The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-14 00:00:00

COLLIERIES BILL.

Mr. T. DIINCOMBE moved the second reading of
this Bill. He was ready to make any alterations in the
measure Cat the House might think right.
Sir G. GREY thought it would be most objecticnable
while the subject was under the consideration of the
Government, to pass the present Bill. He would there-
fore move that the Bill be read a second time that day
three months.

Mr. WILSON PATTEN trusted that the Hon.
Member for Finsbury would not persevere with this Bill
in the present session. He should be prepared in another
Parliament to support a similar measure if it was brought
forward by her Majesty's Government.
tlr. HUTT objected to the second reading of the Bill.
Mr. WAKLEY thought if the Right Hon. Baronet
at the head of the Home Department would allow the
Bill to be read a second time it was probable his Hon.
Colleague would make such alterations in the Bill as
would be satisfactory to all parties. In voting against
the second reading of the Bill Members were declaring
that it was not necessary to legislate upon the subject.
Mr. LIDDELL did not consider the present Bill
necessary, and he should therefore oppose it. While he
did so he begged to state, on the part of the coal-
owners, that they were as anxious as any persons could
be to do all in their power to preserve the lives of their
colliers. The Bill, if passed, would be quite inoperative,
inasmuch as the clauses were too stringent to be carried
into effect.
Mr. BERNAL said that although he gave every credit
to the good motives which had actuated the Hon. Mem-
ber for Finsbury, still he could not give his consent to
the Bill as it stood, for some of the clauses were altoge-
ther inoperative, and were partly admitted to be so by
the Hon. Member himself. However much, therefore,
he admired the principle of the Bill, he would recom•
mend his Hon. Friend to postpone it to another session.
Mr. HINDLEY was not prepared to go to the extra-
ordinary length which the Hon. Member for Finsbury
would recommend to the House. He had no objection
to any measure which would give protection to human
life, but he could not consent to a measure that would
be inflicting an injustice upon the coalowners, who were
most anxious that the Davy-lamps should be used in the
mines, but whose wishes were thwarted by the careless-
ness of the men themselves.

Mr. FERRAND said that it had been attempted to be
denied that gross negligence was exhibited in the work-
ing of collieries, and that many and frightful acci-
dents had arisen in consequence. It was admitted
by the Right Honourable Baronet opposite that the
right of inspecting mines should be placed in the hand'
of the Urovernment, but he said that it was too late in
the session to adopt a Bill for the purpose. Were
they, because it was late in the session, to
permit these accidents still to continue. Let them

be assured that if they did so, the people would in the
course of the recess, exhibit by some illegal demonstra-
tion of strength, their sense of the neglect of the Legis-
ture. He should support his Hon. Friend if he went to
a division.
Mr. REDHEAD YORKE said that after the distinct

pledge given by the Right Hon. Baronet that a measure
for the prevention of accidents in mines and collieries

should be brought in in the early part of next session,
he (Mr. R. Yorke) was not prepared to give his assent
to the Bill of the Hon. Member for Finsbury.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said it would_ be impossible to

carry into effect the Bill of the Hon. Member for Fins-
bury. He would, therefere, rather wait for the measure
of the Government, knowing well that in the meantime
the Right Hon. Baronet was possessed of powers, which,
if put in practice, would (by a vigilant supervision in
the coal districts), go far to prevent the recurrence of
future accidents.

Mr. FOX MAULE said that little difference of
opinion seemed to prevail in the House with respect to
the objects sought to be attained by the Bill of the Hon.
Member for Finsbury, but however praiseworthy the in-
tention of the Hon. Member, he thought that a Bill of
any extensive character, which was intended to affect a
great mass of interests, should emanate from the Go-
vernment. He could not pass over without remark the
practice of the Hon. Member for Koaresborough of
holding up that House to the masses of the people as
being opposed to their interests.—(Hear, hear.) Such
a practice he thought far from fair—(Hear, hear)—
especially when it was considered that in the face of
great opposition, the Government had passed the Ten
Hours Bill, a measure in which the great body of the
people were decidedly interested.
Mr. FERRAND—After thirty years' delay it was
effected by the pressure from without.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. FOX MAULE—He would, under all the circum-
stances, recommend the Hon. Member to withdraw his
Bill.

—Mr. FORSTER said that this Bill was one of the
most absurd that had ever been laid upon the table of
that House, and he was astonished to find on the back
of the Bill, among other names, those of the Hon. Mem-
ber for Montrose (Mr. Hume), and of the Hon. Mem-
ber for Cockermouth (Mr. Aglionby). He objected to this
mode of giving names, when the probability was that
none of the Hon. Members had read one clause of the
Bill. The Bill was not the Hon. Member for Finbury's,
but the Bill of Mr. Roberts, the colliers' Attorney-
General—(Laughter)—he who had stirred up a strike
in the North, which was only allayed after an expendi-
ture to the public of above 200,0001. He would give the
Bill his most strenuous opposition.
Mr. TRELAWNY opposed all interference between
the employers and employed, because such invariably
led to interference with wages. He could not, therefore,
give his support to the Bill.
Mr. BOUVERIE said that however much he depre-
cated some of the clauses in the Bill, still he should feel
himself bound to support the principles of it, and the
Hon. Member for Finsbury might therefore count upon
his assistance if he went to a division.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that the Bill he had intro-
duced was intended to protect in some degree the lives
of nearly half a million of the most industrious classes
in this country, and he thought it might have been, to
say the least of it, treated with a little more decency.
The Bill had been abused in no measured terms by the
Hon. Member opposite (Mr. Forster), who had gone out
of his way to abuse Mr. Roberts, a gentleman quite as
respectable as himself, and by the Hon. Member for
Ashton-under-Line, who was asleep at that moment.—
(Laughter.) The Hon. Member referred to the report
of the Committee formerly appointed to inquire into
accidents in mines and collieries ; and quoted from them
to show, that no time ought to be lost in introducing a
Bill of this kind. He only asked the House to pass this
Bill for one year, in the hope that by that time a more
comprehensive and lasting measure would be introduced.
He knew, and was well assured, that too many of the
coal masters did not care a straw for the lives of their
workmen, if they filled their own breeches pockets.
[LEFT SPEAKING.]

DISSOLUTION OF PARLIAMENT.—It is, we under-
stand, decided that the Parliament shall be prorogued
on Thursday week next. The dissolution will take place
on the following Friday, and writs of election will be
issued on the Saturday.—Advertiser.
FALL OF A HOUSE IN THE MlNT.—Last evening,.
shortly after seven o'clock, the greatest alarm and con-
sternation prevailed in the vicinity of the Mint, South-
wark, in consequence of an ancient house, situated in a
place called Mint-square, on the eastern side of South-
wark-bridge-road, and immediately in the rear of St.
George's workhouse, Mint-street, telling to the ground
with dreadful violence, whereby several persons were
slightly injured, but none, fortunately, to any serious
extent