The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-19 00:00:00

THE SUN, LON'DON, TUESDA VENINO, MARCH le, 1844.

T.,8 question, he was aware, was one of great difficulty;
:ko he was happy to see so many lion Members,
feet were practically acquainted with the sub-
un tt come forward and express their opinions
c',
e",. it. He did not wish to raise any discussion con-
tilnig extraneous matter but he should say that he
14ought the difficulties which surrounded the question
1, considerably increased by impolitic restrictions
tiro trade, which upon the one hand limited the corn-
ti„eree of the country, and, on the other hand, pro-
th.ced the greatest fluctuations. He felt that the amend-
Zent of his Noble Friend would be attended with the
'3:t beneficial results, and he should vote in favour of it.
froLLir J. GRAHAM said he did not wish to exclude
th: this discussion any matters which might tend to
th.'"w light upon it. This Bill had been brought in for
t4purpose of limiting the duration of labour in fac-
tit." to twelve hours; for many of the operations in
of Manufacture of cotton and the higher branches
,woollen trade, full-grown men and women were not
r7apted, and the labour of young persons was indis-
flisahle. He should take a cursory review of all the
setigislative enactments which had been framed upon the
b.
Jeet of infant labour. Up to the year 1802 there
totil no' aw to limit the labour of young persons, in fac-
thries• In that year a law was passed which prohibited
no, employment for a period exceeding twelve hours
~,L ,of the twenty-four. This was the first instance of
t„) interfererenee for the protection of this most unpro-
,4l-ted class of individuals. So the law stood until 1819,
en an Act was passed, declaring that in cotton manu-
.B.e•
tones no children should be compelled or allowed to
ffork more than twelve hours. In six years afterwards
urther provisions were introduced for the regulation of the
faluillr of persons under sixteen years of age in factories.
in 4831, a Bill was introduced by Mr. Hobhouse, enact-
ii%g that no person under the age of twenty-one should
°ll,k night btween the hours of half-past eight and
n 'Past five in the morning. He had now traced the
e;iltr,se of legislation on this subject from 1802 till 1831.
s„ nr year 1833, the Noble Lord, the Member for Dor-
Jl`shire, introduced for the first time his proposition for
4,7t,oing the hours of labour, in the shape of a Bill,
'11;11e,Plg the time of labour from twelve hours to ten.
'Malt of labour before that was always twelve hours,
IA it was never sought to be altered till the Noble
brcl introduced his measure. In 1833, he (Sir James
,ho„1!'n?) had the honour of being in the councils of
' Majesty, together with Lord Spencer, a most humane
1)11, and one on whom the statements of the Noble
th:u were likely to produce a great impression, yet
tkY thought it their duty to resist that motion, and in
til'g so Mr. Poulett Thomson urged the very argu-.
the4t.which he (Sir J. Graham) addressed to the House
„ last time the subject was discussed ; he pointed out
tuillat though the Noble Lord's intention was humane—
hiiiugh the facts he stated were most distressing—yet,
,ng a dispassionate view of the policy the Noble
ru wished to introduce, considering its bear-
isg • between the employer and the employed,
a united Government they said this propo-
-,1 must be resisted. It would not be expedient
'race the course of all the legislation on this subject
1833. He might add, however, that the Act of
033 placed silk manufactories on the same footing as
t'Ve of cotton, wool, and flax. In the following year
to ill was brought in by Mr. Hindley and Mr. Brother-
yen, which Mr. Hobhouse again, on the part of the Go-
,oernmen t, apposed. The measure made no progress in that
lir3i°ll, and was not renewed in the following one. In 1836
to• P. Thomson with the support of Lord John Rus-
", introduced a Bill to amend and explain the Factory
tat of 1823. This measure repealed that part of the
St:tute which permitted children between the ages of
th elve and thirteen to work for twelve hours a day;
there was a division, and he (Sir James Grahatn),
eugh opposed to the Government, voted with
the Majority, but that majority was so small
thuat it was thought advisable not to press
t 411. In 1838, the Honourae Member
t(h4. Taunton brought in a Bill whicbl h provided
ti 14 Children not more than nine years of age should not
12`)rillc more than twelve hours a day, still keeping the
ours as a limit. In 1839 the Factory Bill was again
h roduced, still keeping twelve hours as the number of
bours to work ; there was a Committee on the Bill, and
'1.(1 Ashley moved that the blank in the clause should
ei.ulled up with the words fifty-eight instead of sixty-
,ppt, this being practically a reduction of the hours
niciabour from twelve hours to ten. He could not state
quire forcibly the objections to this proposal, than by
I.,o()ting the words of the Noble Lord the Member for
i,,11400, who said, " It seems to me that the Noble
15,14 has not answered the question of the Hon. Mem-
for Wolverhampton, whether, having reduced the
tgAlrs of labour, he could provide at the same time that
t,e Stine remuneration should be given for those short
the hours of labour." That was exactly the objection to
the Proposition at present; if the operatives believed that
it eY would get twelve hours' wages for ten hours' work,
1:84 a delusion so gross that the Government was
if,lind to exercise its care not to adopt any measure
11111„ticied on such false expectations. The Noble Lord
Its-4 went on to say, "Does he carry his principle so far
fiX the rate of wages by law ? If he means to do
' the Committee must know the impossibility of such
eb,nrse ; instead of the proposition being one
ounlanity, it would be one of great in-
g:lnanity. He must, therefore, resist it." The
,‘ltiority in that Committee against the proposal
as 94 to 62, and he (Sir James Graham) voted in that
),4%.lt)rity with the following gentlemen—Sir G. Grey,
1417 Hawes, Sir J. Hobhouse. Lord Howick, Mr.
t 4 uoUchere, Lord Morpeth, Mr. Fox Maule, who was
s: of the tellers, and, lastly, he had great pleasure in
(4 log on that occasion with Lord John Russell.—
(14 ear, hear.) In 1841 another Factory Bill was intro-
e(l, but the law, as it at present stood, had existed for
40,/ears, had been confirmed bysix or seven Parliaments,
in all the measures introduced on the subject there
1i44,(1. been an uniform adherence to twelve hours as the
be to the time of labour. The Noble Lord the Mem-
r for Dorsetshire had quoted evidence from the Re-
ilt}rts of Mr. Saunders, showing that twelve hours of
fi 'our was too long, but he believed he would not
11(4'ner evidence to that effect in the Report of Mr.
the He (Sir James Graham) had distinctly put
that question to these gentlemen, whether they believed
in ;:t a tell-hours' Bill would be beneficial to manufactur-
leratives, and they were of opinion that such a Bill
Ou
• lie have the worst effect upon them.—(Hear, hear.)
tOras aware that the Noble Lord had influential au-
, tali'le in support of his proposition, but the matter
114,1,1' decided on reasoning, and he could not persuade
11,0 elf that anything had fallen from those authorities
the arguments with which he had met the
Nt..7e Lord. The Honourable Member for the
prn"'.., ' Riding of Yorkshire stated that the
01,-
Hers
was very generally assented to by the mill-
-o.ers of the West Riding ; but those null-
. oar's were mostly engaged in the simpler manufacture
41.001 in its earlier stages; their workmen were paid
t& the Piece; and, provided they supplied the demand of
ikttr customers, the period of labour was to them a
thZer of comparative indifference. But if they went to
as who were engaged in the more expensive stages of
shillafacture, with more expensive and complex ma-
thellerY, in which greater capital was invested, there
01,13 Would find no great desire on the part of the
/444 per manufacturer to limit the hours of labour to ten.
tlectY-niae out of every hundred would have no
88It! to make the change.—(Cries of "No, no.")
6,-"a8 Perfectly dispassionate, and he wished to make
N 7 artelf master of all the facts, for this was a most im-
or` Pt question: He would most gladly avail himself
the-,6e1l hours' Bill if he considered that it would be for
tq laterests of the working people of the country to do
tos t.lle Hon. Gentleman opposite, who was well known
tlk'lls humanity, and for the interest which he took in
o twelfare of his workmen, was obliged to avail himself
!aro." privilege of the law. This arose entirely from
• It, Pet, ition. There was an overwhelming necessity for
let -"tell he could not escape. The Noble Lord oppo-
(%Ttould allow him to proceed step by step. When he
4%3,1. Graham) last spoke on the subject, he did not
ikt :gat Machinery should be replaced in sixteen years,
Get;;; twelve or thirteen years. (The Right Honourable
laaileraan then quoted from Mr. Horner's report, in
Which stated, that the work of machinery was so
%—i and improvements in it so constant, that it should
-Pled within 12 or 13 years, in order to re-
„'lle capital with ordinary interest of stock.)
Ike,./:roposition of his Noble Friend would abridge, by
tate,,ll3(tb,_ the operations by which that machinery, with
to ti,'St of stock, was restored. He said he would advert
krere °lily means of escape open to master manufac•
I%4_if the present amendment were passed. He was
taltt ea that in the present state of the labour market
ter
manufacturers would be able, under ex-
gait" circumstances, and at the present moment, to
to ti:Ler their losses from themselves, the stronger party,
Llabourers, who were the weaker.—(Hear, hear.)
11,,eees'1„ °Use, he knew, disliked calculations, but it would be
lot,,:arY for him to enter into the facts, and he hoped the
L`,,would give him its attention while he did so.
Hor4l,l4lB'q quoted in a former debate the ',opinion 'of Mr.
ner
z--and he still believed that opinion to be true-
44ftt" the present state of the cotton and worsted ma-
tlttee,tores, the effect of this measure would be to re-
Plas„,.,bY 25 per cent., the wages of the operatives em-
it, v
what
those manufactures.—(Hear, hear.) Let
whltt eoserve if that were the state of the case,
,lahou'rw,,,?uld be the effects of this amendment upon the
',lleh d','? whose comfortable position he heard with
Ott% Bright detailed by the Hon. Member for Durham
ea
oh.riitit).
The Hon. Gentleman stated that work-
javesit; Rayed on his own property received, on an
thi, 93 a year. Now, considering that he was right
"ouhi :,'tatement, the effect of the present proposition
94 'O, that those families who were now in receipt
Ntr,) 4,„ Year would have only 701. a year.—(Hear,
tot be Therefore a more important proposition could_
Which
4, cussed. All that' he would ask on the part of
',hisf,"ent was, that they would adhere to the law
who limited limited the hOurs of labour to twelve. They
4t.W14 111derstand those matters in all their bearings.
4°' ever the duty of every Member to consider them, and
PoblibY„Government, more especially, on whom the re-
4n.th,,„_"itY of their effects would rest, to reflect deeply
(Hear, hear.) This was not a case for catch-
\vitt. Passin
(10 the f .g Popularity. That was nothing compared
h h rightful responsibility which attached to it,
4ar.) elit) It might be ruin to the country.—(Hear,
bid'with.e could not contemplate it, feeling as he
heln to
:hare horrornothing should induce
v,Rged th re in that responsibility.—(Hear, hear.) He
which he e attention of the House to the arguments by
w:44ure hoped to prove that the inevitable effect of this
eastes 01-tiZuld be a reduction of 25 per cent. on the
e operatives employed. He would take one
w'e was °fled in Mr. Horner's report of 1842. One
as to be ecll_ °ugh to exhibit the argument. The case
, the miyund in rage 79 of the report. He would
ester,
w‘'la;sure by the case of a cotton mill in Man-
, .th! Pou4d. 11,employed 520 hands, spinning fifty hanks
th'eoagh the le would not weary the House with going
re wa, _
_items of the fixed capital ; suffice it to say
au
'eafted capital to the amount of 8,914/. The total
poti.er the ,T °um during which the operatives worked
to 4104 present law in a week was 69. By the pro-
aiXtv „11's Noble Friend the hours would be reduced
vfas nine hours less than they *ere at

present—there would be a loss to the ,manufacturer by
the hour, which was calculated at 2/.165. 10d. Now, if
this 2/. 16s. 10d. were multiplied by 9, it would giva
25/. ns. 6d., and this would be the loss of capital to
the manufacturer in a week. In • his establishment 170
operatives were employed at 15s. a week, and 250 at 10s.
The weekly wages paid in the mill amounted to 127/.
10s. for the 170 workers at 155., and 1251. for the 250 at
lOs , making a total of weekly wages. to the amount of
252/. 10s. He had already stated that 251. 1 Is. Gd.
was the weekly loss, therefore the interest of the capital
bore to the weekly *ages the proportion that 25/. lls.
Gd. bore to 252/. l Os , which was about one-twelfth of
the weekly wages. There could, therefore, be no ques-
tion that if twelve hours' wages could be made by ten
hours' work, they must admit than a reduction of wages
would be commensurate with the reduction of time, ..nd
master manufacturers would reduce the wages 1-6th.
He said one-sixth, but he would not take so high a cal-
culation. He would take the positive reduction of the
wages at one-seventh. He had shown that the loss of
capital from the reduction of the time by nine hours
was one-twelfth; and if one-seventh were added to one-
twelfth, the loss would be nineteen eighty-fourths on
the whole, or less than one-fourth, but considerably
more than one-fifth. He did not know that he had
made himself clearly understood to the Committee.—
(Hear, hear.) He believed the calculation was perfectly
accurate, and he was not able to discover any fallacy in
it.—(Hear.) It was, he believed, a fair calculation, and
if that were so, it proved that the inevitable conse-
quence of passing the Noble Lord's proposition in the
present state of the commercial world, at least in the
cotton and worsted manufactures, would be a reduction
of wages less than one-fourth but greater than one-fifth.
He was bound to call the attention of the House to mat-
ters of this kind. He begged to call the attention of the
House to the opinion of Mr. Poulett Thomson, a gen-
tleman who ought to be of some authority with gentle-
men opposite.—(Hear hear.) He said, " It would be
better to have a duty of 2d. per pound imposed on the raw
cotton, than that an abridgement of the hours of labour
from twelve to ten hours should be carried into law."
The loss which it would occasion to the master
mauufacturer would amount to 1001. a week.
The Honourable Member for Salford, when
they proposed to reduce the working hours
of young persons from 13 to 12, took occasion to taunt
the Government with breaking the engagements made
under the measure of 1833. It was an arrangement;
and he only asked the Committee to maintain the com-
promise entered into between the manufacturing inte-
rest and the advocates of a Ten Hours' Bill. That was
a settlement which ought not to be disturbed.—(Hear,
hear.) The Hon. Member for Kendal (Mr. Warburton) .
put irresistibly the statement which he (Sir J. Graham)
made the other night, that the-conclusion of his Noble
Friend was at variance with his facts. (Hear,
hear.) His Noble Friend made a statement with
regard to collieries and mines, similar to that
which he made in proposing the present amendment,
but his conclusion was different; for in the former case
he proposed that females- and children under twelve
years of age should be prevented from working in mines
altogether, but he shrank from coming to that con-
clusion in the present case.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble
Lord the Member for South Lancashire felt the force of
this. If this were a matter of feeling he would go along
with his Noble Friend's proposition, but when be con-
sidered the state of the manufacturing population—
assuming that he was right in his calculation that if this
Bill passed the wages of both males and females would
be reduced 25 per cent.—he was bound to ask
himself the question, " Shall we limit labour to an
extent which will reduce it from twelve to ten hours.
under the certain evil that it will reduce the wages of
women, and children, and husbands 25 per cent.?"—
(Hear, That was the balance of disadvantage.
He was persuaded that this would be the ease with all
the certainty that he would be persuaded of a mathe-
matical truth, In his opinion a measure more fatal to
morality, and to all the decencies of civilised life, could
not be adopted. The Noble Lord, the Member for
Liverpool, declared his object was to equalise the distri-
bution of labour. He said he desired to place factory
labour on the same footing with other kinds of labour
throughout the country. That was an ominous warn-
ing.—(Hear, hear.) This was but a small step ; and,
by and bye, steps would be taken to deal with
the whole labour of the country.—(Hear, hear.)
A more disastrous course of legislation could not be
entered on.—(Hear, hear. But, setting aside that view
of the question, he begged to ask whether the tendency
of their legislation was to equalise the distribution of
labour ?—(Hear, hear.) He would ask any gentleman
conversant with the manufacturing districts whether,
though to a certain extent by their legislation of 1830
they had secured young persons against excessive la-
bour, that legislation had the effect so much desired by
the Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool?—(Hear,
hear.) It had a directly opposite effect, and unless the
House was prepared to go the whole length of dealing
with every species of labour, it could not be otherwise.
With regard to children, it had the effect of driving
them from employments which their legislation controlled
to employments to which it did not extend.—(Hear.)
He understood that 35,000 children under the age of
thirteen were employed in the printing of cotton. The
effect of interfering by legislation to shorten the time
of labour, and to prevent women and children from
working, would be to produce a congestion of labour
where they had not legislated.—(Hear, hear.) He had
gone into the subject more fully than he intended,
but he wished to show that her Majesty's Govern-
ment did not desire to resist the wishes of
a large portion of the labouring classes with-
out full deliberation—without duly considering the
reasons on which they acted, and on which several suc-
cessive Governments had acted.—(Hear, hear.) He
would conclude with a few general observations. In
politics, as well as in morals, there was a retributive
justice inherent in the order of affairs, clearly percep-
tible in matters of Government, and he had never yet
seen a wide departure from the principles of sound le-
gislation without, sooner or later, producing confusion.
—(Opposition cheers.) Yes, inextricable confusion.—
(Renewed cheers.) They might taunt him. He cared
not for those taunts. He was decidedly of opinion
that such a departure .from sound legislation would
create and must end in a labyrinth of error, out of
which there would be no escape.—(Opposition cheers.)
It would in the long run produce evils, formidable evils,
which it would be difficult, if not impossible to regulate
at all, but particularly difficult to regulate for
those whom it was intended to benefit.—(Hear, hear.)
He begged particularly to impress upon the Committee,
that it they increased the stringency of certain restric-
tions, the inevitable consequence would be, that they must
relax others of a countervailing nature.—(Opposition
cheers.) This was a highly artificial system.—(Hear,
hear.) It was like a house of cards, from which if
one was taken, the whole tumbled down. It was a
system which, if they touched, he was afraid evils would
be created, which he did not wish to contemplate.
Sir GEORGE GREY rose to explain. The Right
Hon. Baronet had charged him with . inconsistency with
regard to this question, because he had voted differently
in 1839. He thought the Right Hon. Baronet ought
himself to show charity in bringing against him a
charge of inconsistency.—(Cheers and laughter.) But
it should be recollected that this was a subject on which
they had obtained a great deal of new information—
(Hear, hear)— and no regard for consistency would in-
duce him to reject the light of that information.—
(Hear, hear.) He recollected that the Noble Lord the
Secretary for Ireland, and the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Paymaster of the Forces, had voted with him on
that occasion, and he was very anxious to see how
they should regard their consistency.—(Laughter.)
Mr. M`Geachy and Mr. Labouchere rose together,
but the latter gave way, and
Mr. M`GEACH,Y addressed the House. He com-
menced by saying that the Noble Lord who introduced
the present amendment gave an example that a public
man could pursue a great public benefit through life.—
(Hear, hear.) It had excluded the Noble Lord from
office, because he would not accept office, lest it might
stand in the way of that entire self-devotion with which
he gave himself up to the pursuit of his high and noble
objects.—(Hear, hear.) He thought a Ten Hours Bill
had great claims upon the Right Hon. Baronet at the
head of the Government, for a Ten Hours' Bill was in-
troduced by the late Sir Robert Peel, and the principle
was always warmly advocated by him. The present
Government had come into power upon the shoulders of
the people, and he (Mr. M'Geachy) appealed to the
House whether they had shown any attention to the
wants of the people. Had they done so, they might
have remained one of the strongest Governments
that ever existed. Although he did not com-
plain of their conduct with respect' to the
Factories Bill of the last session, considering the bigotry
which was shown respecting it by the Dissenters, yet he
could not help thinking that a bolder course might have
been adopted. From the time of the passing of the
Catholic Emancipation Act and the Reform Bill, when a
Minister did not think it inconsistent with his duty to
receive a deputation of 150,000 persons belonging to
political unions, to the time of the Chartist insurrections,
—from that time to the present, redress of grievances
had only been consequent upon agitation. Agitation
had always preceded redress.—(Cheers from the Oppo-
sition.) He thought the time was now come when the'
truth should be spoken. This country bad gone upon
the principle of amassing wealth, but the condition of
the labouring population had not been considered. He
hailed the proposition of the Noble Lord with satisfac
tion. It was a step in the right direction. So long as
the the present system existed—so long would there
be discontent among the people.—(Hear.) What,
after all, was it that was asked ? Why it was
merely to reduce the hours of labour in the manufac-
turing districts to the usual period in other districts. lie
did not believe this would have the effect of reducing
the wages of the operatives, and in this opinion he was
borne out by many practical men.--(Hear, hear.) It
was said that those who wished to abridge the period of
labour wished to diminish the comforts of the poor. He
did not think such would be the effect of the Noble
Lord's (Lord Ashley's) proposition. Previous restric-
tions upon labour had not proved injurious to the into-
rests of the labourers. The Hon. Member then quoted
from the report of Baron Dupin, a Member of the
French Chamber of Peers, who approved of restric-
tions upon labour. He disapproved of the employment
of children in factory labour, as he thought it injurious
to their constitutions. He would feel it his painful duty
to vote against the measure brought forward by the
Government.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said he never rose to address
the House with feelings of greater fear and anxiety. It
was painful to him to separate himself from those with
whom he was accustomed constantly to act ; but when
he saw the Government pursuing a course which he
sincerely approved he could not shrink from giving
them all the assistance in his power.—(Cheers.)
The Right Honourable Gentleman the Secretary
of State for the Home Department had divided
his speech on 'that question into two distinct portions.
The first portion consisted of a lengthened appeal to the
consistency of those who sat on that side of the House,
and especially of
,those who composed the late cloYern-

mont. He confessed that if the argument of con, i,tency
was the only one which he had t urge, he would throe
that argument to the winds.—(liear, hear.) If subse
quent information bad convinced him that he had
formerly acted wrong, La should feel it his
bounden duty not to shrink from avowing that he had
changed his opinion. This question had been discus,ed
over and over again in the House of Commons ; it had
been repeatedly examined in Committees and by Com-
missioners appointed for the purpose, and they
had all uniformly recoiled from the measure which
his Noble Friend the Member for Dorsetshirt
recommended to the House.(Hear, hear.) The point
before them was a very simple one ; it was as important
as it was simple. It was the point which was commonly
designated the Ten Hours' Bill. The question was
nominally, whether they would take the step of restrict-
ing the hours of labour for young women to ten hours.
but practically and really the proposal was to limit the
working of the factories to those hours.—(Hear, hear.)
To that proposal the Legislature had hither refused to
accede. Some Hon. Gentlemen, in arguing this ques-
tion, had said in effect, " We are in a new and untrod-
den path ; we have sanctioned interference with factory
labour, and having done that we cannot go on too ra-
pidly." He confessed that he drew a very different
conclusion.—(Hear, hear.) Believing that they
were treading in a very perilous path he was
anxious that they should walk in such a path with
great caution.—(Hear, hear.) It was not enough to ask
him whether it was right that a woman or a young
person should be employed fur twelve hours a. day in a
factory. He was prepared at once to say, he wished to
God they could prevent it.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) It
he could view the case as an isolated one, unconnected
with consequences, no one could be more anxious than
himself for the proposed alteration. Bat that was not
the sole question before them —(Hear, hear.) In all
human things good and evil were mixed together ; and,
as legislators, they would act a most unwise, and a most
narrow part, nay, they would act in opposition to
the interests of those whom they wished to
benefit, if they did not pause before they came
to a decision. Honourable Gentlemen asked, what
was the great difference between ten hours and twelve;
and they reminded them that in the Factory Bill, which
had passed through that House, they had already li-
mited the period of labour to twelve hours. Now he
would state why, in his judgment, they had acted on
safe grounds in the course they had hitherto pursued,
and why he thought that the course now pursued was
one of peril. He believed that when.inquiry was first
instituted in 1833, it was found that all well conducted
factories in this country were not worked practically more
that twelve hours a day. If that were the case, so long
as they did not interfere with that arrangement, any other
regulations which they might adopt were likely, impera-
tively speaking, to be safe. What did they do under
those circumstances ? They applied their care princi-
pally to children, and they regulated the hours of labour
in such a manner as to oblige the manufacturers to adapt
their work to the twelve hours' system. By doing that
they had doubtless, to a certain degree, raised the
charges upon the manufacturer, but still they never in-
terfered with the possibility of his working his mill for
twelve hours.—(Hear, hear.) He maintained that this
was a very important distinction.—(Hear, hear.) They
could not confine their views to this country alone in
discussing that subject ; they must look abroad.—
(Hear, hear.) The measure which they were now
discussing was to apply chiefly to those
vast and important branches of their manufac-
tures which depended for their existence upon the
export trade, which were subject in every instance,
and at every step, to a very close competition with fo-
reign rivals. And what was the case with regard to the
foreign manufacturers ? lie apprehended that at that
moment there was not a country in this world where
cotton manufactures were established, in which the
common period of working was not twelve hours a-day,
and generally more.—(" No, no," from Lord Ashley.)
His Noble Friend the Member for Dorsetshire expressed
his incredulity on that subject. He would be glad to
hear from him if in any country in the world there was
a law which prohibited mills from being worketl
more than twelve hours a-day-?—(flear, hear.) He
would be glad to hear him mention any country in
which the mills were not actually worked twelve hours.
He would refer to one country—a very important manu-
facturing country—a country which, with respect to the
cotton trade, was one of our most dangerous rivals—he
meant the United States of America; and he selected
that country the more readily, because it was one in
which the competition was not so intense as to drive
the population to subject themselves to intolerable la-
bour. What was the state of the cotton manufactories
of that country? He begged to quote the evidence of
a very respectable gentleman in America connected with
the cotton manufacture. He was asked what was the
number of daily working hours, and his answer was,
" The actual number of working hours averages twelve
hours work at some seasons, at some seasons it is nearly
fourteen, and at other seasons it is little more than ten."
—(Hear, hear.) Now he thought that the House would
at once perceive that they were taking a much more
dangerous step in reducing the hours from twelve to
ten than they had taken formerly in reducing them to
twelve. They were going on quite a new ground—a
ground quite different from' that which they had oc-
cupied in preventing infant labour from being unneces-
sarily severe and burdensome.—(Hear, hear.) He would
not trouble the House by entering into the details of this
question, which had already been so ably dealt with by his
Right Hon. Friend (Sir J. Graham). It was quite evi-
dent that the effect of the Noble Lord's proposal would
be a material diminution of wages.—(Hear, hear.) No
one who had any acquaintance with the manufacturing
districts would undervalue this effect.—(Hear, hear.)
The seasons when distress and famine stalked abroad in
our manufacturing districts, were not seasons of over-
work, but seasons when there was a difficulty in obtain-
ing employment. It was then that disease was rife, and
crime was found to abound.—(Laughter.) And if, by
the mistaken legislation of that House, they should pro-
duce a real and permanent stagnation of the trade of this
country, they would inflict far more misery in a week
than they were now seeking to remedy.—(Hear. They
were told, to be sure, that manufacturers had always shown
a great disposition to amendment, and that this was a
reason for adopting the Noble Lord's proposal. Why,
manufacturers were, he imagined, much like other
people; nobody liked to be interfered with if they pos-
sibly could avoid it.—(Laughter.) He admitted that
the apprehensions which the manufacturers had formerly
expressed with regard to the Factory Bill had proved to
be unfounded; but he did not think that they ought on
that account entirely to disregard their representations,
especially if, on examination, they proved to be founded
on reason. He could not join his Hon. Friend, the
Member for Kendal, in regretting that Parliament had
ever undertaken to regulate factory labour; on the con-
trary, he thought that experience had shown that they
had conferred most important benefits on the
youthful population in the manufacturing districts
by Parliamentary interference; and he believed that
even the manfacturers themselves who had been most
opposed to the change, were now convinced that such
was the case. But with regard to the effect which their
interference might produce on foreign countries, it was
highly important in his opinion that they should not
take any rash or precipitate step.—(Hear, hear.) If
they saw them crippling their manufactures by unwise
and hasty legislation, it was very unlikely that they
would follow them in the same course.—(Hear, hear.)
Though the circumstance of great masses of people being
there congregated together gave facilities for the regula-
tion of labour in factories, yet there were circumstances
connected with factory labour which ought to make them
particularly cautious, and which ought to prevent them
from pushing the principle of interference to an unwise
and dangerous extreme.—(Hear, hear.) He did not
wish to introduce into that discussion any question
which might interfere with the dispassionate considera-
tion of this subject ; but there was one point involved
in that question, to which, from its importance, he could
not omit alluding. They had in this country established
a protective system ; in various ways, he would not
then say whether wisely or unwisely, successfully or
unsuccessfully, they had protected various interests
But there was one thing which they could not protect,
and that was their export trade. He warned the House
that if they adopted this proposal—if they entered upon
this new course of legislation, they would have to
adopt many other measures, or else see a degree of ruin
and misery inflicted on various great interests in this
country, which it was lamentable to contemplate. He
would not follow the. Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir James
Graham) in his description of the effect which the adop-
tion of the motion of his Noble Friend must inevitably
have, first upon the wages of the labourer, then upon
the profits of the manufacturer, and, lastly, upon the
general trade and industry of the country. But he found
the effect so clearly and ably stated in the Report of the
Commissioners in 1833, that he would take the liberty
of reading a very striking, passage to the House. (The
Right Hon. Gentleman then read an extract from the
Report. It stated, that if the ten hours' system were
enforced, there might, indeed, be a temporary
scarcity of manufactured goods, so as, in the
first instance, to occasion a rise of prices,
which might, as long as it lasted, allow of the main-
tenance of wages ; but this result could not in the nature
of things be of long duration ; the small factories would
soon be swept away and the more opulent would even-
tually share the same fate ; the ultimate result would be
a general recuction of wages.) In this the whole case
was so clearly, though so shortly, stated, that he would
be unwilling to weaken its effect by adding to it any
arguments of his own. He knew that those who took
the course which he was taking might possibly be
charged with inconsistency. He had cheerfully consented
to interfere with labour under certain circumstances.
He thought cases might' be brought before
the House, so revolting, so shocking, so out-
traging to the common feelings of human nature, that
he would listen to no arguments against alteration, but,
rather acting from impulse than reason, he would feel
sure that he was right in putting an end to such abomi-
nations.— (Hear, hear.) ' With that view he had sup-
ported the measure of his Noble Friend the Member
for Dorsetshire last year, prohibiting the employment of
women and girls in mines. He had never regretted
having done so, and he believed that he never would
regret the course which he had pursued in reference to
that question. But he could not but feel that there was
the greatest danger, if they did not look well and cir-
cumspectly to consequences, that, with the best inten-
tions in-the world, they might strike a blow at the ma-
nufacturing interests of this country, and thereby
inflict injury on the working classes generally.—
(Hear, hear.) On these grounds he was pre-
pared to offer all the opposition in his power to the
motion of his Noble Friend ; and he was prepared to
share with the Government the odium and unpopularity
which might attach to such opposition. He had seen no
reason, from what he had heard on that debate, to alter
the opinions which he had hitherto entertained ; he
felt bound, therefore, to give a decided vote against the
proposal of the Noble Lord.— (Cheers.)
Mr. COLQUHOUN said it was no easy matter to meet
authorities so great and arguments so strong as those
which had been urged against the proposal of the. Noble

Cord ; but he could not help referring to the argument
,f his Right Hon. Friend that a blow was about to be
Amick at our manufactures which would affect the profits
Of the manufacturer and the wages of the labourer. It
t as, he thought, a remarkable circumstance that so
manufacturers should petition for that Which, according
to the Right Hon. Gentleman, would be so injurious to
,heir interests. To escape from the pressure of this
trgument, his Wght Hon. Friend threw himself back
upon a distinction. He said that the petitions in favour
of the proposal of the Noble Lord represented only the
woollen manufactures; they did not represent cotton and
other manufactures, which were produced by a finer and
more costly machinery. Amongst the three hundred
manufacturers who petitioned in favour of the measure
of his Noble Friend, there were one hundred engaged
in the manufacture of the finer sorts, which required the
most costly materials.—(llear, hear.) He had asked a
-*riend, who sat now within two of him, and who repro-
iented a district in which only the finest sorts were
manufactured, what did they do in his place? and his
answer was, that they had always limited the time of
work to ten hours a-day.--( Hear, hear.) This was a proof
hat the limitation proposed could be effected, without in-
c, iurin the capitalits, without suffering to the labourer, and
with 'benefit to both.—(Hear.) His Right Hon. Friend
(Sir J. Graham) had referred to the calculations of Mr.
Horner as proofs against the Bill. Mr. Horner was an
inspector, of very great intelligence and respectability.
But he (Mr. Colquhoun) had inquired of an inspector,
of equal respectability with Mr. Horner, and was as-
sured that the calculations of that gentleman were er-
roneous.—(Hear, hear.) That was an authority quite
equal to that which his Right Hon. Friend relied on;
and he (Sir J. Graham) had, therefore, not made out
his case. The operatives were not unaware of what the
,ffeets of the measure would be upon themselves; 'and
they said that they preferred to have no more wages
than 751. or 791. a year, with which they would enjoy
some daily relaxation, and preserve the bloom and vi-
vacity of their children, to 9:3/. a year with the long
hours and intolerable toil.—(Hear, hear.) They said
that they had rather do without those simple luxuries
of which the Hon. Member for Durham spoke, than
continue the system of slavery which caused paleness
and deformity in the child, and premature decrepitude
and old age in the adult. When he (Mr. Colquhoun)
formerly opposed this . measure, he had not that
experience which now compelled him to change his
mind. His Noble Friend.did not propose to bring the
Bill at once into operation, but by a safe and sound
gradation, so as to enable them to stop its progress if it
were found to work disadvantageously.—(Hear.) His
Right Hon. Friend had told the House that he was
willing to prohibit the labour-of women of any age in
.any employment more than twelve hours a day. But
that enactment took place in factories (as we under-
stood) in the year 1833, and it had not been found to
produce the evils which were professed to be appre-
hended from it. He (Mr. C.) found that in all depart-
ments of agricultural labour, the hours of work were
limited to ten a day, and that was found to be as mueh
as the human frame could support. He was satisfied
by his own experience and observation, as well as by
the sound reasoning and humanity by which this Bill
was supported, of the justice of 'the measure, and he
would give it his cordial support.—(Hear, hear.)

Mr. FIELDEN then rose, and for some minutes ad-
dressed the Committee in a tone utterly inaudible, amidst
repeated cries of " Speak up, speak up." He
was understood to say, that he had no fear
that the measure would disturb manufactures. The im-
pression upon his own mind was that the factories could
not go on with twelve hours a day. If they looked back
to the last ten years, how many factories would they
find had been stopped altogether for a month in that pe-
riod, and how many more had worked only half hours ?
—(Hear.) Would it not be better to equalise the dis-
tribution of labour, and to go on regularly with the short
hours as they were called, but which were quite as long
as the people could work without injuring themselves
and their families?—(Hear, hear.) But, in fact, this was
made a question of money against mercy, The sufferings
of the people were made a secondary consideration.—
(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet told them that it
was wrong to legislate on this question. What ! was it
wrong to legislate for the protection of life and limb, and
property ?—(Cheers.) They expressed sympathy with
the poor people, but they told them at the same time
that they could do nothing for them—(Hear)—and con-
tinued to keep them in the abject slavery which was
destroying the people of this country.—(Hear, hear.)
They were bringing up a race of human beings,
whom, by-and-bye, they would not be able to
govern. The people felt that they received no svm-
pathy from the Legislature. They sucked in hatred for
the Legislature with their mother's milk—they saw it
in her eyes—they heard it from her lips. He told them
that he was not for a Ten Hours' Bill—he was for an
Eight Hours' Bill.—(Cheers.) The manufacturing com-
munity would never be what it ought to be until the
hours were reduced to that.—(Hear, hear.) It had been
asked, would they not go to some other employment ?
What ! were there not domestic employments ? Was
there not the education of their children ?—(Hear, hear.)
Twelve hours were too 'much for adult or child. (The
Hon. Gentlemen then proceeded to refer to a measure
for abridging labour in factories, introduced by the late
Sir Robert Peel, and he was understood to infer from
it that Sir Robert was in favour of eight hours ; but
from the lowness of the Hon. Gentleman's tone we
could guess but vaguely at the tonour of his observations.)
He held in his hand a petition signed, in July last, by
thirty-two delegates of the working men employed in
the mills and manufactories for thirty miles round Man-
chester, and a meeting for a similar purpose had, he be-
lieved, been recently held at Bury. These thirty-four
delegates, representing this mass of human industry,
had unanimously agreed to submit to that House that
nothing would be efficient or satisfactory unless they
prohibited working for a longer period than ten hours
per day for five days in the week, and eight hours for
the Saturday. They had further agreed that no child
should be employed until it had completed its tenth
year. These delegates had determined that until these
propositions became the law of the land, there could be
no satisfactory solution of this question. Now, there
was the opinion of the working people upon this ques-
tion. They understood the subject as well as any Hon.
Member of that House ; and as to what had been said
about a reduction of wages consequent upon a reduction
of the hours of labour, they were willing to take the
risk of that.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Dur-
ham had said a great deal about this question of wagei,
and had brought forward a great heap of calculations of
his own, but all his statements amounted to nothing—
all he had said was delusion.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.)
Not merely the operatives of Rochdale, Manchester, and
Oldham, but many of the largest mill-owners, men of
probity, and property, and talent, were now strongly in
favour of a Ten Hours' Bill. Nearly all of them were
anxious for it, and very many of them had signed a
document to that effect.—(Hear, hear.) Aye, and
amongst the number who had thus signed it were to be
found the names of Mr. Bright., sen., and Mr. Bright,
jun., the father and the brother of the Hon. Member for
Durham, but he supposed the last-named gentleman
had latterly become more enlightened than his two es-
teemed and talented relatives. The lion. Gentleman
concluded his speech, which throughout by far the
greater portion of it was quite inaudible in the gallery,
by stating (as we understood) that he would support
the motion of the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Ashley).
Sir R. PEEL said he thought the Committee would
give him credit for disinterestedness in opposing his Hon.
and Learned Friend. No personal or party interest
could be attributed to the Government in the course
they were about to take. It was impossible not to see,
in the progress of this debate, that the Government
were opposing those who generally supported them, and
in whose principles they generally coincided, and that
they were supported by Hon. Members who on most
occasions opposed them. The first duty of the Govern-
ment was to overcome the danger of gaining party sup-
port, or conciliating temporary popular favour by
i acquiescing n the proposition which they conscientiously
believed to be injurious to the permanent interest of the
country. And influenced by that motive, and that
alone, they must now oppose the proposition of the
Noble Lord. There were two propositions before the
House—a proposition made by the Government, which
imposed a restriction on the labour of children, gave
new facilities for those who had not an opportunity of
protecting themselves, which arrested the evil where it
was found of the employment of female labour, prohi-
bited the employment of females in factories for more
than twelve hours a day, but imposed no restrictions
upon the labour of adults, finding twelve hours to be
their general time of labour. The counter proposition
to that was a restriction nominally imposed on the la-
bour of females and children, but practically preventing
the labour of male adults for longer periods than twelve
hours. The Hon. Gentleman who spoke last declared
that the Noble Lord had not based his proposition
upon principle—he admitted the propriety of re-
straining female labour for the purposes of education
and recreation ; but the Hon. Gentleman added that
eight hours would have been more in accordance
with principle. He said that poets and philoso-
phers had divided the day into three compart-
meats of eight hours each, eight for labour,
eight for sleep, and eight for recreation ; and he con-
fessed he did not see that the Noble Lord acted upon
any fixed principle. The Noble Lord's proposition
would apply to cotton, woollen, flax, and silk manufac-
tures. For the last forty years the general rule of labour
was sixty-nine hours a week ; that was the number of
hours tolerated by the law, and now it was demanded
that the hours of labour should be lessened.

Mr. HINDLEY—The number of hours during which
the operatives are at present employed in the factories
are sixtynine.
Sir R. PEEL—I said sixty-ninse hours. That was
twelve hours a day for five days in the week, and:nine
hours on Saturday. Now the proposition of the Noble
Lord was to limit the number of hours to fifty-nine ;
and this restriction was to apply to the four great
branches of domestic industry—cotton, woollens, linens,
and silk. Let them take the foreign trade of the country
from the last returns. The value of British produce and
manufactures exported last year amounted t 044,500,000/.
sterling. What proportion did they suppose the ma-
nufactures of cotton bore to this 44,000,000/.? Cotton
manufactures, including yarns, amounted to 23,500,000/. ;
linen, 4,500,000/., and woollens 7,600,000/., making a
total of 35,000,000/. ? What would be the effect of the
restrictions proposed by the Noble Lord ? There were
about 300 working days in the year. Five days in the
week the labour was to be two hours less than ut pre-
sent ; 250 of the 300 days the labour was to be reduced
by two hours, or 500 hours in the course of the year.
Five hundred hours were equivalent to seven w eeks.
Now only think of the cotton mills and woollen factories
of this country being idle for seven weeks in the year—
seven weeks less labour than was at present performed !
How would this answer with their foreign rival ?
Could they proscribe to him to work seven
weeks less in the year ? The Honourable Gentleman
said that" they had done more harm to manufacturers
by allowing machinery to be exported, than they pus-
eibly could by limiting the number of the howl of

I labour even to eight.. Was the Hon. Gentleman willing
to bring in a Bill flyr the repeal of that Act ?
Mr. HINDLEY—I objected to it.
Sir R. PEEL—It would be very gratifying to the
manufacturers to be told that the Hon. Gentleman had
opposed the eish of both :Houses of Parliament —(A
laugh.) The Hon. Gentleman said that, if the hours of
labour were restricted, the wages of labour must be in-
creased. Why, surely that was the natural conse-
quence of restriction. The manufacturer might in-
crease his wages—but for how long a period?—(Loud
cries of "Hear, bear.") When they entered into
competition with a foreign rival, would not the
increased expense of manufacture operate against
them, and give a new stimulus to the foreigner?
The fact was that the material would not be increased
in price, and he would come into competition with the
manufacturers of this country while the House would
have raised the price of manufactures by their inter-
ference with labour.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentle-
man had described the master manufacturers as being in-
clined to reduce the wages of their workmen. That might
be so, but he did not believe such was the case; but sup-
posing it to be so could it fsr one moment be supposed
that for ten hours' labour as much wages would be given
as for twelve ?—(Hear, bear.) It was repugnant to
common sense to suppose snch a thing.—(Hear, hear.)
There could be no doubt that the great suffersrs, if
the present proposed measure was to pass, would be
the workmen, who would have to give a less
amount of labour than before. If he thought that that
would add to the comfort of the workmen, he would at
once adopt it.—(Hear, hear.) But when he heard the
account given by the Hon. Member for Durham of the
state of the workmen, when he stated that they were
getting 93L a year, he felt bound to pause before he
consented to a measure that would mulct them of a
great part of the wages they now received.—(Hear,
hear.) Then it was said that they ought to separate
the consideration of the comforts of the people from
pecuniary gain. How, he would ask, could that be
done ?—(Hear, hear.) It was impossible. It was tried
in Scotland, and what was the result? Why, he
should never forget the state of Paisley some
years ago, when no less than 50,000 persons
were out of emp'oy there.— (Hear, hear.) If his
wishes could prevail he would have women now working
eight hours a day, but wishes could not prevail on this
question. It must be looked to in a commercial point of
view. It was impossible to say that they could disregard
commerce and• consider humanity alone. If ten hours
was the natural amount of labour, that might be true
with a certain class of agricultural labourers, because at
certain periods of the year women could not work more
than ten hours a day on account of the night coming on.
(Hear, bear.) He was sure that it was not for the ad-
vantage of the manufacturer or the working man that a
Ten Hours' Bill should be passed. Why such a measure
would impose an income• tax of 15 per cent. on labour,
and it was his firm belief that the workmen themselves
cherished a hope the measure would not pass into a law.
He thought there never was an impression more errone-
ous than that by which the supporters of the Noble Lord
were actuated. He would prove that there were other
great manufacturing branches which required legislative
restrictions quite as much as those contemplated by the
present measure. He asked why, if a really tangible
case was proved to exist, he should not correct- it
because another existed ? He was sure that if he cor-
rected the evils existing in one branch of labour he would
do harm if he left untouched any other. It had been said
that after he had imposed restrictions on one description
of labour, he was bound to do the same with re-
spect Ito others, or he should give a premium to
those who were excepted, and also that he would disturb
capital. What were those descriptions of employment
which he left untouched ? The agricultural labourers.
It was said he could not touch them. It was true if he
could control those matters he would most willingly
prohibit the employment of women in many of the agri-
cultural occupations in which they were at present em-
ployed—where women were employed working for eight
or ten hours with wet raiment and without shelter, he
would be disposed, provided he could do so without in-
jurieg any ether interest, to interfere legislatively. Now,
he was about to leave untouched, according to Hon.
Gentlemen opposite, all the other manufacturing inte-
rests. He shouldrefer to the manufacture of earthenware,
of calico; hosiery, rope-twisting, but, above all, dress-
making—of all those he should say that he was not going
to touch one. He was going to leave to the masters
the employment of women and children in what manner
they pleased. He thought if Hon. Gentlemen carefully
read the Report of the Commissioners, they would con-
clude that, by any undue restrictions, so far as the
cotton-manufacturers are concerned, they would
be giving a premium to over-employment in
other branches of manufactures. In that Report
it was stated that in a great number of the dif-
ferent manufactures which were not included in
this Bill, almost the whole employed were women and
children. It appeared from_the Report, that in the ma-
nufacture of metal wares women and children were em-
ployed to a great extent. In the manufacture of screws
alone, it appeared that the proportion of females em-
ployed far exceeded that of the males. In one screw
manufactory there were only 50 males employed, while
there were 300 females. In the chain manufactories
there were ten times' as many girls employed as there
were men. He alluded to those Reports to show the
extreme difficulty there was in legislating upon this
subject, for if they said that all should be subject
to the same law, then he would advise them
to contemplate the results. Let them look
to other manufactories where females were employed—
let them take calico. In that branch there were by far
more females employed than men. In the earthenware
manufactories a vast number of children were employed,
who were compelled, in the carriage of the plates and
saucers to and from the furnace, to undergo a tempera-
ture of nearly 143 degrees, and (according to the Re-
port) the instances were rare in which the regular hours
of work were less than twelve hours nominally, but some-
times it exceeded sixteen, seventeen, and eighteen hours
—(Hear, hear)—and he was called on to restrain labour
in cotton manufactories alone, while calico and the various
others were to be left untouched ! He could not have
credited it, without the strongest proof of its accuracy,
that human nature could undergo such toil as that de-
scribed in the evidence given in that report. One per-
son, named Thomas Whitbread, stated that on a Wed-
nesday he began to work between eight and nine o'clock,
and never stopped until Saturday. A boy who assisted
him, from excessive fatigue, became almost insensible, and
to enable him to carry on his work, he tied him to a post.
The Right Hon. Baronet then read another extract
from the evidence of a man employed in a cotton print.
ing-works, who, having worked from six in the morn-
ing till nine at night, was asked by the foreman of the
works if he could not return to work again at twelve. ,
Now, here was a case (continued the Right Hon.
Baronet) in which the hours of work were from six
o'clock till nine, and yet the man was asked to come
again at twelve at night, thus allowing him only three
hours' interval for repose. The man said, " I did not
go, because I considered it rather unfeeling of them to
expect me, as my child had worked with me all these
hours, and he was only eleven years old." Now let them
read the accounts of the lace manufactory; let them go
from the lace manufactory to the accounts of the hosiery
trade ; but, above all, let them read the accounts of the
dress-makers and milliners who were employed in this
very town—(Hear, Bear)—and then let him ask, was it
right to subject to such new and peculiar restrictions the
labour in factories, and leave untouched all other de-
partments of labour in which the female child and the
adult woman were frequently employed fourteen, fifteen,
and sixteen hours a-day ?—(Loud cheers.) If they were
prepared to legislate for them—(Renewed cheers)—they
would then be prepared to legislate on the labour in
factories. They must not legislate for factory labour
only, but for all the labour in this country that came
within the same principle. (Hear, hear.) They
were not about to legislate on the labour that af-
fected only women] and children, but to provide
regulations which should apply to children, that
should apply to adults, in respect of every kind
of labour where they might think it more severe
than the human frame ought justly to undergo.
That principle he certainly could understand. If, then.
this were the commencement of that work, he could
not make an objection to it as being an unjust inter-
ference with a peculiar class of labour. But if, as it
now seemed to, be, their impression, and perhaps a just
one, that they were imposing these restrictions upon
adult labour, they would engender the necessity of fur-
ther restrictions applicable to all labour—(Hear, hear)
—and he saw not why they should not extend those
restrictions to agricultural labour.—(Loud cheers.)
Before he adopted a principle which necessarily led to
such extensive consequences, namely, an invariable and
almost universal interferefice with labour in this country
—before he adopted this principle, although he admitted
that an universality of application was not inconsistent
with justice, as showing no preference of one deserip-
tion of labour to another, yet, foreseeing that he
was involving himself in a duty he should never
be able satisfactorily to perform— seeing that
although it was possible perhaps to deal with the labour
of factories, yet where he was called on to enter the pri-
vate shops, and the private houses, and to impose obli-
gations upon every individual, as to the degree of labour
which he should impose, not upon 300 or 400 children,
but upon every individual, as to the degree of labour he
should impose upon the members of his family
whom he employed—if he was to be involved in such a
difficult, and, as he thought such a perilous enterprise—
(Cheers)—if he was to understand that it would be his
duty to prescribe by legislation, not only how long the
steam-engine should work, but to inculcate to every pri-
vate establishment, and every private family, the
duty of humanity by legislation—then he thought
he should be involved in a task above all
human strength, and full, as he believed, of individual
injustice.—(Cheers.) His wishes and feelings would be
as much in concurrence with effecting that object, as
those of any man ; he should like to see the father more
proud of the education, the instruction, and moral train-
ing of his child, than anxious to increase his earnings
by his labour. Could lie effect that by law ? If they
once undertook it, they must not be deterred by diffi-
culty in individual cases. The more he extended legis-
lation, if he went from factories to the potteries, from
thepotteries to the manufacturing of hosiery, and from
the hosiery trade to the lace manufactories—by that
which he left incomplete, lie should give a fresh encou-
ragement to excessive labour. It was not the magnitude
of great establishments only they had to contend with ; if
they carried out the principle fully and fairly, they must
descend to all the details of daily occupation? that was
admitted. The principle of a due interference with
labour involved that question. What, then, would be
the effect on the general employmeut of the country
from such interference? It was pregnant with most
important consequences. After that legislation should
have been carried into effect, see what other conse-
quences must follow. He believed that upon the whole
they had attempted as much of legislation with these
great branches of manufactures as it was safe and wise
to attempt for the welfare of the country and the
manufactures, but above all for the interests
and the comforti of the working classes, He

believed they had done all they could safely
attempt at the present tine. If he were to
authorise the forcible restriction of labour to the extent
Ph: preventing the aclu't in cotton factories, in sill:
ffictories, in the lace and woollen factories, to ten hours ;
whatever his sympathies might be, whatever might be
his feelings, he, with his colleagues, had no other motive
than that of promot:ng what he believed most consistent
with the public welfare; and acting, from that motive, he
could not acquiesce in the proposal of his Noble Friend
for forcibly limiting labour to the extent of ten hours in
mills and factories.

Lord J. RUSSELL said he had listened with great anxiety
to the speech of the Right lion. Gentleman opposite ; there
was never a question on which he felt it more difficult to come
to a conclusion, or one the issue of which was more important.
lie would not attempt to gire an answer to what the Right Hon.
Baronet ( Sir 3. Graham) had laid some stress upon, as to his
( Lord J. Russell's) having taken a part on a former occasion
inconsistent with his support of the present motion. He slid
not think this was an opportunity to return any taunt what-
ever.— ( Sir James Graham intimated it was not meant
as a taunt.) If it was not so meant he should
certainly say, whatever might be the apparent inconsistency of
taking that course, where the interest of so many thousands of
the working classes was involved,he should be ashamed of himself
were he not ready to expose himself to any charge of incon-
sistency., if he were persuaded that those interests would induce
him to take one course now, rather than another that he had
taken formerly. He was not satisfied with the statement,
able as it was, of the Noble Lord, the Member for D rset.
He was of opinion that the argument of the Noble Lord was
liable to the reply of the Right lion. Gentleman, that the con-
clusion he ought to come to was, that women and children, at
all events, should be totally excluded from working in factories,
and that the system ought to be altered, if not abridged in es-
sential details. But he must say that the course which the
discussion had taken, and the various speeches made by gentle-
men thoroughly acquainted with the details of the factory system,
very much tended to clear the question of the difficulties in which
the too comprehensive statement of the Noble Lord had in-
volved it. Let him consider fora moment what the amount of
difference was in the proposition made by successive Govern-
ments, and that proposed by the present Government, and the
course which the Noble Lord now proposed.,—( Hear, hear.)
He must say that, listening to the Right Hon. Gentleman's
Speech, and his arguments on the subject that night, he would
suppose that he objected to any legislation on the subject.—
( Hear, hear.) When he told them that persons were employed
for sixteen and eighteen hours iu calico•printing and in the
manufacture of silk, it would be supposed that he was an
enemy to all interference ; yet the Right Honourable Gen-
tleman himself proposed that the hours during which young
persons should labour, should be limited to twelve. Let it be
recollected likewise that they had limited the time of labour to
eight hours for children between the ages of nine and thirteen,
to twelve hours for young persons from thirteen to eighteen
years. The Government were not satisfied with the
extent of this limitation.—( Hear, hear.) They pro-
posed a still further restriction, limiting the time of
labour to six and a half hours, for children from nine to thir-
teen years of age, and limiting, by a very important change in
the law, the hours of labour for adult females. Now he must
say that if a new principle was to be introduced, this was a very
doubtful one.—( Hear, hear.) They gave some sanction
to it by their legislation with regard to mines two years
ago. It was no great encouragement to them to proceed
in that course, if what had been told was true, that
the Act was evaded in Scotland, and that women there
dressed themselves as men to evade the Act. At all
events it was a principle which it was very.difficult to justify.
—( Hear, hear.) It was interfering with the natural guar-
dians of the children to prevent their being employed in a
n anner destructive not only to health and life, but which pro-
duced contortions, deformity, decay, disease, and death at an
early period. The Legislature undertook the charge of chil-
dren and y:ourb-, persons, but with regard to females of 25
and 30 years of age, it seemed hard to justify a departure
from the principle, so far that these women were not
restricted as to the number of hours they worked. That was
not in the proposition of the Noble Lord—it was introduced
for the first time in factory legislation by the Government
themselves, and let it be observed, that the introduction of
women, who were above 18 years, formed one of the objec-
tions to the proposition of the Noble Lord.—( Hear, hear.)
The proposition of the Noble Lord was, that the hours of
labour should be reduced from twelve hours to ten, but the
Right Hon. Gentleman said that if they entertained such a
restriction they must introduce it for all who laboured in mills,
and not for those alone to whom the Bill applied.—(Hear,
hear.) Why ? Because the Bill applied generally to women.
It appeared from the Report of the Commissioners that though
the law as it stood at present confined the time of labour to
twelve hours for those between the ages of thirteen and eighteen,
it did not prevent the working of adults for fifteen and sixteen
hours. Mr. Horner referred to cases of this kind which
he said ought not to be permitted. There was one point
which appeared to him to be the main point in which he
thought the arguments of the two Right Hon. Gentlemen
were unsatisfactory. If they limited the right of adult males
to labour any number of hours they thought proper, and
placed any undue restriction on adult labour, it would be quite
against all sound principles of legislation ; iiut it would be too
much to say that, to obtain that labour from adults, they
thereby injured the health of young persons. If they found
it necessary for their physical health and moral well-being, and
in order to make them good members of society, to place certain
restrictions upon them, he (lid not think it could be argued
as any decisive reason against those restrictions, that they
thereby restricted the labour of male adults, because their ar-
gument was one to which there was no sufficient answer; and
they were not to sacrifice young persons, in order that another
principle might have way. They found that an increase during
the last few years, according to the statement of the
Noble Lord, in the number of females employed, espe-
cially young females, had taken place, and they
had medical testimony that young girls of thirteen
and eighteen could not be employed for twelve hours together
without serious injury to their constitutions, and without the
loss of those feelings which in after life would be likely to
render them good wives and good mothers. If this was se, it
was a principle that should be predominant with them. He
could understand the principle that they ought not to in-
fere on the subject—( Hear, hear)—that if they in-
terfered in the subject at all it would lead to
an interference with all the employments into which this great
community was divided. That argument he could understand
if he had been opposed to any legislation with regard to facto-
ries ; but if they began to legislate on the subject—if they
had a Bill proceeding on the principle of interference—.
if they legislated in a course to :undertake the
guardianship of one hundred thousand persons undergoing severe
hardships, they ought to make that interference effectual.—
( Hear, hear.) It was difficult for him to speak of foreign
countries, but his Right lion. Friend the Member for Taunton
quoted an example of an American factory in which they
were allowed to work more than twelve hours in the course of
the day, but in a subsequent part of the evidence it
seemed that the children and the young persons employed
went away for three or four months in the year to attend a
school. That was a totally different state of things. It very
much weighed with him that a great number of the manufac-
turers themselves were in favour of the amendment, and he
was very much struck with the statement of the Hon. Member
for Leeds, that out of seventy owners of mills forty were ready
to agree to a Ten Hours' Bill—at least they petitioned for it.
They were told that at a moment when trade was reviving
there would be a great objection to legislating upon this sub-
ject, on account of the tendency of this Bill. But they found
such laws produced good as well as bad effects, and this Bill
might have the good effect of more equalising the quan-
tity of employment, seeing the prodigious power of
machinery in this country, and the immense quantity
of goods that could be turned out in a few weeks.
More continuous employment at ten hours per day throughout
the year might be secured to the operative by it than occa-
sional employment at twelve, fourteen, or fifteen hours per day
at one time, and only six or eight at another, according to the
present system. There was another part of the subject, or ra-
ther it was the subject which was naturally allied to the present
one, which had been touched upon by Members on that (the
Opposition) side of the House. Those said, that if the
Government wilhed to benefit the working classes,
they ought rather to take off the restrictions upon food. He
(Lord J. Russell) was one of those who took it that the con-
sequence of the proposal of the Noble Lord (Lord Ashley), if
adopted, would be a diminution in the wages of the working
classes. That was not quite certain, but it had been as nearly
proved as anything could be, and he had had some doubts as to
whether he would give a vote for a measure under the sup-
position that the wages of the operative would
be reduced from their present rate by it.—( Hear,
hear.) But he thought that in taking a view of
this subject, the question of the corn-laws ought not
to be kept out of sight. It was one which they might well
consider in conjunction with this question, particularly if the
operative could obtain a greater supply of food when earning
12s. per week on those restrictions being removed, than he
could now when earning 16s. per week. For it was his belief
that in this country the people had too much toil and a defi-
ciency of food. Certainly it was difficult to try to interfere
with the subject by legislation; but he believed they were
under the necessity of so doing. But there was another task
which they ought likewise to undertake—he meant the admit-
ting a greater supply of food into the country, so that they
might look forward to the people having less toil and a greater
abundance of food. He should give his vote in favour of the
Noble Lord's amendment.

Mr. HINDLEY, amidst cries of " Divide, divide," moved
that the Chairman report progress.
Lord ASHLEY requested that the Hon. Member would
withdraw his motion, and proceed to address the Committee.
Mr. HINDLEY said he would yield to the request of the
Noble Lord and withdraw his proposition, but in following the
Prime Minister and the Noble Lord the late Secretary for the
Colonies, he could scarcely hope to command the attention of the
House. Never did he feel more anxiety in addressing the House
than at the present moment—not that he was in any doubt, like
the Noble Lord the Member for Sunderland (Lord Howick),
as to the vote he ought to give, but it was a question in his
mind of vital importance to the interests of the country. The
interests of humanity ought to be attended to before those of
commerce._( Hear, hear.) Practical men were in favour
of the proposition of the Noble Lord.—( Hear, hear.)
As to the evils resulting from the system of leng hours, no
difference of opinion prevailed. His Hon. Friend the Mem-
ber for Durham admitted that there were great evils; but he
said the Noble Lord took a telescope and looked the right way
when he examined the evils arising from the factory system,
whereas he reversed the evils resulting from agricultural labour.
The Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir J. Graham) had informed
the House that a deputation had waited upon him to state their
opinions on this subject, and that one of them was a person
who had formerly been an operative, but who had now raised
himself above that condition.—( Sir James Graham—
.. He has a share in a factory.") But was this
an argument in favour of the present system ?
As well might it be contended that there was no danger in a
rapid stream, because some strong and brawny, individual had
been able to breast it. It had been his privilege to take part
with others in efforts for the improvement of the working
people of his own locality ; and he had always found that long
how's offered a great impediment to improvement. Though
the women as well as the men earned more money
by working so many hours, they were so ignorant
of the commonest domestic pursuits that a large portion of the
money, under their management, was completely thrown away.
—( Hear, hear.) A friend of his, a magistrate, had gone
round to the houses in his locality on a Sunday, for the purpose
of ascertaining what proportion of persons attended public
worship. Meeting a woman in a cell, lie asked her whether her
daughter had gone to attend public worship. The reply was that
she was asleep in bed. It appeared that this girl, who was fourteen
or fifteen years of age, had been employed in a factory from
six o'clock on Friday morning, during the whole of Friday
night, and until six o'clock on Saturday evening.—(Hear,
hear.) This was neither consistent with Christianity, nor
with the real interests of the country. 'With regard to what
had been said of improvements having lately taken
place—he was prepared to admit that there had been im-
provements, but there was still room for a good deal, and
what had been effected should encourage the House in future
legislation.—( Cries of " Divide, divide," and " Oh, oh.") He
had himself been at the head of a concern, where children of
nine years of age were worked twelve hours of positive
work, which, with two hours' interval for food, made
fourteen, hours; and then many of them were occupied three
hours in walking to and from the factory, making seventeen
hours, which left only seven hours for sleep, recreation, and
education. He did not allow that system to be carried on by
his own choice, or for the purpose of making money at the
expense of their suffering; but he was compelled to carry on
his Works upon the system that prevailed, and there was a

, - - —4
neighbouring house that employed the people an' bour more
daily —( Renewer! and continued cries of " Oh, oh," and
" Divide, divide.") It had been said that the gentlemen
engaged in trade should make some arrangement amcm;st
themselves to pelt an end to the system.—(Divid4aVide.)
But he had no hopes that the gentleman could dcip•so, nor
would any thing effective be done by the freedom ofitilljvidual
industry. —( Confusion, cries of " Oh, oh," and " Diviacr) The
operatives of Lancashire had banded themselves like ige peop"e
of Ireland—( Oh, oh)—to force their employers; but such a
state of things was pregnant with the greateat evils.—
' ( Extraordinary interruption, with cries of " Divide.")
1 If he were not interrupted, he would not detain the
House long.—(Cries of " Divide,"and " Go on, go on.")
He (Mr. llimiley) wished it to be understood by the House
, that the working men were quite alive to the probable conse-
quences of the proposed abridgment of the hours of labour, and
were quite prepared and willing to abide by them. It should
be recollected that in 1833 they were warned of the fearful
consequences that might arise to families, their employment,
their wages, and their comfort, by the interference with chil-
dren's labour, which then commenced. But in spite of these
warnings and prophecies, control and interference were or-
dained, and at the present moment there were more children
in factories than ever.—(Hear, hear.) He believed that
s-lne of those Honourable Members who intended to
support the amendment of the Noble Lord (Ashley) still
were perplexed with doubts as to the working out of the prin-
ciple ; but, for his own part, he had no fears whatever either
of its soundness or its results in practice. There was proved
to exist in the factory system a great moral and physical nui-
sance, and therefore it was the duty of that House to interfere
for its abatement. He asked the House to give a security to
the country, that the comforts of the labouring classes should
not be further abridged, and their condition rendered still more
miserable.

Mr. COLLETT and Mr. Hardy rose at the same time, amid
loud cries of " Divide, divide." Both Hon. Members remained
for a considerable time on their legs, at length the latter gen-
tleman gave way, and Mr. Collett attempted to address the
House, but a scene of indescribable confusion ensued. At
length the Hon. Member was understood to say that he was
opposed to the motion, on the ground of its interfering with the
rights and freedom of labour, and with the liberty of the
subject.

Mr. HARDY then rose, but his attempt to address the
House was the signal for a renewal of the confusion which pre-
viously prevailed. There were loud cries of " Oh, oh," " Di-
vide, divide," and the Hon. Member finding it impossible to
obtain a hearing, said he would move the adjournment of the
House. He then moved the adjournment amidst most mani-
fest and vociferously expressed signs of disapprobation, and sat
down. There were loud cries of "Go on. go on," •he Hon.
Member again rose, but was again received with the same dis-
couraging symptoms of impatience ; he again sat dawn, but
rose a third time and begged that he might be heard for a few
minutes, if only for the sake of those who sent him there.—
(Loud cries of " Hear," " Oh, oh," and " Divide, divide.")
No arguments had been adduced to convince him that the
Noble Lord who had brought forward this motion was not
pursuing the right course. —( The Hon. Member was repeatedly
interrupted by cries of " Divide, divide.")
Mr. MUNTZ would vote in favour of the motion of the
Noble Lord, not because he believed it sound—( Hear, hear)
—for he thought the whole measure unsound—( Hear, hear)—
but because he thought, if they intended to try a principle,
they should try it well.—( Hear, hear.) For his own part, he
thought the whole subject was out of the reach of legislation.—
( Hear, hear.) He believed that it was not the disposition of
the working classes to overwork themselves or their children.
It was their necessities made them overwork. He thought all
the people in this country were worked beyond what they
ought to be.
Lord ASHLEY rose to reply amid cries of " Divide,
divide." If he succeeded in the motion he had brought for-
ward, he should be most happy to agree to the proposition of
his Hon. Friend the Member for Leeds. His reason fur
advocating this amendment was because he thought it would
tend considerably to promote the permanent prosperity, happi-
ness, and stability of the empire.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the Committee
divided, when the numbers were—

For the amendment
Against it
Majority against Ministers -9
On the gallery being re-opened we found that
Mr. COLLETT had moved an amendment, for inserting
the hour of " six o'clock" in the clause, instead of " eight
o'clock."

On this the Committee again divided, and the numbers
were—

For the amendment
Against it'
Majority for the amendment — 8
On the opening of the gallery,
Sir J. GRAHAM was en his legs. He said that the Com-
mittee having, at that late hour, decided that they would
adopt a Ten Hours' Bill without any modification, to which he
must confess, with all due respect to the decision to which
the Committee had come, he had an insuperable objection—
( Cheers)—he still did not think it necessary to drop the Bill
upon the Bth clause. The Committee would have an op-
portunity of reconsidering the question in a form more sub-
stantial than that which they had now discussed. He would
therefore, proceed with the Bil, up to the Bth clause, when he
thought that his Noble Friend, consistently with the decision
to which the Committee had just come, would move that a Ten
Hours' Bill be substituted for a Twelve Hours' Bill. Having
stated this to the Committee he would now move that the
Chairman report progress, and ask leave to sit again on Fri.
day next.
The House having resumed,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL begged to know from the Noble
Lord in what mode he intended to move for a Ten Hours' Bill ?

Sir JAMES GRAHAM suggested that the Noble Lord
ought to take time to consider the subject.
INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT BILL

This Bill was read a second time.
The Gaming Transactions ( Witnesses' Indemnity) Bill was
read a third time and passed.
IRISH REGISTRATIONS.
Lord ELIOT gave notice that, on Thursday, the 28th, he
would move for a Bill to regulate the Parliamentary franchise
in Ireland ; also, for a Bill to amend the Municipal Corpora-
tiors (Ireland) Act.
The House then arljourned at a Quarter to Two o'Clock.

SALE OF THE DUKE OF DEVON-

SHIRE'S COLLECTION OF COINS AND

MEDALS.
Yesterday this splendid collection was submitted to
public competition by Messrs. Christie and Manson, at
their rooms, King-street, St. James's. All the well-
known Savans and Antiquaries were present, and the
bidding continued very brisk durinc, the entire day.
Mr. Manson, on opening the sale, observed that he
had to offer one of the most splendid collections ever
exhibited in this country, though many persons were of
opinion that such a collection ought not to be broken
up, yet he thought far greater advantage would be
afforded to science and the arts by its diffusion. The
collection was to be sold without reserve, with the ex-
ception of one lot.
The sale then commenced, in lots, of Greek copper
coins of the several cities of ancient Greece, but they
did not bring high prices, varying from one guinea to
two guineas and a half the lot. In the Greek silver
there were many beautiful specimens, particularly the
Syracuse medallion head of a female laureated, sur-
mounted by four dolphins—reverse figure, " Friga,
above a victory," below a lion running. This is very
fine, the old medallion of Syracuse is very rare, only one
having been sold in this country, which brought 1261. ;
and it was only within the last three years the British
Museum possessed one. After great competition it was
knocked down at forty-one guineas. There were many
beautiful specimens in Greek gold, amongst which were,
the Head of Apollo, on the reverse an Eagle standing
upon a thunderbolt. Agathocles, head of Pallas hel-
metted—reverse, thunderbolt, very fine. Those did not
bring high prices. The Imperial Greek copper coin
brought, in lots, very fair prices, varying from two
guineas to five. The Roman weights were a very cu-
rious collection. Upon each side of " The As' was
a thunderbolt, a fish, a helinetted head, a female head,
a tortoise, a wheel, the head of Mercury. These_brought
very fair prices.
In the Roman middle brass there were maay fine em-
blematic specimens of ancien t Rome, such as Mark Antony
and Cleopatra face to face, with Augustus on the reverse,
all of which brought high prices. The Roman large
brass comprised many exquisite specimens, and the
prices they brought was but a due estimate of their
value. Amongst them were the heads of Pompey, Julius
Caesar, Augustus Tiberias, new and many others. The
Roman Consular silver sold well, particularly that of
Emilia, the restored coin by Trajan, scarce and rare,
and those legionary coins of Antonia. The Roman
Imperial silver were objects of great competition, and
brought very high prices and were greatly admired.
The Roman silver medallions bearing the heads of
Augustus, Claudius, Domitia, Titus, and Nerva, with
the head of Julia ; and on the reverse Vesta seated, were
specimens of great curiosity. The last lot was the one
of the greatest interest. It was the Roman Consular
and Imperial coins in gold, the sale of which excited the
greatest competition, the coins bearing the head of
Brutus, which was not mnch larger than a half sove-
reign, brought from 16 to 40 guineas ; and even at those
prices were most eagerly sought after. The day's sale
amounted to upwards of 730/.

ENTERTAINMENT AT THE MANSION-HOUSE: On
Saturday the Right Hon. the L'ord Mayor gave a very
splendid entertainment to several of the members of the
Court of Common Council and their ladies. The company
sat down at half-past six o'clock to a table covered with the
most delicious dishes. The long parlour was magnificently
illuminated, and decorated upon the occasion, and there was
some admirable singing by professional persons of both sexes.
His Lordship will give dinners on the 19th, the 21st, the
26th, the 28th, and the 30th, to the other Common Council-
men and their ladies.

THE AUTHORSHIP OF " CHITSWORTH."—CaII any
one answer the question that everybody is asking—" Who
is the author of Chatsworth ?' " It is evidently a " secret
worth knowing," for we have it on the authority of the ac-
knowledged oracles of the day in such matters, that, whoever
he may be, he is, as a writer, " made up of every creature's
best." One writer says that his work displays "the wisdom,
wordly knowledge, and book learning of the author of
'lremaine ;' " another, that it " unites the ideal beauty of
'Beck,' the ever fresh nature and charming simplicity of
Boceacio,' and the sparkling brilliancy of Mrs. Gore ;' "
a third says, of a single tale of its contents, that it has "more
cleverness in the very simplicity of its construction than
scores of three-volume pretenders ; more beauty and tender-
ness of design than as many poems ;" a fourth declares that
" Chatsworth," of its class, is " among the most remarkable
productions of the day, if not the most remarkable." Who
then, we again ask, is the author of " Chatsworth?"
The most experienced and practised critic of the day has pro-
nounced him, from internal evidence, to be no other than
" The author of Tremaine ' " himself ; but this Mr. Ward
has expressly denied, though without in any manner hinting
at the real author, beyond speaking of him as a " valued
friend," and "one in point of ability far beyond any assis-
tance from me." The motive for this mystery, however, we
can guess—when we recollect that the work contains many
brilliant Portraits, which everybody says are likenesses.—
Court Journal.
To LADIES.—The high and universal celebrity
which Rowland's Kalydor continues to maintain, as an active
yet mild and soothing extirpator of all impurities of the
skin, is, during the period of Spring, most pleasingly evinced.
This preparation, eminently balsamic, restorative, and invi-
gorating, is equally celebrated for safety in application, as for
unfailing efficacy in removing all impurities and discolours-
tion • and imparting a healthy freshness and transparency
to the Skin and Complexion. Its universally great demand
excites the cupidity of unprincipled shopkeepers, who give
the title of " Genuine" Kalydor to compounds of their own
manufacture, of the most deleterious character, containing
mineral astringents utterly ruinous to the Complexion, and,
by their repellant action endangering health. It is,. there-
fore, imperative on purchasers to see that the words " Row-
land's Kalydor" are on the wrapper.—All other 4 are fraudu-
,.
lerit CoUnterfeits.