for this measure three
years ago, and he (Mr. Bright) had predicted what would'
happen. That prediction had since been fulfilled. He hoped
that, seeing the consequences of the vote, her Majesty's Go-
vernment would not now assist in forwarding the measure.
Mr. HINDLEY said that he had been a free-trader all his
life, and believed in the principle to its fullest extent, but he
thought that the Government should take care that the
articles produced should be made with a due regard to the
feelings and morals of the people. What had Mr. Cobden
said upon this subject? After commenting upon the system
of oppression upon trade, he had said, that if the
Government would take off the restrictions upon trade,
he would freely give his labourers the same wages
which they were then receiving, with ten hours' labour
(Loud cheers.) The Hon. Member for Oldham had not
always supported the opinion he had just given out, for upon
a former occasion he had agreed with the Hon. Member for
Stockport in his views upon this measure. He would no
longer trespass upon the time of the House, nor hinder them
from going into Committee upon this question.—(Cheers.)
Mr. FIELDEN was astonished at the assertions which
had been made by the Hon. Merr.ber for Durham, for he had
placed the petition against which this protest was entered in
the hands of the Noble Lord a fortnight since. That Hon.
Member had complained, in the protest which he had pre-
sented, that the mill-owners who had signed the petition
were not men of property, and that it consequently
was not entitled to the attention of the House, and had con-
tended that his own protest was a more valid document.
But if it were so, why wsie not the names of the several
partners in the different tiMis given, together with a state-
ment of the number of men employed in each factory, for
that would have given validity to the assertions which
it contained. There were 323 firms, whose names were
signed to this protest, and it was pretended that
they represented a constituency of 823,000 people, but he
would like to know whether the Hon. Member for Durham
would make himself responsible for the respectability of
these firms, as he would make himself responsible for those
who had signed the petition presented by the Noble Lord,
and why throw the responsibility upon him of passing
this Bill through the House? He should like to know how
this protest was got up, and what part the Hon. Gentleman
had taken in it. For his own part, he did not know but that
it was written by the Hon. Gentleman himself, for he found
that it was signed by Bright and Charlesworth, of Ashton-
under-Lyne.—(" Hear, hear," from Mr. Bright.) It was
signed also by Samuel Scotland Jones, of Rochdale, and by
several other persons whose respectability he would not
impugn, but there were other names for which
there were no owners in existence. There was Joel
Gee, of Dunkingfield, together with several other
the owners of which were nowhere to be found. While the
names of those who had signed the petition presented by the
Noble Lord were some of the most distinguished men in
Manchester, well known throughout the whole of the menu-
factoring districts.—(Hear.) And what did these people
say? Why they wanted to convince him that he did not
understand his own business.—(" Hear, hear," and laugh-
ter.) More than thirteen years ago he bad stated the whole
of the case to the mill-owners, and had then recommended
them to adopt the ten hours' system. And look at the be-
nefit that would have arisen from it. There was the Hon.
Member for Durham himself, whose mills were at the pre-
sent moment entirely at a stand-still, and all his hands stand-
ing idle.—(" Hear," ,from Mr. Bright, and cheers from several
parts of the House.) He did not hesitate to say, that if this
Ten Hours' Bill had passed last session, and was at pre.
present in operation, that every mill in Manchester would
be now at work. They had machinery now erected at such
an extent that they were enabled to supply all the markets of
the world. And then with regard towages, it was his own
firm conviction that wages would be as high under a Ten
llours' Bill as they were under a twelve hours' system. In
1634 be bad recommended that a ten hcurs' plan should be
adopted, and since then the House had passed a Bill
for preventing the use of relays of children, and
had hindered all under a certain age from working
more than eight hours a day. But let him finish
with the protest. (The Hon. Gentleman the❑ read several
names which he stated to be fictitious.) The Hon. Gentle-
man had asserted that these parties were in possession of
roily five-sixths of the capital employed in the cotton trade.
Why a greater story never was told. his had to complain
that no notice whatever had been given to him of the inten-
tion to bring this motion forward, for if he bad
received a note, or any intimation whatever, he should
certainly have been in his place to resist it. Nor had there
been more courtesy with respect to the protest presented by
the Hon. Member for Durham, of which he had heard
nothing until he saw it on the table. The tact was, this
motion was merely brought forward for the purposes of
delay, for it could serve no otl.er purpose whatever. if there
was any object really to be attained, why did not the Hon.
Gentleman meet him at Manchester, at Oldham, at Halifax,
and at the several other places which he had visited for the
promotion of this object?—(Cheers.) it was true that the
Hon. Member possessed, the gift of the gab—(Laughter)—
but it was a pity that he did not use it in conferring a
boon on the people, instead of imposing an injury.
He would not consent to any delay of the measure, even for
a single hour.
Mr. BRIGHT said that he had no doubt that the whole of
the mistake referred to by the Hon. Member for Oldham
(Mr. Fielden) arose from a mistake in the printing of the
list of the bellies from the petition.
Mr. DENNISTOUN rose for the purpose of making some
explanations respecting a conversation which had passed
between himself and the lion. Member for Oldham (Mr.
Fielden), to which that Hon. Member had referred.
Mr. STANSFIELD was understood to say that he would
support the motion.
Sir R. PEEL said that he was not quite certain what was
the actual motion before the House.

Mr. DENNISTOUN said, the motion was to postpone the
Bill gcing into Committee for a I..rtnight.
Sir It. PEEL could not then support that motion. It appeared
to him that it was only a motion for delaying the Bill. The

Bill had been already fully discussed upon —every preceding
occasion; it was now proposed to delay the Bill going into
Committee for a fortnight, which would bring the House to
the Wednesday immediately preceding the adjournment, a day
which he did not think would be a very convenient one for
the purpose of discussion in committee, and he thought that
the consequence would be the postponement of the Bill till
after Easter. He did not think that sufficient grounds had
been made out for delaying the measure, and he should,
therefore, feel it his duty to oppose the motion.
Mr. DUNCAN supported the motion for postponement.

Lord JOHN BUS'ELL said that the Ikon. Member for
Durham complained that he had taken no part in the discus?
sion. He should now, therefore, state as shortly as he could
the reason which induced him to support the Bill.
He hoped the Hon. Member, and other Hon. Gentlemen,
would not forget that on one occasion lie did briefly state his
reasons for supporting the Bill, and if he did not then go
fully into the question, it was because he was limited to ten
minutes to do so, the Hon. Member who spoke before having
only finished ten minutes before six o'clock.—( Hear, hear.)
The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tainworth
in a speech he made on the Bill, had also stated that he
would like to hear him (Lord John Russell) express the
views which he entertained on the subject, but the Right
Honourable Baronet was so led away that evening
by his argument, as to preclude the possibility of
his being able to state what his views were. Be-
fore he could now proceed to make any observations
on the general question, he wished to say that he did not
think the Hon. Member for Durham had any right to lec-
ture him upon his conduct in 1844.—(Cheers.) It was with
his eyes open that he (Lord J. Russell) then supported the
measure brought forward, and he was quite willing to bear
the responsibility of the consequences that resulted from that
step. If he recollected well, it, was urged as an argument for
the abolition of the corn-laws by the Hon. Gentleman and
those who acted with him representing the Anti-Corn-
law League, that if these laws were abolished there
would be no ;necessity for prolonging the hours of factory
labour to the same extent as then prevailed. Now, if he
were disposed to retaliate on the Hon. Member, he would
say that those assertions were held out for the purpose of
securing the support of the working classes, irrespective of the
truth of the statement. He would not, however, say that they
were insincere in their representations, but he thought that
a consideration of this should induce him to be sparing in his
taunts of his (Lord John Russell's) conduct in 1844. With
regard to the question, it had been debated before, and it
was scarcely necessary for them to enter into it. There
could be no doubt but to limit the hours of labour
for the young people in factories was a perfectly
legitimate object. It was stated, however, that the con-
sequence of this would be to limit the labour of adults, but
he could not assent to this objection, as it. would be just as
reasonable to allege with regard to a proposal to
make a railway from a sea-port to Loncon that it
would injure the coasting trade generally. The principle
of the measure was good, and should therefore be carried
out, notwithstanding any inconvenience which might result.
—(Hear, hear.) Ile thought the object of the Bill was a
perfectly legitimate one, and it should therefore have his
support, as he believed that great benefit would result
from it. The powerful argument for the limitation of
the hours of labour was the opportunity which would be
thus afforded to the manufacturing population of having re-
ligious and moral instruction, cultivating the domestic atfec-
tions, and acquiring domestic habits. Now, the advocates
of these improvements in the social condition of the
working classes seemed to forget that they were incompatible
with the protraction of the hours of labour to 14 hours a
day. It was said, however, that the hours afforded for those
purposes would be abused, and devotod to vice; but he was
not deterred by such an objection from supporting the measure.
He should be quite content if those who would be benefited
were left to spend the leisure which this Bill would give
them at their own homes, in kindly intercourse, instead of
imposing any restriction upon them as to how they should
spend it.—( Hear.) They next came to the great question
inserted in the Bill. Could they give these advantages to
the sons and daughters of the working classes employed in,
factories, without at the same time injuring the manufac-
turer and the industry of the country, and thereby injuring
those classes whom the Bill was designed to benefit ? This was
a large and formidable question, and thoughthe limitation
of the hours of work might be indirect, still if the practical
m er n
effect of such a limitation was likely to injure our foreign
coanc
aclutrhee.
made out be the opponents of the measure to show that
N questionow ,h became,ed id
not
think
n lki e
thatsaid, one of a very
a case had been
serious
serious injury to our foreign trade might be apprehended.—
( Hear, hear.) And, in considering the question, they must
not simply look at the value of the manufactures exported
from this country—namely, 37,000,0001., as for instance, one
of the largest manufacturers in this country—Mr. Marshall,
of Leeds, only worked his flax-mill eleven hours a day, and
they had a right to assume that he did so with profit.
They had also been told that many other manufacturers in
Leeds did not employ their workers more than eleven hours
a day; therefore the hours of work did not bear so materially
on the amount exported as many Hon. Gentleineu seemed to
suppose. The next consideration was, how many various
elements there were in the price of the article, in order to
show they would be affected by foreign competition. With
respect to cotton, there was the original price of the raw
material, the cost of its transit across the ocean, the
commission of the merchant at Liverpool, the expenseof working it into thread and into various fabrics.
It had then to be embarked again, and he would assume that
it was carried to China, where it would have to compete
with American and Swiss manufactures. The original cost
would not be affected by the Bill, and the manufacturers
would not pay their workers for twelve hours' work
if they worked only ten.—(Loud cries of "Hear, hear.")
The manufacturers would pay only for the quantity of work
done. The expenses of a manufacturer win
vested
100,0001. had
100,000/. in his works had been thus estimated :-5/. per cent.
into, et on capi• al in the first instance ; we&r and tc ar
61. ; oil, tallow, mid coal, about 12/. ; and 1/. for gas ;
making altogether twenty-four pounds per cent.--( Hear.)
With regard to wear and tear, as far as the reduction of the
price of labour was concerneo, there would he an equal re-
ductitoi lit this parr, La aunt :allow,
&c , would be used, and thie, with the other item, would make
a reduction of about 12/, per cent.; se that there was only W. per
cent. on which any loss could take place—namely, the ill-