The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-13 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(THis DAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair shortly after 12 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Lords' amendments to the Tenbury and Bewdley
Railway Bill were considered and agreed to, and the bill was
ordered to be read a third time.

The following bills were considered and ordered for the
third reading :—Epsom and Leatherhead Railway Bill ;
London, Chatham, and Dover Railway (Capital) Bill.
PETITIONS.

Several petitions were presented, chiefly in favour of the
Education Bill ; against the powers vested in the Poor Law
Commissioners, and praying for an amendment of the law ;
against the provision in the Census Bill which required a
landlord to give a return of the religious profession of his
lodgers, as being useless and calculated to mislead as to the
actual numbers of the different religious denominations in
the country ; against themode of registering births, deaths,
and marriages in Scotland ; against Sunday trading, &c.
MINES REGULATION AND INSPECTION BILL.
The house went into committee on this bill.

On clause 1,
Mr. PAGET moved to leave out in line 20 " 12," and
insert " 13." The object of the amendment was to prevent
children being admitted to work in mines before they had
obtained an adequate amount of mental and moral culture.
The plan he proposed had been adopted by the provisions of
the Factory Act, and that measure had worked most suc-
cessfully. He was opposed to this bill when it was intro-
duced as being an undue interference between the employer
and employed, but the statement he made as to its success-
ful operation was founded on information furnished by the
most competent authority. The hon. member then
referred to the state of juvenile education amongst
the working classes, and said that it was stated by persons
of the most reliable character, that up to a certain age, only
15 out of 46 could read, and the number would much be re-
duced if the test of writing were required.
Mr. CLIVE defended the clause, which he said was
framed in conformity with the suggestions of those best
qualified to understand the subject. He denied that the
operation of the factory act in respect to the question wider
consideration was satisfactory, as it had the effect of ex-
cluding in Scotch factories children under a certain age,
when their labour would be valuable.
Mr. LIDDELL opposed the clause as well as the amend-
ment. He considered that a compulsory enactment of that
kind would materially impede the efforts of those who had
laboured strenuously for the education of the working
classes, and would disgust those classes with that very edu-
cation which it was the duty as well as the desire of the
house to 'promote. The partial application of the principle
of compulsory labour to any one branch of industry would,
according to sound political axioms, tend to raise wages and
place such branch of trade at a most unfair - in-
equality with other branches of national industry. They
should remember that they were legislating for
the working classes ; and that in dealing with juvenile
labour, they might be depriving a working man of an im-
portant addition of 65., 75., or Ss. a week to his income, by
the restriction intended to be imposed. He contended also
that, as we were about to enter into a competition with
France, we ought to afford every facility for the supply of
labour in the production of those articles which we intended
for the French market.
Mr. ADDERLEY objected to step by step legislation,
and said that the statute book was in a most anomalous
condition in reference to the subject of juvenile labour. He
contended that there should be a general measure introduced
on this question. They should sot say to employers that
they should net employ boys of a certain age, but that they
should employ them co sistently with the national system
of education. In fact, they were now endeavouring to throw
on the employer the obligation of the parent, while the
house should stand in that relation to the child, or, at all
events, partake of it conjointly with the parent.
Mr. C. BUXTON said that the system which it
was proposed was one of compulsory education, to which
he strongly objected. Instead of leaving this subject of
juvenile education to the gradual increase of knowledge and
intelligence, instead of having recourse to law, and impos-
ing criminal penalties for its neglect.
Mr. CROSSLEY objected to the bill, and said that its
operation in Yorkshire would have the effect, to a
considerable extent, of confiscating mining property.
Mining proprietors had no objection to children being edu-
cated while in their employment, but no means could be
devised to render the present bill practical in operation.
The children employed in mines were a hard dreadnaught
class, and it would be useless to depend on procuring them
from schools, so that the effect of the bill would be to drive
children into other branches of industry. He had no
objection to the age proposed,
(LEFT SPEAKING.)