The Sun.
London, England, 1833-07-06 00:00:00

to him that there should he so many thoulands in this
country deprived of that blessing. It was becoming in
the Noble Lord (Althorp), as a Mini-ter of the Crown,
thus to come forward ; and if lie elm, to go further, he
would find in him (Lord Ashley) a zealous supporter;
and should the Noble Lord extend his bounty in this way,
not merely to factory children, hut to all who were desti-
tute, he would be not only the best benefactor to the
country but the most glorious Minister that ever existed.
—(Hear, hear.) But when the Noble Lord complained
of the machinery of his (Lord Ashley's) Bill, and of his
provision against injury by machinery in mill., he must
only refer the Noble Lord to the report of his own Cem •
missioners, which it would appear lie had not read. The
statements made by those gentlemen were rather curious.
(Here the Noble Lord read an extract from the report of
the Cominis,ioners, speaking of fatal injuries inflicted
by machinery, as well as of serious accidents from
the same cause, with the addition that the greater
were the number of accidents the less was the sympathy
with the sufferers; that the wages of the parties thus in.
jured were stopped, no medical assistance was furnished,
and no compensation made to the sufferers.) He thought
that before the Noble Lord (Althorp) reprobated his Bill,
he ought to have considered this passage of the report, and
so long as there remained any consideration for men and
fellow-creatures in the House, and that there were any to
feel with him, he would never consent to withdraw that
clause. Besides this difference, he would ask, what was
there to have prevented the Noble Lord (Althorp)
from saying heretofore all he had said that night ? Why
did he not do so on the second reading,
.instead of having
kept him (Lord Ashley) and his supporters in a kind of
fool's paradise by his promise of no opposition? They had
not anticipated any resistance, but now it appeared they
were to be turned out of the House and sent up stairs.
Unless, therefore, the Noble Lord would affirm his Bill,
and concede the ten hours principle, he should oppose this
amendment; but let that be once admitted, and he gave
up details. Several of the clauses in the Bill, as it stood
originally, he had withdrawn, because they were ob-
noxious to others, although he was convinced of their
being beneficial ; but to gain a great object he was willing
to sacrifice his own impressions. And now, when the
Noble Lord said that children under their 14th year were
not to work more than 8 hours a-day, what was that but
to leave all children who were 13 years and a day old out of
the pale of all protection ? Did not the Noble Lord know
that a vast proportion of those children were females; and
were he and the House prepared to leave females of this most
critical age subject to work perhaps 16 or 18 hours ?--
(" No," from Lord Althorp.) Yes, but it must be so,
they were left without any protection. It was to be re-
collected that all the medical men in their evidence, and
particularly Mr. Elliotson, had declared that making
females of this kind work even ten hours was not only in-
tolerable but was absolutely horrible. A Bill so import-.
ant as this the House ought not to abandon from under
their own jurisdiction, and confide to a Select Committee.
Did the Noble Lord (Althorp) suppose he would in this
way stifle the complaints that were made, and give satis-
faction either to the labourers, the manufacturers, or the
country ? As far as he (Lord Ashley) could judge, such
a proceeding would only excite entire and uncontroulable
disgust.
An HON. MEarsca—Strong language this.

Lord ASHLEY said, with all deference to the Hon.
Member, he would use such language as he pleased, and
the language he now used was not a jot too strong for the
occasion. The House was fully competent to all the de-
tails of the measure, and he thought it their bounden
duty to reserve to themselves the decision of this subject.
As to having two sets of workmen, all the evidence de-
clared it to be impracticable, though the Commisioners
were in favour of it. They could not be procured by the
manufacturer, and the injury to the children and their
parents, by cutting down wages, would render them
more miserable than they were even at present. He im-
plored the House to enter upon this subject publicly, and
not to a!low it to be refereed to any private tribunal.
Mr. JERVIS said that the noble Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer had admitted the principle contended for, and only
wished to refer the details to a Committee.—(Cries of
" No, no.") He was sure that if the choice of the manu-
facturing population were taken, it would be in favour of
the proposed reference to a Select Committee ; but he
hoped that the Noble Lord would not fetter the Committee
by an instruction.

Sir SAMUEL WHALLEY objected to a Select Com-
mittee, and contended that the Commission had been a
useless waste of the public money, without any practical
result. The effects of the factory system ought not to be
coolly calculated with reference to the prices of commodi-
ties for the foreign market. The cruelties of the English
factories had rendered it odious in the eyes of Europe,
which had been fixed on the atrocities which the evidence
had proved to have been perpetrated there.
Mr. WILBRAHAM would vote for a Select Committee.
He had no means of judging of the evidence on the other
side. His objection to the resolutions was the difficulty
of carrying them iota effect. Other Bills had been passed
already for regulating factories ; amongst the rest, Sir J.
Hobhouse's Bill, which had been carried into effect at
Manchester by the master manufacturers themselves. He
was a warm and sincere advocate for the interference of
the House in favour of the factory children under present
circumstances; but if he were to be a member of the Com-
mittee, he should go into it without prejudice or bias.
Sir R. INGLIS observed that the volume on the ta,ble
had not yet been delivered to the Members, and except in
the hands of an Hon. Friend, who he saw carrying it in
the sti eets as a burden a few days ago, he had never seen
the outside of the volume till now. Yet it was on the con-
tents of this volume that the House was required to legis-
late. The difficulty, however, was reduced by the recol-
lection of a smaller volume, the Report of the Factory
Labium Regulation Bill.!3 If be knew no more than
the evidence of tde medical men, contained in that volume,
he should accede to the general proposition, that a given
quantity of labour,—say 14, 15, or 16 hours, was greater
tban the human animal could undergo, whom it was the
object of his Noble Friend's Bill to protect.
Lord MORPETH would be sorry to leave children
above 13 or 14 without any regulation to protect them
from excessive work. The regulations of Sir John Hob-
house's Bill should be applied to all branches of manufac-
ture, which would be advantageous to the woollen dis-
tricts. It was desirable to regulate adult labour, and to
give both descriptions the opportunity of obtaining a mo-
derate degree of instruction. Whatever painful cases of
abuse might have been proved to exist, he had always
objected to the fierce and indiscriminate attacks made upon
the manufacturers of England. At the same time, he did
not think they had any very high responsibilities imposed
upon them. As the factory system had added to the wealth
and population of the manufacturing district., under good
management he thought it might be so conducted as to add
to the moral and religious improvement of the swarming
population which it reared.—(Hear.) He thought that, in
the present state of the session, there was not time for a
Select Committee; but whether there was a Committee
upstairs or below, he was happy that the question would
be entered upon without that acrimony and irritation of
mind which had polluted this great and righteous cause
elsewhere.

Mr. O'CONNELL observed that there ought to be no
more delay; their object ought to be to put an end to all
delusion.—(Hear.) There were two questions—first, as
to the principle; secondly, whether the evil existed. With
regard to the principle, the law took all persons under the
age of 21 under its protection ; if they bad property, the
Lord Chancellor took especial care of them. These chil-
dren had no property but their labour; and if the machi•
nery of the Court of Chancery was too expensive, the
House was bound to act as universal Chancellor, and to
protect them. The only question then was, did the evil
exist? But it was admitted to exist. Then, why not
legislate at once? On one side was the number of chil-
dren slaughtered in a year; on the other, the possibility of
the loss of the sale of a certain quantity of calico. The
protection ought to last till 21 ; at all events till IS. Let
all delusion on this subject be put an end to. Let
it be stated that the House did not intend to legislate at all
on the subject this session, and then it would be under-
stood ; or let the House now go into Committee and
report progress, and by Monday any man of humanity
would have got through the contents of that great book.
He repudiated drawing the line at 13 or 14 ; let it be fixed
at 18 till next Session, when the Legislature could relax
that rule if it was for the benefit of the children to do so,
and not else.

Mr. BROTHERTON said, that all persons were agreed
that some legislation was necessary. That was making a
great progress, for twenty years ago, not a single master
would allow that legislative interference was necessary.
Now the public, the masters, and the working men, all
agreed in appealing to Parliament to make regulations for
the h.bour of factories. They had different motives for
demanding it. The masters demanded it because they
desired to prevent some amongst themselves from working
too long. The adults rNuired interference as the only
means of preventing them from being overwo.'kecl; and
the public required the inter:erencc of .he Legislature to
protect the children. He Caought that there should be
some restriction, and that the :-estr:etion should estaLlish
one uniform system. He knew that some mills were now
working for fifteen or sixteen hours a day; and he knew
that infants of a very tender age were so employed. The
Hon. Member quoted two or three cases, we believe, from
the evidence of the Commissioners. The Ten Hours

Bill would. he admitted. he a arP;IF rhanap frmn the