The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-15 00:00:00

fitonting .7. int

LONDON, FRIDAY, MAY 15, 1846.

We have hitherto taken no part in the discussion on the
Ten Hours' Bill for various reasons. It is one of the most
difficult questions, if not the most difficult, that can be
brought before the Legislature. It requires a great deal of
practical knowledge of the system of labour in factories, of
the nature of the work to be performed, the fatigue in-
curred, the difference between a certain number of hours
of work fully employed, and a larger number of
hours of work in which the full energy of the operatives
is not exerted, though the vast machinery is going on in the
most efficient way ; the difficulty of finding hands to work
additional time in case the prosperity of trade should greatly
increase; and even with the knowledge of all these facts,
it might be impossible to anticipate with anything like
precision what might be the result of a change
which will affect nearly one million of labourers,
and interfere with the most gigantic and expen-
sive machinery in the world. Persons unacquainted
with such complicated operations may therefore be excused
from giving any decided opinion on the subject, and we are
the more confirmed in this opinion from the very diversity of
judgments pronounced by persons who should be best in-
formed. The Bill is opposed by the Government chiefly
we believe, from a reluctance to interfere with the
regulations of the master manufacturers, or to control
in any way, by legislative enactments, the use of
capital. We do not blame them for this caution,
because experience shows that nothing is so dangerous to
the prosperity of any particular trade, or undertaking, or
speculation, as laws decreed by absolute monarchs, or even
popular assemblies, which may bind down the masters or the
men to a specific course of operation. Some trades cannot
be touched without ultimate ruin. For these reasons, pro-
bably, such men as Mr. LABOI:CHERE and others, who
have attained the rank of statesmen, may be opposed to
the Bill. The master manufacturers, one may suppose,
would be opposed to it unanimously, because they naturally
dislike all interference, and are inclined as much to rebel
against the office of factory inspector as against the abridge-
ment of the hours of labour. But the Bill for the appoint-
ment of inspectors has been found to work well ; it affords
some protection to the ill-used operative, who previously had
absolutely no protection whatever, and might be treated
with the utmost cruelty by an overseer or a master with ab-
solute impunity. The master now finds that he gains rather
than loses by treating those under him like rational beings, and
that men who are well used are both more willing and more able
to perform their work. Under such a conviction some of the
largest manufacturers are in favour of the measure, for, con-
trary to what might a priori be taken for granted, the
masters are by no means unanimous on the subject. The
Bill has been brought in by one of the most distinguished
cotton manufacturers of England, by a man who has
amassed great wealth, though he always treated his men well,
and did not fear to compete with others, though he en-
forced less strictly his power. The authority of such a man
is of tenfold importance when compared with that of Lord
ASHLEY, or any other humane but uninformed innovator.
Besides, if we are not mistaken, Mr. FIELDEN has worked
his way from the condition of a labourer to his present envi-
able position, and cannot fail, therefore, to be thoroughly
acquainted with the nature of the employment, the debility
caused by over-working, and the consequent loss to the
master; and it may also be presumed that he is as likely to
forsee the results of the proposed change as any cotton-spinner
in Yorkshire or Lancashire. But there is another equally
important witness in its favour, one who has admitted in the
House that he had gone through all the grades of the sys-
tem, that he had worked himself as a common operative,
and had been subjected to the tender mercies of an overseer
or superintendent, armed with a billy-roller. These are
strong authorities when balanced even with the most learned
and confident political economists. But even these cannot
in any way agree as to the amount of mischief
which this Bill will inflict. Sir JAMES GRAHAM calculates
that the change would reduce the profits of the manufacturer
by 16 per cent. Mr. LABOOCHEIE agrees with him, and
t.Q fhe mee,nt nnp-sixth : while Mr. DENNIST/ UN seems
be " most disastrous." Mr. W. COWPER did not an-
ticipate any diminution in the produce. When
such division prevails among men of experience,
and who profess to be well acquainted with the subject,
writers in newspapers may well be allowed to hesitate.
From all accounts the operatives themselves are in favour
of the measure; and as they seldom have a " say " in the
deliberations of Parliament, and a brief experiment could
not cause much injury, they might be indulged for once to
prove that they are not altogether unrepresented.

Mr. Sr•onEn last night moved that a Select Committee be
formed to consider the petitions of Mr. T. SMITH, and the
papers presented to the House relative to the case stated in
those petitions. In the question thus submittedto the inves-
tigation of the Legislature is involved one of the leading
principles of our Constitution—a principle, indeed, upon
the maintenance of which rests not merely the stability, but
the very existence of perhaps the most vaunted and the

most cherished among what are usually termed our birth-
rights as Englishmen. It appeals to every individual mem-
ber of the community, being a matter of the most essen-
tially public character; and in bringing it before Parliament
the petitioner is not only vindicating his own prerogatives
as an English citizen, but he is vindicating the prerogatives
of every one of his fellow-countrymen, and is striving for
the preservation (P) of one of the noblest and most valuable
boons an inhabitant of the British Isles is supposed to pos-
sess. Every Etudent of BLACKSTONE is familiar with the prin-
ciple here implied, the principle through the operation of
which every householder in the United Kingdom would
enjoy as great security both to himself and his pos-
sessions, as though he were girt about by impregnable forti-
fications, and filled with the exultation, at which reflection
the great commentator, in his fourth volume, page 223, revels
in the idea that "every Englishman's house is his castle!"
Repeatedly, however, as this boast is upon our lips, wo have
been compelled, again and again, to pause in its very utter-
ance—a dubious suspicion of its emptiness has invaded
our minds—and we are brought at last to the blunt question,
Is this really the case? Do we, in truth, possess

• immunities of this nature? Are our houses castles? Or,
are not those vaunted rights, on the contrary, of a very vul-
nerable description ? Unhappily there are on record not
merely arguments, but facts, which too fully prove the
i justice of our scepticism, and the fallacy of our boast.
The case of WlLKEs—now so remote, and of itself so im-
portant as to become invested with the dignity of an his-
torical transac:ion—places the matter beyond all doubt, as
far as an obnoxious demagogue is concerned. The case of
Mr. JO3IIIIA TowirN Small (infinitely more important
than the preceding, because the case of a private individual,
and hence the possible precedent of any and every person in
the realm) testifies that all the bragging in the world can-
not preserve an Englishman from the most disgraceful and
unconstitutional espionage. From their involving
the actuality of this axiom, that our habi-
tations cannot be broken open and entered
with impunity, and from affecting, as they do, the question
of the extent of our civil liberties as a people, the particulars
of the grievance complained of by the petitioner are ele •
vated from a personal to a national importance. They are
simple enough in themselves, but absolutely monstrous in
their bearing. It appears from the documents already lying
before, or about to be submitted to Parliament, that Mr.
Totramm Sum s, a special pleader, residing and practising in
the Temple, has had the privacy of his dwelling-house in-
vaded by two policemen and an Excise-officer, armed with
a search warrant which had been obtained by the Excise
authorities from a magistrate, solely—let this be especially
observed—solely at the instigation of the writer of an anony-
mous letter ! It appears, moreover, that under the cover of
this warrant, though they actually refused to produce it upon
the requisition of the petitioner, these three persons invaded
and searched every part of the tenement, garden, green-house,
bed-rooms, and private stilly; that "a full and explicit
apology has been most deliberately refused," and that "any
expression even of regret had been evaded." In this ex-
traordinary transaction the immediate culpability appears to
Test with either the Excise authorities or the magis-
trate issuing the warrant, or possibly with
boty
but beyond this, and apart from the individualit of
the case, there is manifestly " something rotten in the state
op
Denmark." There is a hiatus somewhere—a crack in the
'very shield of our liberty. It is, impressed with this feeling,
:and anxious to divest the matter of anything like
.an in-
vidious or personal character, that the petitioner here
.endeavours to ensure the reformation of a system,
:not the punishment of an individual. He adduces
-the transaction which we have just mentioned simply
,as a case in point, and with the view of directing the atten-
-tion of the Legislature to the correction of a most grievous
Abuse. Upon this head Mr. TOULMIN Salmi, in certain
it,imself
civil
:
'" considerations" (as to the real character and origin of the
" Of all civil rights and liberties, se?urityThouasned and
it is the first duty of every civilised government secure
to instituted) which e
observeshas recently published in
"person is the most sacred, essential important;
P ther c ;o@rdm i n ogfs a
all boast of rights and of
a free constitution is empty.
t
.and maintain. Without
sot now exist in England, but that any and every man's
"The case of my petition shows that that security does