The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-30 00:00:00

any private right or private property. It was opposed by the
Creoker branch of the Bristol and Exeterßailway, which was pro-
posed to be a branch of the Yeovil branch, sanctioned by .he Legis-
lature last session. It was sufficient for him, however, to say that
not a spade had yet been put into the ground for the Yeovil branch,
while the proposed new branch ran in a circuitous 6irection, and
diverted the traffic of the district from Its natural channels. The esti-
mated cost of the proposed line, for which he appeared, was 139,0001.,
and it was proposed to raise that sum by the sale o shares at pre-
sent in the possession of the Chard Canal Conapaby, and it was
calculated the traffic would yield a return of Si. i.er cent. on the
outlay. _ _ .

Mr. Giles Laing, a merchant, residing at Ilminster, proved that
there were three coaches passing daily between Hminster and Chard,
and Axminster and Taunton, and in his opinion the proposed con-
version of the canal would be of great public utility.
On Cress-examination the witness admitted that these coaches
ran from different places to Croker, and, perhaps, it would be more
convenient for 1101120 of the passengers toihave a line extending on to
Croker.
Mr. John Thorns, a merchant, of laminster, gave similar testimony.
Mr. Humphrey Brown, the gentleman who made out the traffic
tables of the proposed line, proved that the traffic would yield a very
ample per tentage on the outlay.
The canal Acts were then put in to prove that the Company had
the power to raise more money than would cover the estimate for the
proposed railway.
Some other evidence of a general character was adduced, and the
Committee adjourned shortly after four o'clock.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 29.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
FACTORIES BILL.
Mr. HINDLEY presented 58 petitions from various places
in the neighbourhood of Manchester in favour of the Ten
Hours' Bill.
THE RIVER CLYDE.
Mr. HUME moved for certain returns respecting the
amount of debt, and the progress of the debt, of the River
Clyde Trust, with the revenue and expenditure of the navi-
gation.—Agreed to.
---
THE FACTORIES REGULATION BILL. "
On the order of the day for the second reading of this Bill,
Mr. HUME said he wished to ask the Hon. Member for
Oldham a question, in regard to his motion on this Bill. It
was important that the fullest freedom should be given to
capital, and it was also an essential of commercial prosperity
that there should be the same freedom given to labour. On
that ground he was sorry to see the system of attempting to
interfere with the free application of capital which prevailed
in certain quarters in the country. To that he was directly op-
posed, and seeing that it was going forward to such an extent
he could not let the matter pass over without calling atten-
tion to it. In a question of such importance he begged leave
to suggest that it ought not to be discussed in such a thin
House, and at the time when there were twenty Committees
sitting. Members could not in consequence attend, and in
order that there should be the fullest and fairest discussion
he thought the Government might be prevailed on
to allow a Monday or Friday evening for the discus.
sion of the question.—(lronical cries of " Hear, hear.")
Well, if that could not be arranged, then some other day
might be fixed on. What he meant was, that the question
should not be dealt with in such a thin House. On that
ground it was that he had made a suggestion.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir R. PEEL concurred with the Hon. Member as to the
importance of the question, and would be willing that some
other Government days should be set apart for the discus-
sion of it ; but, in the present state of the business, he could
not make a promise of any day. It was out of his power to
give any pledge in the matter.
Mr. HUME thought the Bill might be postponed till such
time as the Corn Bill was disposed of. The factory queetion.
was next in importance to that question, and it could come
on in due course then.
Mr. BANKES asked the Hon. Member if, in the event
of the Corn Bill being carried, he would vote for the pre-
sent measure ?
Mr. lIUME intimated that he would oppose the Bill in
every stage.
Mr.• BANKES hoped the Hon. Member for Oldham
would persevere in his motion. Wednesday ,was, in fact,
the only day on which public business was transacted,
and he did not see why the Bill might not be taken. He
had lately been applied to by several delegates of the opera-
tive classes interested in this Bill, asking his advice re-
specting the conduct they ought to pursue. He gave them
his humble opinion, that the sooner the measure was pro-
ceeded with the better, as, on a former occasion the delay
which had taken place was fatal to the measure. The
Bill, after being carried by a vote of Hon. Members, was in
consequence of the delay lost, and the House thereby brought
Into great discredit.—(Hear, hear.) Instead of meeting any
suggestion for delay,'he trusted the Hon. Member for Oldham
would bring forward the measure at once; and if they could
not finish the discussion that day, it could be pro-
tracted till to-morrow night. If it was adjourned
till to-morrow evening, he had no doubt the
Hon. and Learned Member for Cork, and other Hon. Mem-
bers, who had motions on the paper, would give way, so as
to bring the discussion to a conclusion. If the Hon. and
Learned Member and the other Hon. Gentlemen who had
motions did not interfere, he (Mr. Bankes) had no
doubt OA debate would be concluded by that time.
He hoped that his Hon. Friend would persist in his motion.
What he had principally risen for was to express a hope
that the Right Hon. Gentleman would take the Thursdays
to himself at once.
Mr. FORSTER said this was a most important question ;-
but before it was decided he certainly thought that they
should adopt measures for giving the people food. His Hon.
Friend the Member for Durham had, at the commence-
mencement of the session, prosented a petition, signed by
7,000 of the inhabitants of Shetland. He was not surprised
that those people should have petitioned that House. He
had, on Monday last, received a paper which detailed the
state of distress which was existing in the Shetland
Islands. The inhabitants of those islands were 32,000 in
number, depending chiefly upon fish. Their agricultural
produce was very scanty, and during the last season was
more scanty than ever. The Hon. Gentleman here read a
document which stated that great distress existed in the
Shetland Islands. The inhabitants only traded in fish, and
their chief customers were the Spaniards. The Spanish mer-
chants would be glad to send corn in exchange, but the corn-
law prevented it. A Spanish vessel was actually now on her
way to Shetland in ballast, and she would have taken corn
if the repeal of the corn-laws could be depended upon.
Mr. COWPER rose to order. He thought this was an
unfair mode of getting rid of the discussion on the Factory
Bill.
The SPEAKER was understood to say that the Hon.
Gentleman was in order, as the question was whether the order
of the day should be proceeded with. The Hon. Gentle-
man was at liberty to show that in his opinion another
order of the day ought to be taken.
Mr. FORSTER was again proceeding, when
Mr. T. DUNUOMBE Lose to order. He must say that the
Hon. Gentleman's reading the document from the Shetland
Islands, looked very like an indirect mode of defeating the
discussion on the Factory Bill.
Mr. FORSTER repudiated this charge, and said he had no
such intention.
The SPEAKER decided that the Hon. Gentleman was in
order.
Mr. FORSTER proceeded. He had already said ,hathe did
not deny the importance of the Factory Bill, but he thought
their first duty was to legislate to give the people
an increased supply of food. He could assure the House
that the utmost stagnation existed in commercial
circles, in consequence of the delay which had taken
place in the progress of the Government measures.
He understood that a Noble Lord in another place, not very
successful in his legislative pleasures, intended to hoist the
standard against the Government measure? What would be
the effect of any mutilation of that measure. It was a gene-
ral opinion among the great body of the merchants that
something of that sort would take place. Commerce was a
timid bird, and would not take its flight in a storm.
Mr. GIBSON—The question brought before the House was
a pressing emergency—a question of present starvation—a
question of people not having a sufficiency of food for their
subsistence. The Factory Bill was not of such a pressing na
ture as that of the Hon. Member's with reference to the
Shetland Isles. Irish distress had been brought before the
House, why should not the case of the people of the
Shetland Isles be considered? He thought that Hon. Gen-
tlemen on the opposite side came down to the House for the
purpose of putting the Government in a minority rather
than to support the Factory Bill.--(No, no, and hear, hear.)
The House should bear in mind that the people of the Shetland
Isles did not come to Parliament intimating in their peti-
tion that they wanted a grant of money for the promotion
of public works, or-for giving the means of employment to
the people of the Shetland Isles. All they ask is that the
House would remove those prohibitions which prevented
them from exchanging the fish which they catch for the
corn and meal of other .:auntries. It is their opinion that
much of their distress would be alleviated if those prohibi-
tions were removed. Could the Right Hon. Baronet explain
to the House the grounds of his refusing to allow these poor
and starving inhabitants of Shetland, the power of
ex-
changing their fish for the corn and meal of other countries?
Had he provided them with ships or with fishing tackle, or
in any way facilitated the progress of their industry ? Why
did the Right Hon. Baronet insist upon their paying tolls on
their fish for the benefit of himself and other landed proprietors
of this country? It would be of great benefit to the people if
they were allowed to exchange their fish for corn and meal.
Many families were on the very brink of starvation. The
potato crop had failed. There were Spanish ships which
could deliver them a supply of corn if they were allowed
to do so. Hon. Members opposite were delaying public busi-
ness night after night in that House.—("No, no, 'from the Op-
position. ) The House was entitled to call upon them to relieve
the starvation of the people. While they were persevering in
their opposition to the Corn Bill they were contributing to
the starvation of those people.—(" No, no," and cheers.)
He was discharging a public duty in thus pressing
on the attention of the House the condition of
the inhabitants of the Shetland Isles, and he considered
it was as sacred a duty as could be performed by any Member
of that House. He thought that the House should first settle
the great questions which were then before them (the
Corn and Customs Importation Act) before they proceeded
with the consideration of other business. He hoped that the
Factory Bill would not then be interposed between the Corn
and Customs Bill. The public mind could not entertain so many
measures at one and the same time, neither could that House
legislate upon several questions at the same time in a proper
manner. No delay should be allowed to intervene in the
carrying out of the measures brought forward by her Ma-
jesty's Government.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said that motives had been imputed to
Hon. Members on his side of the House that it was their in-
tention to place the Government in a minority rather than
to support the Factory. Bill. He begged to state that they
would not yield to any person on the other side in
attachment to the sacred cause which had brought
them down to that House to-day, and which
had brought them together upon other occasions when they
were more happily united, and when it was still more painful
for them to differ -from the Government.
Mr. FIELDEN, after presenting two hundred and thirty
petitions in favour of the Factories Ten Hours' Bill, proceeded
to draw the attention of the House to the deplorable condi-
tion of the factory children. The Honourable Gentle-
intfbaaveno—urgeaauds
gallery,
len
aand always
ra similar h
esi
es —asnnpsneeweecireauhsae,
snweheee
deaiperfectly inaudible in
rfde thelhvihs
eolti
Mr. AINSWORTH seconded thethma motion of the papers with a copy noterut
eahobarilnvei
morning
give anything like a report.
colnemsebnetredfortoOltdhleiapmas.
sinligeobfetihieisvedßill they the Government
satisfy
parties. Some change was evidently necessary for ts all
employed in factories, scarcely any time being allowed
their instruction.
Icioatdtobneemn
hmieethsee, nhuemwbaesr
boundof petitions
t o
believeha t
Mr. _HUME said that this measure would no doubt be
satisfactory. to the greater part of those employed in the
anpruesfa:ntteordies.
to tFhero
that this Bill would be desirable to the working classes. But
it was because he thought that a more dener usroceedin
to the interests of the countr could t possibly g
be enter-
tained, that he thought it wasy the duty Df• those who be-
lieved that such a proce •
eding should be opposed, that he
came forward to oppose this his opinion, w measure, which, in
, as calculated ultimately
to being
ruin upon the best it
He had on no occasion shown himself • of the country ;
eats of the working classes--(Hear, h indifferent to the inter-
,he prided himself on having, on, ear)—on the contrary.
deavodred, as far as he was able, to freevartirs occasions, en-
from all tile trammels of monopoly under which ouring artizan
(Hear(Hear, hear.) And he did wish to submit to th he
existed.—
, House what
had been the cOnseuence since that great and important which he had been i4strumental in effecting. liechange submitted,
too, that if the House assented to this Bill they vi
acting in direct contradiction to the great'
principleouolf free
trade, which they had lately adopted.—ur,hear.)
This Bill was contrary to the commontrade,
sense and the good
Meuse of the Ifogse, to remove all trammels on the capital
of industry whilst tli.e.y proposed et the same time to impose
trammels on what was edually important.—the capital of the
labouring fleet) It was not only an imposi-
tion .cu" the capital of the ‘laleotiring man, but also on the
capital of the manufacturer, who employed him,
and lie ventured to say diet if this principle
were carried out it would end in the destruc-
tiou of the interests of both ,ettiployer and employed.
—(Hear; hear.) And it was on this groundehet be (named
any, eerenroinise on this question. He objected to anything
that would admit—the principle, that the House. had
any right whatever to entertain the consider-
ation of this most injurious measure.—(Hear, hear.)
Although he had paid the greatest . attention whilst the
Hon. Member who moved the second reading of the Bill was
speaking, he could not hear one single word of what lie
said.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") He, therefore, knew no-

thing of what had fallen from him, but he knew his
opinions, having seen reports of his speeches deli-
vered in other places on' this subject. He was therefore
compelled to confine himself to the opinions expressed
by the Honourable Gentleman that had seconded the
motion of the Honourable Member for Oldham.—(Hear.)
But he hoped that they had arrived at that time when the
principles of commercial restrictions would be clearly
understood.—(Hear, hear.) It did not appear to him,
however, if they put shackles on the manufactures, they
would be able to meet the demand in the markets
which has given employment to so many millions
of their fellow-countrymen. The result would be, that they
will be thrown out of employment and the manufacturers
will remain idle. You will then have not complaints that
they are over-worked, but that they cannot get work. Again,
if the manufacturer is limited, what would be the result ?
The millions must stand still, and they would re-
gret the day when they besought you to impose
these restrictions. He was against this Bill. No trammel
should be imposed on the manufacturer save in the case of
children of tender age; and when a Bill was brought in for
their protection, he well remembered telling the
Right Honourable Gentleman that it would be used
as a precedent, and the principle would not be limited,
but would go on from stage to stage. If they agreed to a
Ten Hours' Bill, they would have one for eight hours pro-
posed before long. It was true it was a hard thing that men
should be compelled to labour for twelve hours, and
that no limitation should be enforced to alleviate
their hardships; if he considered that it was possible
to enforce any limitation, he would be the very first to afford
it—he meant any alleviation which could be afforded with-
out destroying the principle on which their livelihood de-
pends. And it was because he could judge of results,
and because he felt that if they carried out their request, that
they would be laying the foundation of future distress, that he
opposed the present measure. He would like to know on
what principle they claimed a right of interference in private
rights. He would suppose a case. He had three hundred
people on his estate;" he had no means of employing more
than one hundred at agricultural labour; how would he
employ the other two hundred? why,by manufactures alone.
There was no mode by which he could employ them unless
he was placed in a position, in regard to the produce of fo-
reign countries, that he could give them employment in ma-
nufactures. Unless he was able to supply his produce at a
rate by which he could compete with foreign manufacturers,
the effect would be that he could not employ them in manu-
factures, and they would be driven back on agricul-
ture for support. With regard to a glut in the market,
there would not be any, but the want of the
means of purchasing. The cheaper the article the larger
would it be purchased, and the greater the demand. It was
not fair to the manufacturers of this country to be stopped
in working their machinery two hours a day, when it was
necessary they should do so in order to compete with foreign
producers. It was the right of a manufacturer, in the first
place, to attend to his own interest as a capitalist, and in
the second place to regulate his affairs as to the parties whom
he employed. In such circumstances it was not fair to step in
and say that they must not employ their machinery for
twelve hours a day. The present Bill confines a manufac-
turer only to work his machinery ten hours a day, or else not
to employ parties, in which case the latter would be driven
to the union. . The principle which was inapplicable to one
case was inapplicable to the, country generally; and in
his opinion they could not take a worse step than to
interfere with the industry of the country. Hence
it was that, in a measure of such national
importance, he suggested that it should not be discussed in
a thin House and while so many Committees were sitting.
He appealed to the Rouse if such a principle of interference
as he had cited was admissible, and if not, why seek to
extend it:to the whole country ?—(Hear, hear.) No one
deplored more than he did the long hours and hard labour of
the English operatives, and none could be more anxious to
support any measure to expand their minds and elevate
them in the scale of being, but he opposed the
present Bill . because he believed it would be highly
injurious. Master and labourer should be left at per-
fect liberty to make the best bargain they could without any
interference. If such a measure was carried, it would be
impossible to continue the same rate of wages. Mr. Senior,
and three other gentlemen, had been sent down into the
manufacturing districts, to inquire into the effect which
the reduction of one hour per day would have on the capital
and the rate of wages. They had inquired into the respec-
tive influence of 12 hours, 11 hours, and JO hours daily;
and Mr. Senior had repeated that a large proportion of the
profits of machinery arose from the 11th and 12th hour's work.
If that was the case the House would see how vain it was to
limit the hours of labour in factories. If Hon. Members on
the other side would provide a fund to supply the wages of
those who would be turned out of employment in consequence
of such bad legislation, he would then be prepared to sup-
port the measure. He protested against any doctrine that
interfered with the capital of labour. The Hon. Member
concluded by moving, " That the Bill be read a second time
this day six months."
Mr. WARD seconded the amendment.
Sir G. STRICKLAND was of opinion that many who had
opposed legislation on this subject were rather shaken in
their convictions. Even the Hon. Member who had last
addressed the House (Mr. Hume) stood upon no very high
ground in his opposition. If the law were to be left in its
present state it would have the effect of requiring a labour of
fourteen hours, instead of twelve. He thought the Hon.
Member had done well in putting this as a case of humanity.
Sir J. GRAHAM said thatalthough upon personal grounds
he was unwilling this morning to interpose himself in the
course of this debate, yet, as the question now stood, it was
expedient that some member of the Government should state
the course that Government intended to adopt. The
Honourable Member who had just sat down
had truly remarked that this subject had undergone
much consideration in the course of the present Par-
liament. On former occasions, when it had been fully dis-
cussed, it was his duty to state to the House the principles
which guided him in coming to a discussion on the question
which they were then debating. That question was of
paramount importance, and most decidedly of great
interest. It had been his duty carefully to re-
consider all these opinions upon the subject, and
he was bound to state to the House that his
opinions had undergone no change, after the most careful
consideration he could bestow on the subject, and therefore
it was his duty to concur with the Hon. Member for Mon-
trose in resisting the further progress of the Bill.—(Hear.)
Now, be would shortly refer to some of the topics broached
in the course of the debate. It was urged by some Hon.
Members, and particularly by the Honourable Member
for Preston, that they ought to make some compromise
on this question, but lie thought that the time had gone by
when it was prudent to adopt any such course. Already the
Legislature had restricted the hours of labour for children to
twelve hours, while children under the age of eight years
were restricted altogether from working in factories con-
ofsilkth, e
anndianfluattureThoef
ntheectedcouNnYtirtyh_cofotutr brancheson,.vioollen,
hours of labour for persons between the ages of
twelve and sixteen were limited to twelve, and in
some factories the hours of labour for children between the
ages of six and thirteen were restricted to six hours and a
half per day, while the Acts of Parliament, which made these
restrictions, provided most amply for the education of the
childrea during the leisure hours. Having said
thus much, he would entreat the House to
consider the immense magnitude of the subject
they were discussing. First, with reference to our
trade. What proportion did the four branches of manufac-
ture he had mentioned bear to the exports of the country?
He said fearlessly that three-quarters of the value of the
whole exports, amounting to between thirty and forty mil-
lions, were connected with these four branches of
manufacture. Now, with regard to wages. How
did these four branches stand? They paid in wages
225,0001. a week, 'while at least half a million of the popula-
tion of the count].) - were dependent for their living on these
four branches of manufacture. He said, therefore, if they
committed an error in their legislation upon this subject it
was no trifling e nor, as it touched the staple manu-
factures of the 'country, a great portion of the foreign
trade of the cc untry, affected the industry of half a
million of the ro oat industrious of their population, and
touched also the circulation to the amount of nearly a
quarter of a milli( )n per week.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") It
was impossible, th erefore, that they could consider a question
of more frightful importance as bearing upon the interests of
either the whole country or particular classes, but he
objected to the time at which they were called to
discuss this mat ter, or in its being discussed at all now,
because it had al ready, in the course of the present Parlia-
ment, undergorre the most full and ample consideration.—
(Hear, hear.) 1t had been stated by one Hon. Member that
the working cla asses were disappointed in the conduct of that
House, but he • for one absolutely denied that the House
had ever pror tounced an opinion in favour of a Ten
Hours' Bill. It was true, Lord Ashley, on a former
occasion moved an amendment to a factory Bill that the
hours should 1 me limited to ten instead of twelve, but that
s
pehdoartdtotuhnoecefa.
beforerti 7Th ehooebp discussionur
observed,
erte present
session, time
hi neißcmhuf
oat
,scr
most inopportune.
measuresinadwohe pea was amendment was.: negatived by a majority of 395 to 158.
(Cheers.)osi
ttnethhhs
sesetirhroeisnnewa amendment
hfister
satoredmetr
ncpeaAoiol
troaftncf.tcLudhew:ei:a
:pt.tsdhthraniees
resent
ecßne
Governmentsit
Ashley.llt,
wi
had ch
reso alullindyacuotmhoeriinsitnogopreemraotvioanfof whilethe
restrictions on t he importation of corn, and articles
used in the in aking of bread, had not yet come
into force, while o ur home manufacturers had at once been
placed in free Dampetition with their foreign rivals. Ten
per cent, of the fifties enforced on the cotton, and 15 per cent.
on the woollen, 1 ;rade, had already been removed.—(Hear).
What were ca pital and labour ? Somebody had said,
" Don't treat thi s question as one of pounds, shillings, and
pence."—(Hear, hear.) What were wages, and what was
capital? Was t 'ere any difference between them? They
could not cons der the questions of capital and la-
ri:munrufaseeptuarreale(lyii.e.ar, Anin.a.d.arn)ohw.,
la-
bour
rise in price was a-
of this measure a if they attempted to abridge the
hours during whi .ch machinery was in action from 12 to 10
with respect to the effect
hours, they woul ci' diminish the time of labour one fifth ;
and the effect of the measure, if they adopted it, would be
;educe the a reduction either in the ofits or the prices.—(Hear, hear.)
Ile believed the intensity of foreign competition actually
prohibited a rise in the: price of all our great branches of
andwag ensecoefssahri and he, therefore, held that a
question. There must be a
reduction in the profits ,•or in the wages ,• and what would
be the effectlist' of a redo, ction of the profits? The capita-
Part of t
s only resource if la s profits were diminished would be to
Now he had heard some :thing said about the possibility that
ys scvoourrks-epeople.i n Tthoa tt
take.—(Hear.)
was
eoanrl.y)
the same
amount of i vork would be produced even if the
duurs were re( laced from twelve to eleven hours per
and.—(tiear-) had heard an Hon. Gentleman cheer,
8e •
.6
un the qrs .rter whence that cheer came, he
must say that. he . had every possible respect for the
°Pinf"ns es! the Ho L. Member. But he held in his hand a
statement r osiaectioss; the results of the experiments of Messrs.
Item:sass, the ex,,
ensiye manufacturers, who had recently
redeem th
, hours of labour in their mills from twelve to
eleven "on rki par day. That statement appeared in the
ifanchester • Guardian of the 4th of April, and it appeared
from that statement that the effect of the reduction
of the hour lof labour was a reduction of 6i per cent. in the
amount of goods manufactured—(Hear, hear)—and he
thought 6: ,t he wag quite correct In his calculations that the
effect of the reduction of the hours of labour would, to the
extent sou, lht by the Bill, have tha effect of reducing
the profits of the manufacturer 16 per cent. But,
as he had already said, he believed that in a series
?f Years tl, e employers of the labourer in the manufac-
turing distiS 'as would, in self-defence, propose a reduction
of ra" to effect.
• ses tot he extent that this Bill was calculated
Let them • leo take into their consideration the other
view of the case. What would be the effect of that
reduction of ;he wages of the labouring poor? The
capital of th , f working man was his labour.—( Hear,
was the hard lot of man
hear.) It ss "that by the sweat of
.
his brow he mint earn his bread," and it was also the curse
of mankind that
sorrow and hard labour was it that
I
bread must gee
ll b ned. Then let them take cure
lug no doubt with the
that whilst acting no e ear
purest and most phi-
e
lanthropie inotiy did not increase that sorrow and'
111 •, they
more ho_
ear, aaki ..a
He knew of nothing
nourable, more 1 amiable, or more worthy of the en-
couragement and dmiration of the higher classes than to
endeavour to she :ten the long hours of the patient
and industrious of the labouring classes.—(Hear, hear.)
But let them tal4 a care that they did not throw any