The Sun.
London, England, 1833-08-09 00:00:00

IMPERIALPARLIAMENT

THIS DAY, FRIDAY, AUGUST 9.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The gallery was opened at twenty minutes after twelve
o'clock, when we found about 30 Members in the House.
Mr. KENNEDY brough! up the Report of the Edin.
burgh Community Estates Bill. Report and amendments
read a second time, and ordered to be engrossed.
FACTORIES BILL.

Lord ALTHORP moved that the House should go into
Committee for further consideration of the report on the
Factories Regulation Bill.
Mr. FIELDEN begged leave first to present a petition
in favour of the Bill, from Slanley, in Perthshire; which
was accordingly done.
The House then went into Committee, Mr. BERNAL,
Chairman.
Lord ALTHORP then said that be had thought that to be
the more convenient time for going into detail on the regula-
tions as to the time of employment. He had provided in the
Bill, that no children under• 13 years of age should work more
than eight hours a day, instead of the previous proposi-
tion of placing all under eighteen years of age generally at
ten hours a day ; and that those from 13 to 18 years
of age should not exceed from 69 hours of labour in
the week ; and it would he a general rule that all
under IS years of age should not work longer than
sixty nine hours in the week, and that no children should
on any account be employed under the age of nine years.
These arrangements would be so secured by the
appointment of the inspectors, in such a way that
no evasion of the law could take place.—(Hear, hear.)
By that Bill the provi,ions of Sir John Hobhouse's Bill
was extended to all manufactories, except silk ones in cer-
tain cases. It contained three principles,—first, that
children under thirteen years of age should not work
more than eight hours a-day-2d, that a system of
inspection was established by which the Bill would be
carried into effect, and thirdly, it would establish a
better and more general system of education among
the class of persons employed in factories. He still
entertained doubts of the propriety of the Legislature in-
terfering between the master and servants, but he
would admit that if children were placed in a different
situation they could not protect themselves, therefore it
was the duty of that House to afford it to them. It was
with these views that he offered the Bill to the considera-
tion of the Committee, and he pledged himself to do all
in his power to pass it during the present session.
Mr. BROTHERTON proposed that, in the first clause
the time should be 8 o'clock in place of half-past.
Mr. P. THOMSON said that the clause only extended
the principle of Sir J. Hobhouse's Bill to all factories,
and be had not beard it complained of.
Mr. HARDY supported the amendment on the ground
that, both workmen and master would better know when
the hour had arrived if it was carried, than if the House
continued the clause as it originally stood.
After a few words from Lord ALTHORT, the amend-
ment was withdrawn.
Mr. G HEATHCOTE then moved that the lace trade
be excluded from the operation of the Bill. The Hon.
Member quoted largely from the Report of the Commis-
sioners, to the effect that in those districts where the
lace trade prevailed, they saw nothing to call for any
change in the system. Another argument in favour of it
was, that the Bill would only include one•fifth of the
trade.

Mr. STRUTT supported the amendment, and stated
that he had bad a letter from one of his constituents
largely engaged in the trade, stating that there were
very few young children employed in it ; he had upward.
of sixty working for him, and amongst them there were
only four under fifteen years of age.
Lnrd AL THORP said the statements of the two Hon.
Gentlemen put that trade in a very different light from
any other, as the Bill would not include more than one.
fifth of it. He would, therefore, agree to the amendment.
Mr. P. THOMSON said he was before aware of the
necessity of excluding the lace trade from the operation of
the Bill, but, as it was originally included in it, he had
left it there, in order that it might be taken out in that
House.
Mr. BOLLING was opposed to the amendment. If
that was granted to the lace trade, it ought also to be given
to the cotton. The children in these factories were the
most able to perform their work, for they had almost
nothing to do, being half their time laying on the floor.
If that amendment was carried, then the power loom
weavers ought also to be excluded, for the hand loom
weavers (a large class) had much harder work, and tbey
were not protected.
Lord ALTHORP said the hand loom weavers were as
nothing compared to those who would not participate in
the benefits of the Bill, engaged in the lace trade.
Mr. BOLLING said it was very partial legislating ;
besides he would not agree to the clause unless it came
into operation immediately. He saw it was proposed
only to de so on the Ist of January, 1834, but if it was
to be a benefit, let the people at once have ir, and so please
the country.
After a few words from Lord Altborp, Dr. Baldwin,
Mr. Hardy, and Mr. P. Thomson,
Mr. MARSHALL said he was opposed to the amend.
ment. He thought lace manufacturers ought to be placed
on an equal footing with others. There were many occu-
pations which were as little laborious as in the lace trade.
Mr. GISBORNE supported the amendment.
Mr. ROBINSON said the object of the Hon. Member
(Mr. G. Heathcote) would be better attained by the in-
troduction of a special clause respecting the lace manu-
factories.
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the Amendment
Against it
Majority for excluding lace manufactories —2l
_ _ _

Mr. BOLLING objected to delaying the operation of
the Bill to the let of January next. The manufacturers
were quite prepared to act upon it, and therefore he
would move that its operation commence on the let of
October.

After a short discussion, the amendment was nega-
tived, and the clause agreed to.
Clause 2, which provided that persons under 18 years
of age should nut work more than 12 hours a day, was
then read.

Mr. ROBINSON considered this a very important
clause. The Noble Lord proposed that the labour of
children under 13 years of age should he restricted to eight
hours a day, and from 13 to 18 to 12 hours a day. For
his (Mr. Robinson's) own part, he was averse altogether
to legislative interference between master and servant, but
since it had in this instance been agreed to by the House, it
was not now for him to offer any further objection. If, how-
ever, as the House was going to interfere, there was a ten-
der period at which children, and particularly female
children, stood in need of legislative protection, it was
unquestionably the period of from thirteen to fifteen
years of age—(Hear, hear, hear)—and it really did
seem to be too bad to say that female infanta
were to be protected till thirteen, and then, that
immediately on their attaining their tenth year, they were
to have suddenly an additional four hours labour thrown
upon them. He was afraid he could not propose any sub-
stantive amendment, yet he could not abstain from making
these observations, for the consideration of the Noble Lord,
and hoped the Noble Lord would be able to suggest some-
thing crilculated to continue the protection those poor
girls who must be con.idered (*.he incapable of unilerving
four hours' additional labour at the moment they arrive at
13, to that which on the preceding day they were able to
get through.

Lord ALTHORP said that this clause had certainly
been framed according to what the general feeling of the
pub
o of
thl i sec
a dpdpeitai
or ed
na i t be. W
wo
ork. ,
from t t respect h
sto 12 toh otuhre ad s sbedinegn change
imposed
when a child attained 13 years of age, there could only be
two modes of proceeding with respect to that, either that
the sudden change should take place, or that there should
be a graduated scale of removing the extreme re-
striction ; and as it would be nearly impossible
to have that graduated scale framed so as to
be acted upon, regard being had to the practica-
bility of the clause, the Noble Lord really did not know
how he could in any way vary the clause from the terms
in which it stood.

Mr. J. OSWALD moved as an amendment teat the
period of labour should not be limited as proposed by the
Bill to nine hours on Saturdays, but that it should be left
to the manufacturers to make it twelve hours, as on other
days, if they chose.
Mr. BRISCOE opposed the amendment. It was in-
tended that the children should have a little relaxation
on the Saturdays that they might be somewhat refreshed
from their fatigues on the Sundays, and enabled to keep
from sleeping while in school.
Mr. J. OSWALD said he was aware of the object,
but he did not think that a sufficient reason, because
at the Lanark Mills the children were as well
protected, and their morals and health as well attended
to, as at any manufactory that could be found, and no
such Saturdiy r..striction affected those mills.
Mr. HALCOMB supported the amendment on the
ground that it would prevent mills from working on a
Sunday.
Mr. Gisborne, Mr. Buller, Mr. Strutt, Mr. Howard,
and Mr. Brotherton, supported the amendment.

Mr. BRISCOE laid the principle of the clause had
been already agreed to by the Houle in a former Bill.