The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-29 00:00:00

TiiiE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING. APRIL 29, 1846

•••••
BANCOr
nKBEiSI akl
e iendg th e
carried, H on
he Memberwoul d f
0,
tien
fotrhteh
the even vperne
osefnMttt
lirieasure?
li r.
stager
intimated that he would oppose the Bill in
every
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.—(Rear, hear.) Instead of meeting any
suggestion fordelay, 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 the 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. DUNCOMBE rose 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: let he 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 measures, 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 iu 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 countries. 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. lie 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 beg 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 childeen. The Honourable Gentle-
man—as he always is—was perfectly inaudible in
the gallery, and in consequence of his not having
favoured us in a similar manner as he did the other morning
papers with a copy of his speech, we are wholly unable to
give anything like a report.
Mr. AINSWORTH seconded the motion of the Hon.
Member for Oldham. He believed that if the Government
consented to the passing of this Bill they would satisfy all
parties. Some change was evidently necessary for the people
employed in factories, scarcely any time being allowed tor
their instruction. „
Mr. HUME said that this measure would no doubt be
satisfactory to the greater part of those employed in the
cotton manufactories. From the number of petitions that
had been presented to the House, he was bound to believe
that this Bill would be desirable to the working classes. But
it was because he thought that a more dangerous proceeding
to the interests of the country could not possibly be enter-
tained, that he thought it was the duty of those who be-
lieved that such a proceeding should be opposed, that he
came forward to oppose this measure, which, in
his opinion, was calculated ultimately to bring
ruin upon the best interests of the country ;
He had on no occasion shown himself indifferent to the inter-
ests of the working classes—( Hear, hear)—on the contrary.
he prided himself on having, on various occasions, en-
deavoured, as far as he was able, to free the labouring artizan
from all the trammels of monopoly under which he existed.—
( Hear, hear.) And he did wish to submit to the House what
had been the consequence since that great and important change
which be had been instrumental in effecting. He submitted,
too, that if the House assented to this Bill, they would be
acting in direct contradiction to the great principle of free
trade, which they had lately adopted.—(Hear, hear.)
This Bill was contrary to the common sense and the good
sense of the House, to remove all trammels on the capital
of industry whilst they proposed at the same time to impose
trammels on what was equally important—the capital of the
labouring man.—(Hear, hear.) It was not only an imposi-
tion on the capital of the labouring man, but also on the
capital of the manufacturer, who employed him,
and he ventured to say that if this principle
were carried out it would end in the destruc-
tion of the interests of' both employer and employed.
—(Hear, hear.) And it was on this ground that he opposed
any compromise 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
said.
—(Cries
rwiehaatofh‘a‘
Hon. Member who moved the second reading of the Bill was
ovpairneidoni
speaking, he could not hear one single word of what he
opinions,
ohthaevrin g dafi en:Hear,
eesaelalhoe
;Ire
seatfephrr l .
from
reports
ohHitemhef He,
e hisbol
iai therefore,
tinspeeches
he
opinions
nees
es e
cc
kh,)knewnaesewdd expressednethiho it -se.
compelled to coil subject. He was therefore
by the Honourable Gentleman that had
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
chit ren of tender age; and when a Bill was brought in for
their protection, he well remembered tellingthe
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 ?re-
posed before long. It was true it was a hard thing that men
should be compelled to labour for twelve hours, ani
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—lie 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 gums. ure He would like to know on
what principle they c
claimed a right of interference in private
He had three hundred
people He would suppose a case. . ,
his
people on estate;
cultural labour; how would he
than one hundred at agricultural
employ the other two hun
hich he could employ t 1
dred ? wh, by manu ac ures a one
f un them less
w
There was no mode by
rd to the produce of fo-
he was placed in a position, g
on, r
'eg a
employment i
reign countries, countries, that he could give
them
ly his produce at a
neactures. Unless he wag able to zupp

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
net 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 much 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 House 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 (sae
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. It' 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 that although 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 fur Mon-
trose in resisting the further progress of the Bill.—(Hear.)
Now, he 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 he 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-
nected with four branches of the manufacture of
' the country—cotton, woollen, silk, and flax. The
hours of labour for persons between the ages of
twelve and sixteen were limited to t ATM, 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
children 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?
lle 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
225,000/. a week, while at least half a million of the popula-
tion of the country were dependent for their living on these
four branches of manufacture. He iald, theTefore, if they
committed an error in their legislation upon this subject if
was no trifling error, as it touched the staple manu-
factures of the country—a great portion of the foreign
trade of the country—affected the industry of half a
million of the most industrious of their population, and
touched also the circulation to the amount of nearly a
quarter of a million per week.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") It
was impossible, therefore, 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 matter, or in its being discussed at all now,
because it had already, in the course of the present Parlia-
ment, undergone the most full and ample consideration.—
(Hear, hear.) It had been stated by one Hon. Member that
the working classes were disappointed in the conduct of that
House, but he for one absolutely denied that the House
had ever pronounced 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 be limited to ten instead of twelve, but that
amendment was negatived by a majority of 395 to 158.—
(Cheers.) And this Bill, in fact, was to carry out that
amendment of Lord Ashley. But, as he had before observed,
there were circuinstandes which rendered the discussion of
this matter at the present time most inopportune. There were
in the first place, the Government measures of the present
session, some of which had already come into operation, while
others had not. The resolution authorising removal of the
restrictions on the importation of corn, and articles•
used in the making of bread, had not yet come
into force, while our home manufacturers had at once been
placed in free competition with their foreign rivals. Ten
per cent. of the duties enforced on the cotton, and 15 per cent.
on the woollen trade, had already been removed.—(Hear).
What were capital and labour ? Somebody had said,
" Don't treat this question as one of pounds, shillings, and
pence."—(Hear, Lear.) What were wages, and what was
capital? Was there any difference between them? They
could not consider the questions of capital and la-
bour separately. And now, with respect to the effect
of this measures, if they attempted to abridge the
hours, during which machinery was in action from 12 to 18
hours, they would diminish the time of labour one fifth ;
and the effect of the measure, if they adopted it, would be
a reduction either in the profits or the prices.—( Hear, hear.)
He believed the intensity of foreign competition actually
prohibited a rise in the price of all our great branches of
manufacture—(Hear, hear)—and he, therefore, held that a
rise in price was a part of this question. There must be a
reduction in the profits or on the wages, And what would
be the effect of a reduction of the profits. The capita-
list's only resource if his profits were diminished would be to
reduce the wages of his work people. That was the only
justifiable and necessary course for him to take.—( Hear.)
Now he had heard something said about the possibility that
the same amount of work would be produced even if the
hours of labour were reduced from twelve to eleven hours per
day.—(Hear.) Ile had heard an Hon. Gentleman cheer,
and seeing the quarter whence that cheer came, he
must say that he had every possible respect for the
opinions of the Hon. Member. But he held in his hand a
statement respecting the results of the experiments of Messrs.
Horrocks, the extensive manufacturers, who had recently
reduced the hours of labour in their mills from twelve to
eleven hours per day That statement appeared in the
Manchester Guardian of the 4th of April, and it appeared
from that statement that the effect of the reduction
of the hours of labour was a reduction of 6i per cent. in the
amount of goods manufactured—(Bear, hear)—and he
thought that he was quite correct in his calculations that the
effect of the reduction of the hours of labour would, to the
extent sought by the Bill, have the effect of reducing
the profits of the manufacturer 16 per cent. But
as he had already said, he believed that in a series
of years the employers of the labourer in the manufao-
turinring districts would, in self-defence, propose a reduction
of wages to the extent that this Bill was calculated to effect.
Let them also take into their consideration the other
view of the case. What would be the effect of that
reduction of the wages of the labouring poor? The
capital of the working man was his labur.—( Hear,
hear.) It was the hard lot of man "that by the sweat of
his brow he must earn his bread," and it was also the curse
of mankind that in sorrow and hard labour was it that
bread must generally be earned. Then let them take care
that whilst acting, no doubt with the purest and most phi-
lanthropic motives, they did not increase thwat,t. sorrow and
toil.—(Hear, hear.) He knew of nohing nu honourable,
higher classes than to
admiration on the part of the
of the patient
endeavour to shorten the long hours
classes.—(Hear, hear.)
more laudable, or more worthy of the encouragement and
and industrious of the labouring
But let them take care that they did not throw any
impediment in the way of the poor, patient, and hard-
working man, who strived to obtain a living for himself
and his family.—(Hear, hear.) If they increased their
poverty (as he contended the effect of this Bill would be),
they would run the risk of corrupting their morals.—(Hear,
hear.) If they degraded their station he was satisfied they
would corrupt their morality.—(llear, hear.) Any measure
of this kind was fatal to the independence,- of the working
dlasses and the destruction of that independency
would be surely fatal to their morals.—(Hear, hear.)
Nothing could be more fatal to that independency than the
alteration of the present system of labour. He had received
several petitions from all parts of the country, stating that the
effect of such a measure would be to reduce the amount of 16 per
cent, the profits of the manufacturer. Whatever the mea-
sures of the Legislature might be, the effect of that measure
would be, not to mitigate this evil in any way. All he asked
was, that they would proceed with caution, arid not
depart from any desision of their own laid down
so as to cause a violation of a principle.
to which the House of Commons had, in its legislative
capac, already acceded. He, as a Member of the Govern-
ment, acting in conformity with the other Members, felt it
hie duty to
ity
. oppose this Bill.
Mr. COWPER moved that the debate be adjourned.
COLQUROUN thought that it would be better if the
debate were continued till six o'clock.
Dr. BOWRLNG said there were a number of other orders
of the day to be disposed of, and he really considered that it
motion
would be hard if the debate should continue so as to make
them dropped orders,
Sir ROBERT PEEL did not see why they should adjourn
the debat at so early a period, therby losing half an hour.
p i was
Llpt then n
said,withdrawn.
that
Mr.h M. Mr. COWPER said if the sense of the House was against
his motion he would not persevere with it, it was to prevent
the
_cther orders of the day from becoming dropped.
T
frequently as the present
subject had been introduced there had been no attempt
made by its advocates to disprove a fact which he considered
oit
f the utmost importance. In former times they were
frequently attempted to be seduced into a support of the Ten
Hours '
Bill by the allegation that there would be an equal
quantity of work done in ten as there was then in twelve
hours. But how the fallacy of that statement had been
entirely exposed. Experiments had been made by ma-
nufacturers, and he was then able to stand up in

his place, and say that it was utterly impossible
with ten hours work to perform the same amount of business
as was done in twelve. Well then, it comes to this plain
question, can the persons employed in the different branches
of trade live on tea hours' pay ?—(lDar.) He stated in that
House formerly, that if they would take the question by ballot,
of the working classes whether they would prefer ten hours'
pay to twelve hours the question would be at once settled,
and they would unanimously prefer the latter. It was very
singular, in the number of strikes which had taken place among
the working classes, if they were so anxious for the measure.
that they had never attempted to obtain it. Taking the
question in a political and economical point of view, he con-
sidered, that in agreeing to it, they could do nothing that
would tend so much to inflict evil on the neighbouring com-
munity of this country. He cordially concurred in what had
fallen from the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir J. Graham), and
he was persuaded the Government, in deciding to oppose the
Bill, were doing the best thing, not only to protect the com-
mercial interests of the country, but also the best interests of
those who lived by labour. On these grounds he oppesed the
second readini of the Bill.—(Hear, hear).
Mr. GEORGE BANKES then moved the adjournment of
the debate till to-morrow night.
The SPEAKER said it was not competent for the Hon.
Member to move it till any precise time.
Mr. BANKES then simply moved the adjournment.
He hoped Hon. Members who had motions would postpone
them in order to allow the debate to come off. He hoped
also the Government, who had the Coercion Bill adjourned
debate for the same night, would give way to this arrange-
I ment. . _

Mr, HAWES said he had a motion, the first on the paper,
to-morrow night, and as he had already twice given way he
should certainly not do so on the present occasion.
Sir R. PEEL would be willing to fall into any arrange-
ment that might become to, to allow the present debate to
come off to-morrow night; still there was an understanding
with the Irish Members, that if there iv-fv; any time to-morrow
night, the debate o❑ the Irish Protection Bill should be resumed
He must say, however, to Hon. Members, that when the
Corn Bill was under discussion, there was no disposition
shown to allow the eivision on that Bill to proceed day by
day. Still he would be willing, with the concurrence of the
Irish Members, that the debate on the Irish Bill should be
taken on Friday, at five o'clock, so as to liberate to-morrow
night.
After a few words from Mr. T. Duncovnbe, Sir R. Peel, and
Mr. Fielden, the debate was adjourned to Wednesday.
The other orders 3f the day were then disposed of, and
the House rose at six o'clock.

NEWMARKET RACES.
(THIS DAY-BY EXPRESS.)

BY THE E &STERN COUNTIES
ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.

Match.

Physalis

Cocoa. Nut .
Match.

Prospect
Trebonius
Handicap. A.F

Footstool
Petit MorePau
Rowland Hill

Fifty Pounds Plate; B.C,

Wolfdog
Maynooth
Koppel

RAILWAY Sti 1+ RE MARKETS.

MANCHESTER, Arata 28.
STOCK EICHANGE.—The sales are—Blackburn, Darwen, and Bol-
ton, 2 dis.—Buckingham and Bletchly Junction, 14 dis.—Chester
and Manchester Direct, 11% dis.—Clitheroe Junction, 1 dis.—Derby
and Crewe, 2 p. —Direct Northern, ILA dis.—Eastera Counties, 2314
—East Lancashire (No. 2), 2 p.—Glasgow and Dumfries, 34 dis.—
Goole, Doncaster, Sheffield, &c , 34 dis. Great Grimsby and Shef-
field, 5 dis.—Huddersfield, Halifax, and Bradford, 11/, p.—Hudders-
field and Manchester Railway and Canal, 3i dis.—Ditto, Extension,
dis. —Huddersfield and Sheffield Junction, 44 p.—Leeds and
Thirsk, 51 Ms.—Liverpool and Bury, 8 p.—Ditto, New Shares, 1%
p.— Liverpool and Leeds Direct, 1, dis.—Liverpool, Ormskirk, and
Preston, I Is. 6d. p.—Liverpool, Preston, Manchester, and Soutlip,rt,
11 dis.—London and Manchester (Remington's), 134 dis —Manches-
ter, Buxton, and Matlock, 1-16 p.—Manchester and Birmingham,
7834—Ditto, Quarters (A), B%—Ditto, ditto (B), p.—Ditto,
ditto (C), Manchester and Leeds, halves, 1714 p.—Ditto, Quar-
ters, 7% p.—Ditto, Extension, 365. p.—Northumberland and Lance-
shire, 17s. dis.—North Staffordshire, 2% p.—Oldham, Birkenhead,
&c., I9s. 6d. die.—Preston and Wyre, Halves, (B), 13-16 p.—Preston
and Wyre Extension, 4 dis. —Sheffield and Lincolnshire Junction,
3s. 9d. dis.—Sheftleld and Manchester, Quarters (No. 2), 2% p.—
Ditto, ditto (No. 3), 14 p.—South Eastern and Dover, Halves (No.
4), Is. 2cl. dis.—West Riding Union, 2 p.
HULL, APRIL 28. _ _ .

- - ,
STOCK EXCHANGE.—We have had a rather spirited market to-day
in scrip, partcularly Hull and Barnsley. Heavy stock, of which
little is offered here, was also more inquired after, at much better
prices. The sales are—London and Brighton, 6414--Blackburn,
Darwen, and Bolton, 21. Bs. 9d. —Huddersfield and Sheffield Junction,
12—Newcastle and Berwick, 20 —North British, Halt Shares, 81/,
—Ditto, Carlisle, 395. 6d. —North Wales, 153.—Armagh, Coleraine,
and Portrush, 12s. —Bradford, Wakefield, and Midland, 305.—Chelms-
ford and Bury, 1 Is. 9d —Derby and Gab,sborough, 13s. 6d.--East
Lincolnshire, 13s. 3d.—EaSt Coast, 225. W.—Grimsby, Louth, and
llorncastle, 235. o,—i/till and Barnsley Junction, 263. 6d.—Hull and
Lincoln, 21s. 6d. —Leicester and Tamworth, 20s. 61—North Staf-
fordshire, 41. 125. 61—South Midland, 425. 9d.—Shrewsbury and
Birmingham, —Tean and Dave Valley, 14s.—West Biding Union,
4—Yorkshire and Glasgow Union, 235.

LEEDS, APRIL 2S

STOCK EXCIIINGE.-The sales are-Eastern Counties, York Ex-
tension, 27s Gd. p.-London and Croydon, 22-Manchester and Leeds
Extensions, 2 p.-East Lancashire, No. 2 (late Accrington), 2 c. p. -
Great Grims'ay and Sheffield, 414 dis.-Huddersfield and Manchester,
1 dis.-Ditto, Extensions, 1 dis.-Huddersfleld and Sheffield, 3% c.
p.-Leeds and Bradford, 26% p.-Leads and Dewsbury, N p.-
Ditto, New Branches, 7s. Gd. p.-Ditto, New Extensions, ss. p.-
Liverpool and Bury, l % p.-North British, New Carlisle Branch,
15s. p.-Ambergate, Nottingham, and Boston, 255. dis.-Bradford,
Wakefield, and Midland, 21s. 6d. dis.-Chelmsford and Bury, 175.
dis.-Direct Northern, 255. dig. -Essex and Suffolk, 15s. W.-Glas-
gow and Dumfries, 155. dis.-Great Eastern and Western, 275. 6d.
dis.-Leeds and York, 233. dis.-Leicester and Bedford, 14s. 6d.
dis.-Liverpool, Ormskirk, and Preston, 105. p.-London and York,
175. dis.-Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland, 2s. Gd. p. -
Manckester and Birmingham Continuation and Welsh Junction, 17s.
dis.-Northumberland and Lancashire Junction, 17s. dis.-North
Staffordshire, 2% p.-North Western. 6s. dis.-Oxford, Witney, and
Cheltenham, 17s. 6d. dis.-South Midlands, 6d. die. -Welsh Midlands,
225. dis.-West Riding Union. 31. 134.-York and Carlisle, 265. 6d.
dis.-Yorkshire and Glasgow Union, 265. 6d. dis.
GLASGOW, APRIL 27.

STOCK EICHATZGE.-The sales are-Aberdeen, Banff, and Elgin,
265.-Ayr and Galloway, 315.-British and Irish Union, 435.-Cale-
donian Extension, 31s. Gd.-Caledonian and Dumbartonshire Junc-
tion, 30e.-Cornwall and Devon Central, 30s. Gd.-East Indian Rail-
way, 9s. 9d.-Edinburgh and Glasgow, 721.-Ditto, New, 16% -
Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Dumbarton, 19s. 6d.-Edinburgh and
Northern, 955.-Ditto, Lochgelly, 19s. 6d.-Edinburgh and Peebles,
275.-Forth and Clyde Junction, 355. W.-Glasgow General Ter-
minus, 91.-Glasgow and Belfast Union, 345. 6d.-Glasgow, Kil-
marnock, and Ayr, Quarter Shares (5 per cent. guar.), 181. -Glasgow,
Dumfries, and Carlisle, 375. Gd. -Glasgow, Kihnarnock, and Ardros-
san, 27s.-Glasgow and Dundee Junction, 335.-Glasgow Harbour
Mineral, 315.-Inverness and Elgin, 205. 6d.-Lauark and Lothians,
40s. Gd.-Larne, Belfast, and Ballymena, 125.-Lesmahagow, 425.-
London, Bristol, and South Wales, 20s. Gd.-Midland, 1461.--Ditto,
New, 311,6-Perth and Inverness, 31s. 6d.-Scottish Central and
Caledonian Junction, 265. 6d.-South Midland, 395.-South and Mid-
land Junction, 205.-Stirling and Dunfermline, 355.-Wishaw and
Coltness, 47%.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS. April 28.
THE PROPOSED RAILWAY BILL.
Earl FITZ WILLIAM said they were now about to enter
upon the second reading of the Bill that had been introduced
for the purpose of regulating all future railway Bills. He ap-
proved of the measure entirely, for he did think it was
time to put an end to the disgraceful mania
for railways that had existed, and which had been most mis-
chievous to the country at large. He would now beg to move
that there be laid upon the table of the House an account of
the total estimated cost of all railways for which peti-
tions had been presented in • this session of Parlia-
ment, distinguishing between the Bills that had been
withdrawn and those tkat were now pending It
was an absurdity to call these railway Bills private Bills.
s
differed
since r
et
a o l, ave
They should have been dealt with with moreda algearxwhetaeaeytnast
number
beusede w
mes
etnvbariebpetrlhwri
os-
tfoas,
as Bills involving the means of communication with all parts
of Great Britain. They were national Bills, aid should have
been dealt with as such. He
There would
ie. m
alwayse be a great dis-
position
teorf
that
hnit
lhawteraayi
railways.
communication.owtuhay ne country, ys, withTahrielly e
hdaa vi
The
to h
aap egoetn)
leerwa generall
to
osoysstspuht
speculate
lgy ofaht a
heof
railways
sd
flast,hethfauttuirte.wasi
too
late now.
Ile
from
the present railway Bills this session they would hear no more
fitable investments. He believed it was not too late
to take
the initiative so far as it could be taken in the matter, by esta-
blishing a railway department in connexion with the State,
Commission.
The on the principle of the Poor-law
The Duke of CLEVELAND fully agreed with what had
fallen from the Noble Lord. Such a motion would have the effect
of relieving many from the position
in which they had placed them-
selves from the fever which seized them in railway speculation.
The whole system of rail
way legislation required a complete
change. Nothing could be more frightful than the state of
things which prevailed, promoting bankruptcy and gambling to
a great extent, yet what had been done had been encouraged
by the Government and Parliament. If they looked to the ses-
sion of 1844, leaving out of view the projects of the present year,
they would find that more schemes were brought forward than
had been projected from the formation of the first railway up to
that period. The present system completely dissipated the
finances of the country, as well as corrupted its morals.
Last year they had stopped the gaming houses in Pall-mall and
other places, and he could not see what difference there was
between gambling carried on in such houses and that which
had taken place in regard to railways. While in the former
case it was limited to a few places, in the latter it had become
widely extended. It was necessary, in order to cheek this gam-
bling, that Parliament should retrace its steps. During the
continuance of the undue speculation, many persons who were
wholly irresponsible took upon themselves the office of direc-
tors, not for the purpose of projecting schemes for the benefit
of the public, but for the express purpose of obtaining money
from the public for their own purposes. Why should there
not then be a Board of Works, to whom the
should be submitted, and who should give their opinion whe-
ther the railways ought or ought not to be made ?—( Hear,
hear.) This, in his opinion, would prevent the promulgation
of futile projects, and consequently render essential benefit to
the community. At present, parties might take a map of
England in their hands and project a line through any part of
it which had not a railway; and they might do this, although
persons possessed of neither influence nor capital, and totally
unconnected with the locality for which they proposed a rail-
way. Landowners ought not to be allowed to oppose projects
simply because they passed through their land, it it could be
proved that they would confer benefits on the country, but they
ought not to be at the mercy of engineers and solicitors in
country towns.—(Hear, hear.) The Government ought to
bring in a new Bill with respect to railways, and appoint such
a tribunal as the one he suggested ; they would then have good
railways instead of bad ones, and would put an end to all those
bubble schemes of which they had heard so much. But if they
did not adopt some such plan, they might rest assured that
such projects would increase instead of diminishing.
Lord MONTEAGLE said it was his intention to call for
some further information bearing on the question. It was not
always they could get an estimate of the cost of construction of
railways; and even when they only got a list of Bills, they did
net get at the root of all the mischief, because such a list would
riot contain those projects on which money had been paid and
expended, but which hail not come before the consideration of
Parliament. The documents he wished for were these :—he
would wish to have a list of all the motions for Bills that had
appeared in the Gnzette; he would wish for a list of all the
Bills of which notice had been given at the Private Bill-office;
an account of all the capital proposed to be raised and to be
borrowed ; and, as the most impoetant of all, an account of the
number of shares issued in order to raise this capital. His
object was
to show the House the necessity of putting an end to
this system of gambling.
Lord CAMPBELL rose to speak to the motion, when
The LORD CHANCELLOR proceeded to put the motion.
Lord CAMPBELL still insisting upon addressing their
Lordships,
The LORD CHANCELLOR—Will the Noble Lord allow
me to put this motion? He can then speak as the second
motion.