The Sun.
London, England, 1870-03-08 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH 8, 1870.

itt/jv

LONDO.N, TUESDAY, 11.IARC11 8, 1870.

THE exertions of Canon Girdlestone and others
have been the means of causing the condition of the
agricultural labourer to become a prominent matter
of debate on most occasions of discussion, and to
occupy a certain amount of attention on the part of
all personsinterested in the various national questions
of the present generation. Of all that has been said
and written on this subject much, no doubt, has been
the result of actual experience and observation.
On the other hand, the occupations of business
men, and the difficulty attending a non-professional
search into a social mystery as old as the British Con-
stitution, have forced many persons to accept state-
ments and ideas, the correctness or incorrectness of
which they had no means of ascertaining. It is a
matter of congratulation that there are such things as
Royal Commissions in the land. As a rule abstract
theories and dogmas founded upon prejudices, and
sometimes even upon -imaginary ideas fade into
insignificance when confronted by plain practical
evidence. The second report, is now published of the
Assistant Commissioners appointed to inquire into
the employment of children, young persons, and
women, in agriculture. Like its predecessor, it em-
bodies a vast amount of the evidence 'we have been
in' search of—evidence from the mouths of both
fliployers and employed. Taking as a basis of
nquiry the question as to whether or not legis-
ation is required to fix the age below
_which no child shall be allowed to work, we find
that on this point a variety of opinion is expressed.
).11 classes of persons have been interrogated, or have
volunteered statements, from the peer of the realm
to the wretched little "bird-keeping" boy of seven
years old. In some parts of the country the condition
of our agricultural labourers in general, and of the
boys, women, and children in particular, is re2re-
sented as deplorable. In other parts men of sound
practical sense and great experience deckle
that the outcry for legislation has no
sufficient grounds to stand upon. Probably
both descriptions are correct when applied
to the particular localities they refer to. Thus, a
meeting of Hampshire farmers, presided over by
Lord Northbrook, had no objection to a limit
of ten years being fixed as the earliest ago at
which children should be allowed to go to work,
which resolution may be accounted for by the fact
that there happens to be a plentiful supply of labour
in the district from which the meeting drew
its opinions, and a wish on the part of
parents to send their children to school. But in the
same county the New Forest Board of Guardians
thought the best limit would be eight years, inas-
much as if boys were not allowed to work till they
were ten years of OA they would hereafter be bad
labourers. More than once throughout the evidence
is this opinion expressed and the doctrine laid down
that the best agriculturists are those who begin work
at a very early age. A Cheshire clergyman, expres-
sing the opinions of his farmer acquaintances on this
point, complains that Government school inspectors
can't or won't understand that agricultural is technical
education.

Taking an individual opinion on the question
amongst others of whether any work is injurious to
the women and children engaged it, we visit North
Wilts, where we find that Mr. Edward Little, of
Lanhill, near Chippenham, states positively, after
thirtyyears experience of farming, that he knows of no
employment which he considers injurious to women and
children. He can recollect no such cases in his
neighbourhood. There would not be enough boys
for the work in this district, if the age was restricted
to ten years. Of the boys in his employment, the
best is one who began work at six years of age. He
can now read and write. Mr. Little believes that
boys who can do the three R.'s fairly make the
best labourers, and he adds that the schools
of the neighbourhood are attended by children
as regularly as can be desired. Passing from one ex-
tremity of Wiltshire to another, Mr. Geo. Mannings,
of Downton, informs the Assistant Commissioner that
he thinks a boy can be well spared on a farm till
he is ten years old. The wages they earn under that
age are of little service to the parents. Here, how-
ever, we are told that the parents don't care any-
thing at all about education. They formerly
considered it of value, but they do not
now. Very different is the feeling of a
labourer in the North of England, who told Yr. Tre-
menheere—the gentleman appointed to explore that
part of the country in search of facts—that, labourer
as he was,." he knew that scholarship was the only
chance for children getting on in the world ; and the
thought of not being able to give it to his children
often made him unhappy." The rate of wages ,
paid to small boys throughout the country
seems somewhat inadequate to make up for
the want of schooling, which is necessitated by
their employment. On the score of low wages, or
even of no wages, the village of Halberton, in Devon-
shire, bears away the palm. The Hon. E. Portman
elicited from two urchins of eight and nine years of
age the histories of their little lives. One told
him that he had been out bird-scaring at
3d. a week, wet and dry, from 5 a.m.
to 6 p.m. The other received his victuals instead
of wages for the same service, wet or dry, from
four a.m. to eight p.m. In most parts, when a boy
is promoted from the noble occupation of bird-scaring
to that of pig-keeping, his daily pay increases, and
when he attains to the honour of the plough, the
cart, or the sheepfold (as assistant to the shepherd)
he usually receives upwards of 4s. a week, which
increases by degrees until he earns the wages of a
full-grown man.
Prominent amongst districts Where education is
considered in preference to the scanty earnings of,
child, is the greater part of the county of Kent. The
average ago at which children here leave school. IEIIO
or 11. Until then they aro not needed b-y the
farmers, and not employed. In Cheshire vtry few
English women ever engage in farm labour, and the

number of these is rapidly diminishing. Numbers of
Irish women, however, are employed in the potato fields.
Tho gang system, having been dealt with by law, is
become nearly obsolete in many parts of the country.
A system prevails, however, of sending six. or twelve
women out weeding under the superintendence of an
old man. Cottage accommodation is A prominent
matter of comment throughout the evide ace. Besides

the excessive crowding, injurious to h eal ,h and morals,
which is the burden of all the rerta; ks, Mr. Stan-
hope found that in Dorsetshiro the. 2ingle upstairs
window was very frequently not made to open ! Ono
noble earl is setting the example to landlords by
building his cottages with film rooms above and

three below. This policy does. not suit many of the
private speculators—often the.'village," statesmen "
who build or purchase cottages for the poor.
In Berkshire Mr. Cully obtained f !enuine answers
from the very men who could be: rt satisfy him by
truthful replies. One cottager told I Lim he shared a
bedroom with a son, a daughter, and . two nephews;
while another, after describing a similar state of
things, aptly added, "most like r sir." A third
sail: "My boy can't real nor write y no more can't I,
no more can't his mother. T avi3ll we could."
Altogether, the answers with w tich the Connuis-
sioner's cirealars have been filled liffer widely in
their sentiments on most poin. A; great majority,
however, agree in w lug .hat the present system
of out-door labour by women ani l children are
are not injurious to their health, o cept in cases of
turnip-pulling in wet weathorpstrftinint •of the body by
carrying too heavy milk-pails, ant:. ex; optional work
of descriptions which no rigl.c,-;nin, led employer
would permit. The tendency to immo. •ality caused
by a too indiscr:'_.inate mixture of the 'erns, both
when at work all in the cc ttagos, is generally
acknowledged. So also in most cases is the c 'rawback

primary education receives by t' early gointAforth to
the fields of young children.
..,
We may notice one gore._ rat tliati half been

adducted. A table has been prepared, showing
the percentage of marriages at which marks were
substituted for signatures in the year 1805. In
Kent, which appears to be the best educated county,
twenty per • cent. of the men, and an equal
number of the women, wore unable to write
their names; while in Stafford the number
of marks instead of signatures amounts to no less than
fifty-six per cent. of the men, and forty-seven per
cent. of the women. From this piece of evidence,
then, it may be pretty safely said that if no legislation
is required to restrain little children from labour on
account of the physical effect on their bodies, it cer-
tainly is required for the purpose of enabling the
existing generation of the country to ,affix
their names to the marriage register, and to
otherwise reap in their future lives the advantages of
reading, writing, and arithmetic. There is no evi-
dence, however diverse, without a balance on one
side or other. And, despite assertions to the contrary,
there cannot be the slightest doubt that in many dis-
tricts the labourer is deplorably underpaid, wretchedly
housed, and his children ill-educated, because their
future is sacrificed to the wants of a needy present.

the debate which opened last night on the second
reading of the Irish Land Bill cannot fail to prove
interesting and instructive. It is the first time
during a long period that this great question
has been made the subject of formal discussion
in Parliament; and the leading statesmen on the
Opposition benches are as yet unpledged. We have
heard that they oppose and dislike divers remedies;
but whilst they have admitted that some settlement
of the tenure problem is necessary, they have displayed
remarkable ingenuity in concealing the terms which
they would deem satisfactory. The nation will be curi-
ous to learn what length the Conservative party is
prepared to go. It is not intended, however,
that this great debate should have any serious termi-
nation. Notwithstanding the laudable efforts of Mr.
Bryan to produce an explosion, these pleasing and
useful oratorical fireworks are to go off quietly. No
party or organised opposition to the second reading
is announced. And, judging by appearances, it would
seem that the triumph of the Government, in the
Lower House at least, will be short and easy. A
variety of amendments are threatened in committee,
but none of them is at present supported by a force
likely to•make an impression on the serried ranks of
the Ministerial host. Indeed the arrangements forthe
improvement or mutilation of the bill are remarkably
clumsy and confused. Between the Conservative
party and its chief organ, the Standard, there is at
present no sympathy ; for whilst the leaders
make no opposition to the second reading,
the Standard furiously fulminates against the
Government measure as ono of confiscation—just as it
denounced the Ministerial policy on the emigration
question, though scarcely any Conservative members
supported Mr. Torrens's motion.
Still more remarkable is the case of the Irish mem-
bers. These requested Mr. Gladstone to extend the
Ulster tenant right to the whole of Ireland—
a very reasonable proposition, though it would
now involve a large reconstruction of the bill ; but
at the same time they gave to the Utster custom a
definition which does not, and never did, belong to
it. Their demand was plainly the right of con-
tinuous occupancy, which is only another
name for the very fixity of tenure which
Mr. Gladstone, in bringing in the bill, de-
clared the Government could not countenance.
Unable to persuade the Premier that black could be
made white by a mere definition, the Irish members,
with the utmost calmness and gravity, have
devised, and mean to recommend, a scheme
which differs from the Government proposals
mainly in being applied as a uniform
rule to the whole country. Surely, if the Irish mem-
bers stand upon fixity of tenure, they are sacrificing
their principles by resting satisfied with this new
alternative ; and if their last proposal repre-
sents their opinions, their remarkable "Ulster
tenant-right " manoeuvre looks very much
like the itinerant auctioneer's expedient of
setting upon an article three or four times the price
he is prepared to take. The Government can have
but little to apprehend from opposition conducted ou
these principles.

effn
b. lot
'CID
Iliscnbr

SPIRIT OF THE PRESS.

THE IRISH LAND DILL,

It seemed on Monday night, says the Times, as if the
demand for an Irish Parliament had at length been con-
ceded by common consent. Mr. Gladstone formally moved
the second reading of the Land Bill at five in the after-
noon, and for many hours afterwards nothing was heard
but the voices of Irish members. When at length the
re,presentative of an English constituency ventured to take
part in the debate, he proved to be a member of an Irish
family, intimately bound up with the history of the island
for more than a century past. The debate was, in
truth, Irish in every respect save one—it was dull. Mr.
Bryan, who moved the rejection of the second reading,
had only the fluency of an average Englishman. Captain
White's rhetoric was of a different stamp, and showed
marks of training which are rarely found in a maiden
speech ; while in Mr. O'Reilly Dease the House enjoyed
eloquence of a typical Milesian character. But
the tone of the evening was laboriously solemn.
It may be gathered that the substantial result of
the first night's debate on the Irish Land Bill was not
great. So far as criticism went we may observe that the
clause professing to legalisethe -Ulster custom was denou need
us inadequate. Sir Hervey Bruce and Sir Frederick Hey-
gate, as Ulster members, roundly declared that it was
impossible to define the custom of the province. Mr.
Bryan's declaration that the bill as it stands allows the
landlord to appropriate the value of the holder's
Tenant Right was confirmed in several quarters, and
very feebly met by the Chief Secretary. The practical
result of the discussion was to ivove that the work now to
to be done is to perfect the bill in committee. Its prin-
ciples are accepted as affor..ling the prospect of a just and
sufficient solution of the Irish Laud question, and the
labours of the House of Commons must be directed to
a careful examination of the reveral amendments of its
details that have been or may bo catered on the Notice
Book.

The Daily News observes that the beginning of the de-
bate was curious. The opposition to the bill proceeded
from the Liberal side. One Irish member moved, and
another seconded, the rejection of the measure which
had been heralded months and almost years in advance
as the panacea for all the wrongs of Ireland, and as
the instrument of its regeneration. The first night of the
Irish Land debate is chiefly memorable as having elicited
the sentiments of Irish members on both sides of the
House, and for an able speech by Mr. Chichester
Fortescue, in which he reviewed the course of legisla-
tion from the time of Mr. Sharman Crawford, and
defended the equity and policy of the bill in its
dealings with the several customs and localities of
Ireland. The opinion of the Irish members is not, of
course, decisive, but it must form one of the features
in the ultimate solution. They will do well, however,
to remember that the best may sometimes be the
worst enemy of the good. If they be taken as fair ex-
ponents of the wishes of the Irish people, the Government,
on the other hand, as Mr. Fortescue's speech showed, can
jndge with more accuracy of the conditions under which
alone effect can be given to those wishes. If the bill in
its present form should not prove a settlement of the land
question, its passage into law would be at least a step
towards a settlement. The goal, if not absolutely won,
would be nearly approached.

DEBATE ON NEW ZEALAND.
The Standard declares that in the debate on New Zea-
land the substance of Lord Granville's apology for himself
was in fact that his predecessors, and Lord Carnarvon
especially, had done precisely the same as ho had done.
The Colonial Minister laboured to prove that there was
not a single foolish act or intemperate expression of his
which had not a warrant in the dispatches of his
noble friends opposite. As a party rejoinder,
this may be considered, perhaps, perfectly fair and
becoming. But is it possible to conceive anything
more paltry in a statesman giving an account to
the nation of his policy? What has the country to do
with the fact that some of Lord Granville's predecessors
were almost as foolish and as wrong as himself ? The pre-
sent colonial policy is no less "miserable and shabby," as
Lord Carnarvon styled it, because it goes but a little fur-
ther than other men's policies. What wo want to know
is why such a policy is necessary. What is the reason for
the immediate withdrawal of the Queen's troops from
New Zealand ? Lord Granville was unable to give any de-
cent one on Monday night. The country will learn that rather
than yield a jot of his arbitrary decree Lord Granville is
willing to run the risk of the loss of New Zealand. By
his own showing he has no better reason for carrying out
his policy than that it has been sanctioned by the tradi-
tions of Dow-ning-street. He will exact his paltry bond
at any cost, and prefers his consistency to the integrity oi:
the empire. Let only the spirit of the New Zealanders be
equal to ours in this miserable business, and we may
reckon on the loss of New Zealand as the first fruit of the
Liberal colonial policy.