The Sun.
London, England, 1835-07-29 00:00:00

CARLOW ELECTION COMMITTEE.

Mr. DYSON brought up the reduced list of this Committee,
and the following Members being sworn retired to elect a
Chairman :
Barclay, C. Jones, Wilson I O'Connell, J.
Egerton, W. I'. Lowther, J. H. Power, J.
Gaskell, J. M. Nagle, Sir R Sandon, Lord
Grimston, Hon. E. Yorke, Elliot Thos.
Mr. D. ROCHE presented a petition from Mr. James Fitz-
gerald, of the city of Limerick, complaining of the window-tax.
LADIES GALLERY.

Mr. G. BERKELEY brought up the report of the Select
Committee on the Ladies' Gallery amid much cheering. The
report was ordered to be printed.
IRISH CHURCH.
Colonel WOOD presented a petition from Brecon against
the Irish Church Bill. The Hon. Member felt confident that
he expressed the sentiments of the greater part of the country,
when he expressed a sincere hope that the measure would never
pass into a law.—( Cheers from the Opposition.)
SHERIFF'S DECLARATION BILL.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved the Order of the
Day for the seccnd reading of this Bill.
POST-OFFICE MAIL-COACH CONTRACT.
Mr. WARBURTON, seeing the Hon. Member for Taun-
ton (Mr. Labouchere) in his place, wished to ask him whether
it was intended that any additional time should be given for
delivering in estimates for the contracts for mail coaches.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said that there was no intention to
extend the time. It was absolutely necessary that the vouchers
should be ready for the servive of the public on the sth of Ja-
nuary next, and therefore it was deemed by the Commissioners
inexpedient to extend the time beyond the Ist of August next.
Mr. WALLACE expressed his entire approbation of what
had fallen from the Honourable Member from Taunton. An
opinion was now abroad which he trusted was without founda-
tion. It was believed in some quarters that the country was to
to saddled with all the useless expense of the old establishment.
Now that they had the promise of the advantage of new models
and patterns, he trusted that the Government, or the Com-
missioners of Post-office inquiry, would make it perfectly clear
that the old establishment was entirely to cease, and was no
mote to be foisted upon the public.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said the Commissioners and the
Government had no intention of keeping the old establishment ;
on the contrary, they would have an entirely new establish-
ment.
Captain BOLDERO understood that the present contrac-
tor had been offered the contract upon the present terms for a
longer period. He wished to know whether such was the fact.
Mr. L ABOUC HERE—It was undoubtedly true that
the present contractor had been made such an offer, but
in consequence of his conduct he was totally excluded
from the new contract ; in the first place, because, it having
been found that it would be for the benefit of the pub-
lic service to continue the present contract for six months
longer it was offered to Mr. Viddler. It was accepted by his
solicitor, and only when he was called upon to sign the contract
did he give the very first intimation of his refusal.
Such conduct he thought no public officer ought to allow.—
(Loud cheers.) The Commissioners, therefore, had tendered
this advice to the post office, in consequence of which no esti-
mate would be received from Mr. Viddler, or his representative

mittee appointed to inquire into the merits of this election,
declaring that Colonel Thompson was duly elected, and that
neither the petition or the opposition was frivolous or vexatious.

THE BUDGET.
The Marquis of CHANDOS, not seeing the Right Hon.
the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his place, begged leave
to ask of the Noble Lord (J. Russell) when it was intended
that the Right Hon. Gentleman would make his financial
statement.

Lord J. RUSSELL, we understood to say that it was not
yet finally settled, but be thought it would be on Monday.
The Noble Lord then again asked Hon. Members who had
notices pending to give way to the Committee on the Irish
Church Bill.
Mr. CLAY had alone given in in consequence of the great
importance of the measures before the House, which must have
been retarded had he pressed his motion.—(Cheers.) He
trusted the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Maxwell) would follow the
same course, or otherwise he (Mr. C.) would proceed.
Mr. J. MA X WEL L—l may as well tell the Hon. Gen-
tleman that I will proceed.--( Laughter and cries of Go on.)
Mr. D. JACKSON seeing the Noble Lord, the Secre-
tary for Ireland in his place, wished to ask him some particu-
lars relative to the case of four persons tried for an assault
at the last Armagh Assizes.
Mr. PERRIN promised to make inquiries into the matter.
Mr. CLAY would not press his motion, as it. was most
likely to occupy the whole of the evening.—(Loud cheers, )
He bad on a former occasion postponed it in consequence of
the important measures before the House, and would do so
again. He considered his motion as of the utmost importance,
but he would take that opportunity of stating that it was not
his intention to press it during the present session, but he would
take a very early opportunity of doing so in the next.
Sir E. CODRINGT ON had before waived his motions,
merely because the measure before the House was of the most
vital importance. As the same course still operated, he would
follow the example set by the Hon. Gentleman.
Mr. T. DUN C OMBE postponed his motion relative to the
case of Lieutenant Bradley, till Tuesday next.
Captain PE C HELL would follow in the wake of the Gal-
lant Admiral ; he trusted the House would allow him to in-
troduce his two Bills with respect to Tithes on Turnips, at the
close of the sitting.
Mr. E. TENNANT wished to ask the Noble Secretary
for Ireland whether it was his intention, during the present
session, to introduce any measure to alter the issuing of Par-
liamentary NI rits in Ireland.
Lord MORPETH said a Bill on the subject was in prepa-
ration, but the Session was too far advanced for its introduction.
Mr. SHIEL postponed his motion until Thursday next.
HAND-LOOM WEAVERS.
Mr. MAXWELL then rose to bring forward his motion for
Boards of Trade. He felt as much regret as any other Member
in inconveniencing the House.—( Cries of " Oh," and laughter. )
The Hon. Member referred to the evidence of one of the
weavers who had been examined before the Parliamentary
Committee appointed for the purpose. That person, who
was a competent and credible witness, stated that in the
year 1797, his wages were 275. per week, and that then he
could command 281 lbs. of flour a year • but in 1834, his
wages were reduced to ss. 6d. per week, and he was compelled
to support himself and family upon 81 lbs. flour only for a year.
Those on whose behalf be then appealed to the House did
not ask benefits at the expense of others ' • they only asked
to be enabled to support themselves, by giving them
the same protection they gave to others. Oh, but then it
was said that it would be contrary to the principles of political
economy, and therefore these hundreds of thousands must be
left to starve.—( Hear, hear.) It might be said that these
persons should have recourse to other trades or to agriculture.
What would be the advantage of this ? Was not the agricultural
labourer complaining, and would he not complain still more if so
large a body were to be thrown on the land for support ? A
Committee had been appointed upon this subject, and it was
in pursuance of the views of that Committee that he now
asked leave to bring in this Bid. He admitted that his Hon.
Friend opposite, the Member for Kilmarnock (Dr. Bowring),
who had taken an active part in the labours of the Committee,
dissented from the principle embodied in the Report, and sug-
gested a remedy (as we understood), in the reduction of the
pressure of taxation ; but in reply to such a suggestion he
begged to say that until those reductions were made, the Le-
gislature was bound to give these classes protection against the
influence of wealth and power, protected as that influence
was by such imposts and restrictions as the existing corn laws
provided.—( Hear, hear.) This class of his Majesty's sub-
jects subjects were entitled to equal protection. It was true
that great capitalists might not be enabled to make large for-
tunes, owing to the variations in the price ofmanufactures and
to the starved condition of the people, and their unequal com-
petition with machinery, but he contended that some protec-
tion should be afforded to the poor man's capital--his labour.
And what was the condition of that class as had been proved
before the Committee? The House would, he hoped, excuse
him if he quoted the evidence of one of the body who had
been examined, of the name of Hallowell, and he proved that
though formerly be could earn 20s. per week, his earnings
were now reduced to ss. 61d. per week, and that was to suf-
fice for the support of himself and his family. This man had
been himself a weaver for 40 years, and was a person well ac-
quainted with the trade, and as such competent to speak upon
it. The Honourable Member then proceeded to read at
length long extracts from the evidence taken before the
Committee, but in a tone of voice which was wholly inau-
dible in the gallery. We understood the result of the evi-
dence to be, that even in health the hand-loom weavers were
not enabled to earn sufficient " to keep soul and body toge-
ther." Under such a state of misery, was it to be won-
dered at that some men would go astray frem the paths of rec-
titude and honesty—was it surprising that they should be
guilty of petty thefts and purloinings from the property in-
trusted to them by their employers? He would not express
an opinion as to what a man driven by despair might perpe-
trate even in such a state of things, but how much must that
despair be increased when, as the witness had stated before
the committee, the Poor Law Bill was regarded by the labour-
ing classes as a measure of coercion upon them ? He ( Mr.
Maxwell) begged to ask the house whether it was just or pro-
per that a man who for 40 years had laboured hard for the
support of his family and himself should have to look forward
to such a state of things? With increased distress, the liabi-
lities of the labouring classes had increased, and yet what had
been the language of the Government when the Legislature
had been called upon by them to raise the salaries of the
judges ? It was urged that they had now a great deal more
to do, and it was stated in proof of that proposition, that in
one district the number of criminals for trial in the year 1810
was 326 ; while in 1829 the number had increased to 1,240.
That increase had originated from the distressed condition of
the people ; and from the same cause crime had still further
progressed during more recent years. By giving employment
and adequate wages to the people, crime would most assuredly
be diminished, and though it might be urged that the Bill
which he trusted to obtain the permission of the House to in-
troduce was insufficient, he should be prepared in a future
stage to show that it would prove adequate both in respect to
increase of employment and reduction of distress. The Hon.
Member concluded a speech, which from the indistinctness
with which it was delivered was almost wholly inaudible to us
in the gallery, and of which the above is consequently but an
outline, by moving for leave to bring in a Bill for the better
protection of the artisans of Great Britain and Ireland em-
ployed in weaving by hand-loom.
Sir M. S. STE WART seconded the motion.

The SPEAKER having put the question,
Lord DUDLEY STUART thought that when the Go-
vernment and the House considered that the subject to which
the bill proposed by his lion. friend had been referred by the
House itself to a select committee, they would agree in think-
ing that it would be very hard to refuse to sanction the intro-
duction of a bill founded upon the report of that committee.
When it was alto remembered that no less than 800,000 of his

Majesty's subjects earned their scanty and miserable sub
sistence by the trade of weaving, and were in the distressed
condition which had been proved, could the rejection of their
petitions, praying that which the select committee by their
report had recommended, be justified ? This suffering por-
tion of the community deserved well of the legislature, inas-
much as up to a certain period they had borne their deep
privation with patience, and for a great many years conducted
themselves under their sufferings with great morality. That
morality had only suffered injury by the want of those means
which could afford them physical strength, by the want of those
means which in the weaving districts had produced the most
squalid wretchedness. Wai it surprising that when by honest in-
dustry, by work night and day, not excepting in some cases Sun-
days, they they were unable to maintain themselves and fami-
lies even in health, that they should resort to trifling pilfer-
ings ? For this state of things the Government had called
for a remedy to be devised ; the remedy had been devised, by
the labours of a select committee appointed by the House it-
self, arid he trusted that House would not throw out, without
consideration, that measure. On the contrary, let the House
consent to its introduction, and when it came before it, en-
deavour, if possible, to improve its principles or details.—
( Hear, hear.) He would not now undertake to say that he
should approve of all the details of the bill, but he supported
its introduction in the hope that it might prove a measure of
amelioration to the wretched but deserving classes whose re-
lief it contemplated.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. P. THO M SON announced his intention of opposing
the motion of the Hon. Member for Lanarkshire for leave to
bring in this Bill, and said that he did so principally for the in-
terest of those whom the Hon. Member professed himself so
anxious to protect. It was not that he turned a deaf ear to
the complaints of the hand-loom weavers, or that he underra-
ted the sufferings under which they were labouring at present,
that he had come to the determination of rejecting this Bill,
but it was because he was satisfied that the sooner the delu-
sion which this Bill fostered was dissipated, the better it would
be for those who believed in it. The principle of this mea-
sure, although disavowed by a number of the Committee, was
nothing more nor less than than the fixation of a minimum of
wages, and being so was a sufficient reason for his opposing it.
—(Hear, hear.) He did not wish to allude with disrespect to
the labours of that Committee, but the large blue volume then
under his hand was not the only volume which had emanated
from them. There were two other volumes equally ponderous,
and he should like to know how many Hon. Members bad
waded through their contents. His official situation had com-
pelled him to read them, and he thought that they that they
would have been much better had the questions been shorter
and the answers longer. He turned, however, from the ques-
tions, which were full of speculations upon corn and cur-
rency, and from the answers which were given to them, to the
report of the Committee itself. The Committee in their re-
port stated that the causes of the distress under which the
hand-loom weavers were suffering were in their nature fivefold.
The first cause was the increase of machinery ; the second
was the oppressive taxation occasioned by the war ; the third
was the increased pressure of taxation occasioned by the alte-
rations in the currency in 1816, in 1826, and in 1829 ; the
fourth Was the exportation of British yarn, and the foreign