The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-22 00:00:00

THE WEATHER.—SUN OFFICE, MARcH 22, 1860.

THERMOMETER, IN THE SHADE.
52—highest since noon yesterday.
38—lowest this morning and during the night.
48—this day at noon.

BAROMETER-29.80.
WIND, North-Westerly; fresh, and squally, with cloudy
weather, inclining to rain. It was very stormy in the
Channel yesterday—the equinoctial gales.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
THIS ULT.—Morning, 2h. 7m.—Afternoon, 2h. 20m
To-moitßow.-Morning, 2h. 33m.—Afternoon, 2h. 47m

-;,:t,• 1/4s,N
44-e
. 4,4
lel. ;-/--4a' _ A."!:_?•5`.,:-_,,: 1 ,-- ,t,
~,ttiiiii';'''''',4.
?1-1, t:::t
•,,,,/---*c'.-.....tt
_
,
l'. .no\---rr „ ---''l--.- ,--
-:.• „... .:.4 t.,0111,,fte41.• c' ''
nfiEt 4rl.' )
~‘, ,

THE SUN.
LONDON, THURSDAY, MARCH 22, 1860.

----~-

We insert in another part of The Sun a report
of a meeting of paper manufacturers, held yester-
day at the King's Arms, New Palace-yard. It
was indeed a most influential meeting, composed of
the principal paper manufacturers of this country.
The public will recollect that from the first we
denounced the treaty of commerce as being exceed-
ingly partial in most of its items, but positively
destructive in many others. It was a treaty all
for the benefit of France, and chiefly all for the
detriment of England. The frank and unsuspect-
ing generosity of Mr. COBDEN was met by the
cunning politeness of the best-mannered men in
creation. England gave or conceded all—France
conceded nothing, but affected to give much. The
prohibition on certain articles was rescinded, but
heavy countervailing duties were substituted
to the tune of 30 per cent. and upwards.
Nor was this all, our iron and coal were
allowed to go into France free of any charge, while
their silks and other articles were admitted into
this country free. This was all reciprocity on one
side with a will, and on the other with a ven-
geance ! Then, as to the question of rags ;—much
credit was taken the other evening in the House of
Commons, on Lord JOHN RUSSELL'S announcing
that the Emperor NAPOLEON had taken off the
prohibition against the exportation of rags, but
not one word about the duty of 100 per cent. being
substituted on the exportation of common, and
some 50 or GO per cent. being laid on that of fine
rags. The purpose was to raise a cheer in favour
of Imperial liberality—and then to make us pay
for our whistle. It was a clever dodge. Now the
manoeuvre was a complete piece of thimble-rig-
ging, for the supposed free exportation of rags
was to be at the price of nearly three half=pence on
the pound of rags, or ten pounds per ton ! And
this was the boasted boon to our paper
manufacturers in lieu of our taking of the penny
per pound on the importation of French paper!
Never was there a grosser illustration of how to
hoodwink your neighbour.

At the meetinc, yesterdayV
WRIGLEY put the
whole question in a clear and comprehensive light ;
as he did in his excellent letter which we inserted
the other day, and another yesterday. Mr. WRIG-
-I,EY is one of the largest manufacturers, if not the
largest, and he is as liberal as intelligent. Be was
a thorough free-trader, be said, but he meant free
trade based upon jast fit,incipies. He had no objection
to free trade in paper upon the same principles
as were applied to other trades, but, as there was
no rule without exception, so he thought the paper
trade was peculiar. There was no similarity or ana-
logy between the raw material of paper and the raw
material of any other manufacture. In the case of
AU other articles of manufacture and consumption

the producer of the raw material had a motive for
extending its produetion, and as long as the manu-
facturer was willing to pay a price bringing a profit
he might calculate upon an almost illimitable supply
of raw material. But the ordinary rules of demand
and supply did not apply to the raw material of
paper, as the home supply could not be greatly
increased. There was a very great distinction
between the raw material of paper and all other
articles. Mr. WRIGLEY said he was willing to
meet the competition of the world, but let him have
all the markets of the world open to him for his
supply of raw material, as the cotton manufacturer,
the silk manufacturer, and all others had. Unless
that was done the result would be utter destruction
to all small factories, and what trade remained in
this country would be centred in the few large esta-
blishments like his own, which would be content with
a fractional profit on their production. What was
there to prevent this country being supplied with
paper from the Continent ? Would any one say that
the manufacturers of this country could make paper
any cheaper after the duty was removed than they
did now ? He knew of nothing that would ena-
ble him to make paper at 1-16th part of a
penny less per pound than it cost him at pre-
sent. It was pardonable for men who, like
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, were ignorant
of the practical business of paper making,
to talk of new fabrics being accessible,
but no one had ever yet suggested anything at all
to be compared to rags as a material for paper-
making. Mr. Deputy PEWTRESS fully corroborated
this statement for with regard to other substances
as " substitutes for rags, he could only say that
he was once persuaded to try an article that
could be procured for nothing—at only the ex-
pense of carting—but after a fortnight's trial he
found that 100 lb. of material only produced 281 b.
of paper, and that at a cost of ls. 6d. per lb.

The truth of this was confirmed by the cheers
and laughter of the meeting. Nor was this all;
—since the free exportation of coal was allowed
the price of the article had risen at home, and the
foreigner, who got the raw material at a less price
and paid lower wages, was working double tides
against us, thus making all the profit, and beating
us with our own weapons. So much for one-sided
free trade ! Surely the House of Commons will
not ruin the paper manufacturer at home for the
benefit of rivals abroad, who feel no sympathy for
us, but inasmuch as they can get all and give
nothing.

We rejoice to find that the House of Commons

has so nobly responded to the appeal of humanity,
having carried the second reading of Mr. CROOK'S
bill by the triumphant majority of 187 ! After
such a decided success the friends of the cause have
little reason to doubt that it will pass through the
succeeding stages, and become part of the law of
the land. The debate last night must have con-
vinced all unprejudiced members that the argu-
ments of the opponents of the bill could be satisfac-
torily answered, while the appeal to humanity and

jistice was incontrovertible. The only speech
which strongly opposed the principle of the bill
was that of Mr. TURNER, the member for Man-
chester, who moved as an amendment that it should
be read that day six months. He contended that
the case was different from that of the cotton mills,

as in them the machinery could at any momeat be
stopped, and the operations resumed next day ;
whereas in the bleaching works critical chemical

operations had to be performed, the favourable re-
sult of which depended on a certain amount of
time being occupied in them. This assertion was
contradicted by Mr. COBBETT, on the evidence of a
manager. But, even supposing it to be the case, it
affords no plea for the cruel extension of the hours
of labour, as relays of workpeople could be obtained,
allowing each their fair share of rest. Mr. TURNER
brought forward the old arguments as to the evil
effects of legislative interference between employer
and employed, and declared that if the select com-
mittee, to whom the question had been referred
in 1858, reported against legislation on
the subject, it was equally unnecessary
at the present time. He threatened the House
with the disastrous and ruinous effect which the
Bill would have upon trade, and concluded by
moving the amendment, which, if carried, would
have condemned the sufferers to another year's delay.
The speech of Mr. ROEBUCK was in every respect
admirable. It was clear and forcible in its reason-
ing, undeniable in its evidence, fervent and moving
in its appeal to the hearts of the members. The
calculating and heartless logic of the hon. mem-

ber for Manchester was completely disposed of,

and the effect upon the House was most convincing.
The hon. member for Sheffield, in commencing his
speech, referred to the introduction of the Ten
Hours' Bill by Lord ASHLEY, and to his own con-
duct at that time, when he had opposed it as a
political economist, although drawing a distinction
between the labour of men, and that of women and
children. He was mainly influenced in that oppo-
sition by the statements of the Yorkshire and Lan-
cashire manufacturers, who asserted that the last
half hour was their profit, and that their trade
would be ruined by the proposed innovation. The
Bill had been carried, and what was the result ?
Who could say that the manufacturers of England
had suffered ? The same evils are prophesied notv,
but the threats have fortunately lost their effect.
We fully agree with the hon. member when he said
it Were better that the manufacturers should
suffer than that the present system should be main-
tained. With regard to the analogy between
the factories and the bleach works, he
said justly, that if
there was analogy
in the suffering,it was sufficient to call for the
same interference and protection. Mr. ROEBUCK
erference
then made a most forcible appeal to the sympathies
of the House. He read evidence given by persons
employed in this trade, showing that they worked
sometimes twenty-four hours in succession. lie
reminded the hon. members that they often com-
plained of the long hours of that House. They
came to the House at four o'clock, and went to
dinner at seven, and if after that they were kept
till two o'clock in the morning they said they had
had a terrible night's work. What then, said he,
must be the feelings of a poor child of 12 or 13,
not going home to a comfortable repast, not resting
on soft cushions, but standing through the long
hours of the night, and, at best, resting her poor
aching limbs on a wooden bench. He addressed
them as fathers, and begged them to reflect how
they would feel if their own children were in such
a position, and concluded his excellent speech by
the following forcible appeal:—

" For God's sake, then, I say, don't let us listen to the
hon. gentleman I don't want to weary the house, but I
appeal to you as men, I appeal to you as fathers, I appeal
to you as brothers, and I ask you for God's sake not to be
participants in this horrible cruelty. The hon. member
nays he is sure you will not go into committee on this bill.
I, on the contrary, feel ca.tain that if I know anything of
my countrymen we shall go into committee ; that the mea-
sure will be carried by a triumphant majority, and that we
shall not lay our heads upon our pillows to-night, saying,
We have deserted those whom God has placed under our
charge—the weak, the helpless, the distressed; we think
only of ourselves, of the wealthy, and of the great.' The
weak and the miserable appeal to you now for compassion
awl for aid, and I, their humble advocate, also appeal to

you in perfect confidence that you will listen to their prayer
and will pass this measure for their relief."

Mr. ROEBUCK'S powerful and impressive ad-
dress was followed by a speech from Mr. COBBETT,
the member for Oldham, and his explana-
tions relative to the select committee took away
the last stronghold of the opposition. A com-
mission had, he said, been issued, and they re-
ported in favour of a bill. Subsequently a com-
mittee was appointed, but, in consequence of him-
self and several other members being prevented
from attending it, it fell into the hands of the
opponents of the measure. " The committee, in
fact, resolved themselves into a bleachers' and
manufacturers' committee." He was requested
to draw up a report, but the committee
refused to adopt it, and substituted one
drawn up by the honourable member for
Manchester and Mr. KIRK. Thisstatement is a
sufficient explanation of the proceedings of th e
committee, although, as Lord J. MANNERS ob-
served, since the manufacturers had not even
adopted the suggestions made by the report,
its members are absolved from its decisions.
Mr. COBBETT stated that he had written to
Scotland for information, and the answer is so
strong an argument in behalf of the measure that
we place it prominently before the public. "He
had received a reply that morning, containing a
note of the time of females and young persons, for
the fortnight ending the 17th March, 1860, at the
works of JOHN SANDIEMAN, Esq., in the dyeing
department :—Monday, the sth of March, 171
hours ; Tuesday, the 6th, 151 hours ; Wednesday,
the 7th, 157 hours; Thursday, the Bth, 151 hours ;
Friday, the 9th, 15 hours; and Saturday, the 10th,
7 hours. The next week the hours of work were
as follow :—Monday, the 12th, 171 hours ; Tues-
day, the 13th, 151 hours ; Wednesday, the 14th,
13 hours ; Thursday, the 15th, 151 hours ; Friday,
the 16th, 151 hours ; and Saturday, the 17th, 71
hours." These terrible hours of labour are
thus even now being exacted from women
and children. This very week, while the
discussion is pending, the sun is rising and set-
ting over the feeble frames wearily carrying on
their exhausting toil. The hon. member for Old-
ham said that it had been objected that the worst
times of the year were taken as samples, and that
the average of the twelve month's labour should be
given. But he asked, " Who would work his horse
20 hours a-day and then let him rest a day, then
work him 20 hours a-day for two or three days.
The horse would die of exhaustion, and it would
be no answer to say that he had only worked an
average of 11 or 12 hours." Surely, then, the manu-
facturers can hardly claim from human beings what
the owners of cattle would refuse to subject them to.
We, feel confident that the Bill will pass triumph-
antly through committee, and the good work so
nobly begun last night by the members of the
Legislature will be carried to a conclusion which
shall obtain for them the blessings of the suffering
and helpless, and the warm approval of the British
public.

Already the evidence given by witness after
witness before the Select Committee upon the
Serpentine may be pronounced overwhelming and
conclusive. Day by day the facts have been ac-
cumulating rapidly• in one scale alone—until "the
other" has fairly kicked the beam. As the cele-
brated Mr. SQUEERS said, when in " durance vile"
—pronouncing his opinions orthographically as
became a schoolmaster—" It is a double 1 AWL,
substantive a cobbler's weapon, everything ; u p
UP"—with (in the present instance) this absurd
scheme of filtration. The Committee can only in
reason report against the plan of filtration as, at
once, irrational, ineffectual, expensive, and never-
ending ! The imaginary picture but just now
drawn with a master-hand by one of the many
clever contributors to DICKENS'S .411 the Year
Round—the revoltingly truthful picture drawn
thus in pen-and-ink is only too real—it
is only, like a certain impertinent conun-
drum in regard to a certain article in a lady's
toilet, " fiction founded upon fact." It is worth
repeating here, this little sketch of the Serpentine.
Speaking of which charming " Familiar" to every
fashionable Londoner, says the writer in Mr.
DICKENS'S weekly opuscule :—" Let us fancy our
friend without his gay outside, let us imagine his
smooth exterior—there is a little scum upon it—
removed, and the real depths of his character re-
vealed, would it not be an astonishing disclosure ?
What should we see if the water in the Serpentine
could suddenly be drawn off, leaving what lies be-
neath it now exposed to view ? We should see, first
of all, a great black ravine of unequal depth,
stretching its pestilent width before us. I fancy
that its level would be pretty even, because the
holes are so filled up with mud that, except by a
slight depression over them, we should hardly know
where they were. Into this ooze of filthiness wo
should throw the first stone that came to hand,
and should watch it as it sank into the fat slime
and disappeared from view. There is a long course
before it, ere it gets to the bottom. It will travel
slowly through .that dense medium, and haply
may meet with a bone or two before it has done
sinking. And it is beside this black valley, it is
on the edge of this abyss of pollution that we are to
spend the hot summer afternoons, using the margin
of this cesspool for our promenade and daily lounge.
It is over this pit that the wherries float with
stench at the prow and sewage at the helm. It is
to this place that our ladies come from their per-
fumed bedchambers to take the air." Faugh !
and this is the filthy reservoir of nastiness that
we have actually begun to dabble and mess in, and
filter and agitate, at a cost of £17,000 to begin with
—until fortunately the nasty process was interrupted
by the appointment of the Select Committee, now
vigorously carrying on its operations under the
Chairmanship of the Right Hon. WILLIAM Cow-
PER, her MAJESTY'S Chief Commissioner of Public
Works. The occupancy of that chair by Mr.
COWPER is an auspicious commencement of the
right hon. gentleman's administrative career as the
conservator of our Parks and Palaces. It, is an
incident that promises well for his iEdileship.
And if these good promises be but fulfilled, no one
will rejoice more heartily than ourselves at this
t he
particular
First
?Ministerial
Le
rd of the Treasury.
The C
o f the
of the
Commissioner, in point of fact, has an opportunity
afforded him, at the very outset of his labours at
the head of the Board of Works—an enviable op-
portunityf
f occupied
threeort hy
or
rf
four b e being
etahr the
back by r
Sirot BENJAMIN showingtpostiie
himself
HALL, now Lord LL NOVER.
Indeed it is agreeably apparent even now that Afr.
CowrEß has no reluctance whatever to take a leaf
out of the book of Lord LLANOVER. Insomuch is
this obvious that we have every reason to hope
that before we have done with the matter in hand
w e shall have it recommended to the House of
Commons by the Select Committee of Inquiry, that
the same plan which has been carried out so suc-
cessfully in St. James's Park shall be applied to
the larger and fouler sheet of water (river, pool,
call it what you will) separating Hyde Park from
Kensington Gardens at one part, and extending
along the south side of Hyde Park at the other,
between Rotten-rOw and the Ring—in other words,