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

THIRD EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock.

NEWTON RACES.—(This Day.)

[BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.]
MAIDEN PLATE.

Malpas
Skelton

2

Seven ran.
GOLBORNE PARK STAKES.

Lady Clifden
Glen Stewart

Five ran.
NEWTON HANDICAP.

Master Bagot
Birdcage

Twelve ran.

HAMPTON RACES.—(This Day.)

[BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.]
INNKEEPERS' PLATE.
King of the Forest
Confusion.
Foretop

2

Four ran.
SURREY AND MIDDLESEX STAKES.
Claire
Borderer .
Kimaersley

2

Seven ran.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS--(THIS DAY.)
The SPEMIZER 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 ordererl 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 the mode 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 ou.t 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 me ntal 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 ho 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 the, the
operation of the factory act in respect to the question under
consideration was satisfactory, as it had the effect of ex-
cluding in Scotch factories children ender 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 effo its 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, tel ad to raise wages and
place such branch of trade at a most unfair in-
equality with other branches of natir ,nal industry. They
should remember that they we re legislating for
the working classes; and that in d ealing with juvenile
labour, they might be depriving a wr irking man of an im-
rortant addition of 65., 75., or Bs. a week to his income, by
the restriction intended to be impose. . 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 arti ales 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 a juvenile labour. He
contended that there should be a gene ral measure introduced
on this question. They should not say to employers that
they should net employ boys of a cert ain age, but that they
should employ them co „ sistently with the national system
of education. In fact, they were now cndeavouring 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 compulsor y education, to which
he strongly objected. Instead of 1 caving 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,
After some further discussion, in which, however, no new
point was introduced,
Mr. AYRTON said that the only object which they
were then discussing was at what age, whether 12 or 13,
children should be employed in mines, under any restric-
tion or not. The next clause would provide for what the
description of education would be, and the amount of pro-
tection to be extended to children. There were precedents
for fixing the age of the children to be employed.
The age of 13 was that which had been decided on with re-
spect to children employed in factories, and that decision
was founded on a general principle, namely, that it was a
period of life when children had arrived at the age of dis-
cretion for employment. If this was the case in other em-
ployments, it was most particularly so in regard to labour
in mines, and the age of 13 was the one best suited to children
engaged in mines according to the report of inspectors of
mines. He contended that this was a question of mo-
rality, religion, and duty on one side, and money and the
acquisition of money in its worst form on the other. With
regard to this latter, it was a fact that the effect of this
bill would be to compel them to make a larger outlay of
their capital, and instead of employing juvenile labour
without restriction, they would more properly be required
to employ adult labour.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said that, as was not an unusual case,
the house was called on to decide between three courses,
namely, two extremes and one medium course. In one in-
stance it was proposed that there should be no restraint
imposed on the employment of children in mines. Unless
they were disposed to sweep away the acts 4 and 5 of Vic-
toria they could not agree to that proposition. He could
not consent to the proposal of the honourable member
(Mr. Paget), for he considered the alteration he was desi-
rous of introducing was not one that should be adopted with-
out some experience. Government did not propose to do
away with the employment of children of 10 years of age in
mines, provided they could read and write. They could
extend the age to 13 if they found that the addition of two
years was not sufficient for the protection of children.
Col. LINDSAY said that there was much misrepresen-
tation as to the bad condition of persons employed in mines.
The house thea divided, and the numbers were—
For the amendment 7l
Against it l7B
Majority —lO7
The amendment was accordingly lost.
Mr. KINNAIRD moved the following amendment,--
"That no such boy shall be kept, or allowed to remain, in
any colliery or mine for a longer period than eight hours in
one day."
Mr. CLIVE felt bound to oppose the amendment. The
mortality in mines amongst boys was an argument against
the amendment, because, by the restriction it imposed, it
would be necessary that the boys should be drawn up and
let down from the mines more frequently, which would in-
crease the risk to their lives.
Mr. KINNAIRD postponed the amendment for the pre-
sent.

Lord J. MANNERS moved an amendment to the effect
that no children should be employed in mines under 12
years of age under any circumstances. He alluded to the
Factory Act, and stated that the physical improvement
effected in children employed in factories was a conclusive
argument in favour of increasing the age of children to be
employed in mines,
After a few words from Mr. CAYLEY,
Mr. BRUCE opposed any exceptional legislation on this
subject. It had been said that there was a connection be-
tween ignorance and crime, and what was the case as re-
garded the mining population? Mr. Fletcher, who has
Collected a cumber of statistics on this subject, gives the
following result with reference to committals for crime
within certain p9riods :—Metropolitan districts, 22f per
1,000: ircn districts. 18; agricultural, 14 ; cotton, 12;
silk, g; and mining districts, only 6 per 1,000. Like the
hon. and gallant member (Colonel Lindsay) he had visited
mines, and could smoab to the good condition of the:mining
population.

_
After a few words from Mr. CATLEY,
Colonel LINDSAY contended that it was most unfair to
apply a restriction such as that proposed by the bill, the
effect of which would be to drive juvenile labour into other
channels than mining. which would be an injury to the
mining interest and to the public. •
After some discussion the amendment was withdrawn.
Mr. LIDDELL moved the omission of the clause.
Lard A. V. TEMPEST seconded the amendment.
The committee divided, and the numbers were—
For the amendment
Against it 180
Majority -89
The clause was then agreed to.
On clause 2,
Mr. ADDERLEY suggested that it should be post-
poned, as well as clause 3.
Sir G. C. LEWIS declined to accede to the suggestion.
Some discussion ensued, after which,
Mr. KINNAIRD moved the amendment which he had
previously brought forward, limiting the time of work for
boys under 14 years of age to eight hours a-day.
The committee divided—
For the amendment
Against it
Majority
lost.''
progress
and the house resumed.
TheTh e amendment
Chairmanre
reported
e d
The Loeal Boards of Health Bill was read a second time.
The Local Government Supplemental Bill was also read`
a second time.

.............. 77
.............. 146
.............. -69