The Sun.
London, England, 1833-03-08 00:00:00

be safely put down as not more than ss. 4d. Ordinary
hands did not earn more than 4s. a week. The Hon.
Member then said that something ought immediately to
be done to reduce the expenditure of the Government, or
no mau could answer for the tranquillity of the country.
Mr. MARSHALL, as connected with the silk manu-
facture, and well knowing the state of trade in the dis•
tricts to which he belonged, could say that wages were
generally on the rise. Children, at a very early age, got
39. a week, and the wages increased according to their
age from that sum to 65., Ss., and 9s. ; and able work-
men received as much as 15s. or 16s. a week. A girl of
18 years of age could earn Ss., and a lad of 16 years of
age 79. a week.

Mr. BROCKLEHURST could say from his own ex-
perience, that the wages were not on the increase. The
lion. Member then read a statement, to show the present
state of wages in the silk manufactories in the North of
England, from which it appeared that the general rate of
wages for men, in 1824, was 18s. ; in 1828, Ss. 5d ; to
1832, 4s. Id. The general rate of wages for young men,
in 1824, was 14s. ; in 1828, Is. 3d. ; in 1832,
For women, the general rate, in 1524, was 12s. ; in
1828, 6s. 3d. ; in 1832, 2s. For young girls, the gene-
ral rate, in 1824, was 3s. 6d. ; in 1828, 2s. 91. ; in
1832, 2*. ; and for children the rate, in 1824, was 2s. ;
in 1828, Is. 9d. ; and in 1832, Is.

An HON. MEMBER (name unknown) said, that in Ire-
land the milk trade had sunk to a mere trifle. There
were, at one time, 2,500 looms employed in the silk-trade
in Dublin, which at an average employed five men each.
so that the whole number employed was above 11,000,
but that it appeared from evidence taken before the
Committee appointed to inquire into the state of the silk
trade, that at present the whole number of looms employed
in Dublin in that trade was 150, which, at the same ave-
rage, would employ only 750 persons instead of 11,800,
as formerly employed. This showed the state of distress
which was at present in Ireland, and was a clue to the
disturbances which distracted that country.
Mr. R. STEUART complained that a great many sa-
laries had been raised some years ago on account of the
depreciation of the currency, but that no reduction had
been made when the change was made to a metallic cur-
rency. He thought the motion of the Hon. Member for
Evesham a very important one. They had an opportu-
nity, not only of comparing the salaries of those who
were overpaid for their services, but also of considering
the wages of those who were underpaid fur their labour,
but on whose industry they depended for the funds to pay
the public creditor. It was from them that the large sums
paid into the public treasury, as duties on malt, soap,
hops, candles, and other articles were received. And it
was proper that attention should be paid to the remune-
ration which they received for their labour. He trusted
that the subject of the wages of the working classes would
become more and more the subject of discussion in that
House, and he hoped that Hon. Members, whether they
sat o❑ that (the Ministerial) or on the other side of the
House, would not neglect to remind the Ministers of the
necessity of high wages and high profits, or no taxes.
An How. MEaramt (name unknown) rose amidst loud
cries of " Question, question," and " Divide." He was of
opinion that such wholesale motions as that made by the
Hon. Member for Evesham, instead of forwarding the
object which Hon. Members had in view in making them,
tended rather to impede their intention. He would only
bring one or two instances to show the absurdity of such
a general motion. By the Hon. Member's motio❑ 10 per
cent. was to be taken off the salary of those who had
1,0001, In such a case, he (the Hon. Member) thought
such, perhaps, might safely be done ; but then the Hon.
Member proposed that 10 per cent. should likewise be
taken off the salary of the clerk who bad only 120/. a
year. Did the Hon. Mover consider that in these cases
the proportions of reduction were equal? To him (the
Hon. Member) it appeared so preposterous, that he should
give the motion his most decided negative. He was sur-
prised, on the former evening, to hear an Hon. Member
assert that the present Government had made no reduc-
tions, or had no intention to make any. After the state-
ment of the Noble Lord (the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer), he was sure that no person would say that Mini•
stern did not make every reduction which was consistent
with the public service.
Mr. HUDSON replied.
The House was then cleared for a division, but we un-
derstood that none took place.