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

I.I49ERIAL PARLIAMENT

• • ,
Sharel, Railways. Paid. Closing Isasifleas done
Price.
100 Atlantic &St Lawrence lau 87 89
Leased at 6 per cent
Stk Bom.,Baroda&Cent.lnd t 100 97 98 !Pi
gu. 5 per cent
- Do. Addit. Capital A
18 Do. Do. B 11 Pi d
204 BBuffairaa/07:danLtiakGeHodrurioenh alleol
775
8,:
204 Do. New all --
10 Do. Preference
100 6p. ct. bds. 1 Aug., 1872
100 Do. do. 1 July, 1873 100 72 77 741 3
108 Do. do. 1 June, 1874 100 70 75
5 Clcutia.&S.EBBtria.Lim. 1. 30. par 1 p
20 CaVe,Eas tn. Prov,(Lim.)l 2s.
20 CapeTpwn & Dock Scripl 3s. 14 1d 14
20 Central Oude (Limited) '38.0d.
20 Ceylon Guaranteed 6p.c 7j 11 d
174 Demerara
20 Eastern Bengal.gu.sp.c 5 id 1 d
Stock East Indian, gu. sp. c lOO 1021 1021 1081
20 Do. F Shares Ext lO L
20 Do. Jubbulpore
100 Do. 41 p. c. Debentrs all 1 101
Stock Do. 5 p.c. Deb., 1801 lOO 1021 1021 103
s GeelongGe eo ag &el do
re
pl bo or
au
tr
Inc
Re 2_o/ 2_ll
1 per cent, Bonds
Stock Grand Trunk of Canada 100 34 35 351 661 64
100 Do. 6 per cent. P.M.... . all 93 94 934
100 Do, 6 per cent. Debentr. all 721 734
100 Do. 7 per cent. 18 62 all 85 8 861
100 Do. do. 1867 all 73 75 73
100 Do. do. 1872 , all 72 74 73 4
Stock Gt.lndiaPenin.gua.sp.e. 100 991 100
W Do. New, gua.s per cent. 6 1d 1 d
20 I ,Gt.Sputh. of Ind.Lim.— lio 1
gearantPed 4 per cent.
201 Gt.W. of Canada Shares all 111 11 121 131
201 Do. New
100 I Do. Bonds p_ay. '76,with all 95 100
opt. till '6O . ~, •• •
100 Do. do. 73 till 'too ~ „. all 95 100
100 Do. do. '73 without opt: all 95 100
WO Do. 51 p. c. do. 'Y 7 do
Stock gadras, guar., 41 p. c 11100 l 92
Stock 'Do. do. 5 per eent l 100 98 981
Stock Do. 41 p. e, Extension lOO 91 93
Stock Do. Third EN. gua.s,p.c ' 100
20 Do. Fourth do.
20 Do. do.
Stock Melb. Corp. 6 p.o. Bonds 100
20 f Newßrunswick&Canda.
Ry.&Land(Lim,)g.6pc all 5 7
Claes ACapitl.Share
.. Do. do. Land do
20 Do. do. B. Capital do all 5 7
Do. do. Land do
20 Oude (Limited)
20 Scinde 4..3 all 101 20
20 Do. New Le, 6 15 Zd
20 Do. Punjaub , 5 41
20 Do. Indus. St. Flo. Eck; all 19 191
20 St. Andrews & Quebec A 18
10 ,Trinidad(Limited)Scrip 1 Id par I

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at 12 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Bagenalstown and Wexford Railway, and the Metro-
politan Railway'Bills warn read a third time and passed.
The following bills were considered and' ordered for third
reading: —Ambergate, Nottingham, and Boston and Eastern
Junction Railway and Canal Company ; Buckley and
Connah's Quay (Flintslaire) Railway; Great Northern and
Metropolitan Junction Railway; Hinckley and Leicester
Railway; Liskeard and Caradon. Railway; London and
North Western Railway (No. 2) ; Manchester Improve-
ment; Sirhowy Tramroad.

The Dorset Central Railway (Extension of Time, &c.),
and the Wellington Suspension Bridge (Lords) Bills were
read a second time.

CHURCH RATES.
Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from the executive of
the Society for the Liberation of Religion from State Con-
trol, praying for the total abolition of church rates.
Several other petitions to the same effect were also pre-
sented.

MARRIAGE WITH A.DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER.

Mr. E. JAMES presented petitions, including one signed
by 480 females in Pimlico, praying for legalising marriage
with a deceased wife's sister.

THE PREVENTIVE SERVICE (SCOTLAND).
Mr. BLACK asked the Secretary of the Treasury if the
men in the Preventive Service in Scotland have any printed
or written regulations or instructions delivered to them for
their guidance; and if so, whether one of these rules is,
that the offence of marrying shall be visited with dismissal
from the service; and whether the prohibition against
marriage applied equally to the officers and the men?
Mr. LAING said that the penalty was inflicted because
it had been found that unmarried men discharged their
duties more efficiently, having four nights in the week to
be employed on night duty, which was disagreeable to
married men. The men were informed yerbally,of this
regulation on entering the service of the Inland Re-
venue. With regard to the officers, unmarried men were
invariably selected, and when they married they were re-
moved to some other branch of the service when properly
qualified successors could be secured.
RAGS, &c.
Mr. PULLER asked the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs, whether any information had yet been received as
to the amount of duty which the French Government in-
tended to impose on the export of rags ? '
Lord J. RUSSELL said be had received no informa-

tion on the subject since the statement he had made on a
former occasion. He took that opportunity of stating the
cot tree Government proposed to take in respect to public
business, which was to bring forward the income tax in
committee ,of ways and means, and also the adjourned
debate en the Representation of the People's Bill to-
morrow.

, ENDOWED SCHOOLS
Mr. DILLWYN, in moving the second reading of this
bill, explained that its object was to remove the disqualifi-
cation under which Dissenters at present laboured in being
excluded from any control or interference in schools which
were endowed for national and not for sectarian purposes.
When he introduced a bill to the same effect last year it
went through a second reading, but in committee his prin-
ciple was abandoned, and another of an entirely antago-
nistic character was introduced. He could not consent
to the bill in that form, and ultimately it was rejected.
With regard to the 'bill of Lord Cranworth, which had
come down from the Upper House, he must object to it.
That bill was limited to rendering it compulsory on trustees
to make such rdes for the education of Dissenters as they
might deem advisable. In fact, it was merely a homeo-
pathic measure, and would not meet the evils complained of
by Dissenters. The next bill before the house was that of
the hon. and learned member for Belfast (Sir H. Cairns),
to which he objected also, as it was founded on the prin-
ciple that the usage for a certain number of years conferred
a right in reference to these schools. That might be a
Sound legal doctrine as applied to private individuals, but
he contended it should not be applied to public charities.
He (Mr. Dillwyn) proposed that the schools founded up to
the first year of Elizabeth, and prior to the passing of the
Toleration Act, should be regarded in the same light as
foundations for general purposes, but he did not propose to
interfere with any, endowment subsequent to the act in
question. He contended that his bill would remedy a
grievance, but would effect no disruption or any injury on
the interests of these schools. He also argued that, nume •
rically considered, and in consequence of the internal dis-
sensions that preVailed in the Church of England, that
Church was not qualified to discharge efficiently the trusts
of these endowed schools. The hon. member said that the
bill was framed so as to meet the objections raised against
the former measure which he had introduced.
Mr. LOWE advised the rejection of the bill, which he
said originated in consequence of the decisions of the
Courts of Equity, that the doctrines taught in those
schools should be those of the Church of Eng-
land. By this bill they were called on to take away
from the Church of England rights which it held by Act
of Parliament, and on instruments of great antiquity which
had been adjudicated upon for 300 years. He eulogised the
bill of Lord Cranworth, which provided for the education of
children of Dissenters without interference with their reli-
gious tenets, and its adoption by the right reverend
bench, was a proof of the fair principle by
which Churchmen were actuated in reference to this
matter. He was as desirous to effect for Dissenters all that
they were entitled to,, as the hon. member who brought
forward this bill, but he felt perfectly satisfied that the mea-
sure would not accomplish the object contemplated. (Hear.)
Mr. SELWYN moved that the bill be read a second time
this day six months. He contended that there was every
desire on the part of Churchmen, when placed in a position
to do so, to extend to Dissenters all the advantages of edu-
cation. In support of that position he adverted to the
practice that prevailed in the university which he repre-
sented, where facilities were afforded to persons of all
religious denominations t• avail themselves of the bene-
I fits of the institution. The hon.sand learned member
then adverted to the legal bearing of the question to prove
that the bill would lead to confusion in the law courts, and
would be found inoperative in practice.
Mr. CAULFIELD seconded the amendment.
Lord FERMOY contended that the speech of the right
hon. member (Mr. Lowe) was rather Jesuitical than Pro-
testant, and that there had been no argument to show that
the house was not perfectly competent to legislate on this
subject. He believed the donors of thee, schools would, if
they were alive at the present day, have seen the necessity
of widening the portals of education for the admission of
Dissenters. He concluded by stating that he would give
his cordial support to the bill.
Mr. A. MILLS supported the amendment.
Mr. BAINES approved of the bill, which he denied
would have the effect of depriving the Church of England
of any just privilege or advantage. In the township of
Wortley, near the borough which he represented, there was
an endowed school, in which by the will of the donor no
provision was made for any particular form of religious
. teachines The trustees of that endowment were Protestants,
and yet there were nine dissenting places of worship and
only two churches in the township. He maintained that
the bill was a concession to a right principle, and tended to
diminish a grievance; and though he considered it did not
go far enough he would give it his support.
Mr. Beecroft, Mr. Walter, Mr. Whiteside, and Mr. New-
degate opposed the bill.
Mr. DILLWYN replied.
The house divided, and the numbers were—
For the second reading l2O
Against
The motion for the second reading was accordingly lost.
BLEACHING AND DYEING WORKS BILL.
Mr. CROOK moved the second reading of this bill.
Mr. TURNER, in opposing the bill, said that any
hon. member who introduced a measure that interfered be-
'wean operatives and their employers should make out a
very strong case. In the present instance the hon. member
who had brought forward the bill was more than ever bound
to do so, for select committees of that house had decided
against the principle of such a bill, and since that de-
cision in 1858, no circumstances had arisen to show
that the measure was called for. It was proposed
by the bill to assimilate the hours of labour of
those employed in the bleaching and dyeing trade to
those in factories. He contended that there was no analogy
Between the two descriptions of labour, and the effect of
the bill would be to disturb a very important trade. Hav-
ing quoted from the evidence delivered before the commit-
tee alluded to, he said that persons engaged in the dyeing
and bleaching trade were the servants of the
public, liable to be pressed to execute orders
by their customers ; and they had also to con-
tend with the fluctuations of the seasons, so that they
were placed in peculiar circumstances. The hon. member
read extracts from the proprietors of bleaching and dyeing
works in Manchester and other parts of the country, pre-
dicting ruin to their trade if the bill were passed. He
maintained that the measure, while it would do the greatest
injury,. would' utterly fail in effecting the object proposed.
Believing that the bill would prove a useless piece of legis-
lation, he moved, as an amendment, that it be read a second
time that day six months.
Mr. RICHARDSON seconded the amendment.
Mr. ROEBUCK—I am about to speak on this question
under somewhat peculiar circumstances. Very early in my
Parliamentary career Lord Ashley, now the Earl of Shaftes-
bury, introduced a bill of this description. I, being an ar-
dent political economist, as I am now, opposed the Mann,
and drew a distinction, which I draw now, between women
and children and men. Women and children I holdnot to
be suijuris ; they are not masters of themselves, but are
under the control of other people. I would not interfere
between men and those with whom they make eentracts for
employment, but I would certainly interfere between women
and children and their employers. However, I opposed
Lord Ashley at that time, and was very much influenced in
my opposition by what the gentlemen of Lancashire said.
They declared then that it was the last half helix of the work
performed by their operatives which made all their profits,
and that if we took away that last half hour we should ruin
the manufacturers of England. I listened to that statement,
and trembled for the manufacturers of England—(a laugh)
—but Lord Ashley persevered. Parliament passed the bill
which he brought in. Froni that time down to the present
the factories of this country have been under State control,
and I appeal to this house whether the manufacturers
of England have suffered by this legislation. (Cheers.)
But the hon. member for 'lanchestor still, I find, makes
the same objection. He gets up and prophecies all
sorts of evil if we interfere now ; but he has kept
out of view the evils for the prevention of which we are
now about to interfere. (Hear, hear.) He has not told
us what was laid before the committee, and 'what Mr.
Tremenheere describes le the course of his investigation.
But I will read some facts from Mr. Tremenheere's report,
and will then appeal to the House of Commons, to the
fathers and the brothers of English women and children, if
they will not interfere to put down this tremendous evil.
(Hear.) There are some sentences in the book now in my
hand which make my blood creep, and when the hen. mem-
ber gets up and tells me that the Manchester manufacturers
are likely to suffer, I say, let them suffer. (Hear, hear.)
I, at least, will not be a party to the perpetuation of any
such atrocities as I go recorded, and I do hope that the
gentlemen of England will not be parties to them either.
(Rear, hear.) Says the hon. member, "the bleachers are

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

MARINE MUTINY BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.

r servants to the public; the demand for work comes upon
them at uncertain times, and thereis no analogy between
the case of factories and of bleaching and dyeing works."
Now, I don't care a Straw whether or not there is any
analogy in this respect, but I am sure there is an analogy
in the suffering—(cheers) ; and if so, the interference of
the house is as necessary now as it was then, whether the
bleachers are servants of the public or their own masters.
They inflict misery upon the people they employ. (Hear.)
That is the question ; and having prevented this misery
in the one case, let us interfere to prevent it in the other.
(Hear.) I will now quote a few passages from Mr. Tre-
menheere's report. Here is the statement of John Hamer,
finisher : •

" I have been 14 years in the bleaching trade. I was
employed at Messrs. years in the bleaching trade. I was
employed at Messrs. Rollins's, Tootle-bridge, Bolton. . . .
One morning we went to work at 5 o'clock and worked till
6 the morning after (25 hours). All the sets were work-
ing the same hours (the young with the adults). . . I
have been so tired, though I am a strong and healthy man,
that I have often to sit at my bedside when I get up of a
morning, and my fingers are so stiff and sore that I cannot
dress myself. If I feel thus tired what must the young
girls and boys feel ?"
(Hear, hear.) Let hon. gentlemen remember that this is an
inquiry made only a year and a half ago. (Hear, hear.)
Here is the statement of Ann Simpson, 14 years old, Eliza-
beth Hilton, 15, and Sarah Hi ;son, 16 :—.
"We came to work last Friday morning at half-past six
(at Mr. Ridgway Bridson's Bleach-works. Bolton). We
worked all Friday night till half-past five on Saturday morn-
ing (23 hours). We did not sleep any time in the night,
except on Saturday morning at half-past five we laid down
to sleep on the hooking-box, and slept till a little after seven
(less than two hour's sleep, and with the clothes still on,
after 23 hours' work) ; then we went to breakfast for half
an hour, and. then came and worked till ten minutes past
eleven." •

We complain bitterly of the hours of this house, and if we
some at four with liberty to go away and dine at seven, and
then don't get home till two in the morning, we say,
" What a terrible night's work we have had I" (A. laugh.)
Well, then, think of the poor child between 13 and 14, or
between 10 and 11, not able to go away and get a good din-
ner, not sitting while at work upon these soft cushions, but
standing upon -her poor, tired, little legs for hours and
hours together. (Hear, hear.) Think of her and com-
pare her work with ours. (Hear.) We complain of the
labours which we undergo, bift as compared with our life.
bers is the life of the damned. (Hear, hear.) Phithian
Monks says:—
"I am foreman of the dyeing and making-up room. I
worked last Friday till Saturday morning with those three
girls, and what they have said is correct."
" William Crompton.--I am 17. I have been four years
and a half (that is, since he was 121 years old) in the dress-
ing-shop. We go on till different hours, sometimes early,
sometimes late. I worked once three days and three nights,
and not long since I began work on Friday morning at 4
and worked till .5 on Saturday night (37 hours). I mostly
slept at meal times, and only stopped one hour for meals;
the rest I ate while I was working."
(Hear, hear.) Now, I ask you, the gentlemen of England,
if you will bear this. (Cheers.) I hear great talk of huma-
nity—lip humanity !—(hear, hear—about the American
slave. No man can view with more indignation than Ido the
horrible condition of the black in America ; but I cannot help
regarding with at least equal indignation the condition of
the white slave in England. (Hear, hear.) I recollect hear-
ing a story which to me appeared a touching one, and fraught
with a pregnant, lesson. Mr Oastler was walking with the
late Sir Robert Peel up his splendid picture gallery. Mr.
Oastler, as we knew, strongly advocated the shortening of
the hours of labour in factories. Sir Robert Peel, on the
other hand, as we also know, was a great political econo
mist, and was arguing with his companion upon the im-
policy of State interference. In passing along the gallery
they came to a beautiful picture, I think by Landseer,
which most of us probably have seen—a portrait of one of
the daughters of Sir Robert Peel ; and Mr. Oastler, stop-
ping suddenly, said, "My God, Sir Robert I And she might
have been a factory girl!" Yes, any one of our daughters
might have been a factory girl, and is there a man present
with any feeling for his child who could think of her work-
ing almost without cessation for 37 hours I (Hear, hear.)
Think of her tender years, think of her delicate little hands I
I have it in this book that childrene hands are often blis-
tered, and the skin torn off their feet, and yet they are thus
obliged to work, the persons who overlook them being
sometimes forced to keep them awake by beating on the
table with large boards. (Hear.) For God's sake, then, I
say, don't let us listen to the hon. gentleman I 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 yen for God's sake not to be participants in this horrible
cruelty. (Cheers.) The hon. member says he is sure you
will not go into committee on this bill. 'I, on the contrary,
feel certain that if I know anything of my countrymen we
shall go into committee ; that the measure 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." (Cheers.) The weak and
the miserable appeal to you for compassion and for aid, and
I, their humble advocate, also appeal to you in perfect con-
fidence that you will listen to their prayer, and will pass
this measure for their relief. (Cheers.)

Mr. COBBETT supported the bill.
Lord J. MANNERS thought the house might safely give
a second reading to the bill.

Sir H. CAIRNS said the bleaching of linen in the north of
Ireland was a very different process from that carried on in
Lancashire, and if the promoters of the bill would give
him an assurance that it should not apply to Ireland, he
would vote for the second reading.
Mr. IticHARDsoN and Mr. CONOLLY warmly opposed
the bill, which they considered most unjust to the freedom
of manufacture in Ireland. •
Mr. A. EGERTON considered that legislation was ne-
cessary, and supported the bill.
The house then divided, and the numbers were—

For the second reading 226
Against it
Majority -187
The bill was then read a second time.
MUTINY BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION MORTGAGES BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
INCLOn.III,B BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
RETURNS.

On the motion of Col. DUNNE, the following returns
were ordered : —Number of officers, non-commissioned
officers, and.men in depot battalions belonging to regiments
serving in India; similar return for regiments serving
in th colonies ; and sirailar return for regiments
serving in the United Kindom ; also, of the ex-
penses incurred for the commission appointed to
inquire into the state of the store establishment at Weedon,
detailing the expenses of preparing the accounts and audit-
ing them, expenses of witnesses, and all other objects.
The house adjourned at five minutes to six o'clock.