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

ceedings commenced, what progress made, and when
terminated. Amount of the principal moneys in dis-
pute, and costs deducted in each case."—Ordered.
VICTORIA PARK.

In answer to a question from Sir W. CLAY as to
the progress made in the arrangements for the forma-
tion of the Victoria Park,
The Earl of LINCOLN said that the whole of
the ground intended to be included in the park was
not yet in the possession of the Government. The
site of the park would occupy 262 acres : of these
179 were in the hands of the Commissioners of
Woods and Forests, and the remaining 83, which
belonged to six proprietors, remained unpurchased,
because the Commissioners were of opinion that
the price demanded was an extravagant one. The
usual steps, however, would be taken to ascer-
tain the value by a jury. They did not think it ad-
visable to commence the formation of the park till
the entire of the land was in their hands. It would
be in their possession before autumn, when the neces-
sary steps would be taken.
In reply to a question from Sir V. BLAKE, who
was quite inaudible in the gallery,
Sir J. GRAHAM regretted that the Hon.
Baronet had not given him some notice of the ques-
tion. He understood the document which the Hon.
Baronet had read to have reference to that portion of
the poor-law which caused the removal of poor
Irish who had made settlements in parishes in
England to Ireland, where they had no settlement,
and complaining of such a state of things. All he
could inform the Hon. Baronet on the subject at pre-
sent was, that it would be taken into consideration
under the proposed New Poor-law Bill.
Sir WALTER JAMES asked the Hon. Baronet
whether he had taken pains to authenticate the state-
ment which he had read to the House.
Sir V. BLAKE said he had received his informa-
tion from a gentleman of the greatest respectability,
whom he had known for several years.
FACTORIES BILL —COMMITTEE—AD -
JOURNED DEBATE.

On the motion that, the Order of the Day for going
into Committee upon this Bill be read,
Lord HOWICK presefited two petitions from
places in Yorkshire (as we understood) against the
Bill.

The Order of the Day having been then read,
The House went into Committee; Mr. GREENE in
the Chair.
On Lord ASHLEY'S amendment being read,
Mr. WARBURTON said the question was one
which involved the interests of the whole of the
manufacturing prosperity. It had been stated to de-
putations which had waited upon the Government
that they intended to adhere to the printed Bill in
its main provisions, that Bill having been cir-
culated for a long time through the whole of
the manufacturing districts ; and the deputations
quitted the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir J. Graham),
with a firm belief that the Government meant firmly
to resist the application for a Ten Hours' Bill. He
trusted that the Government would strictly adhere to
the assurance that this was not to be an open ques-
tion ; not that he considered the Government Bill
objectionable, for it violated to a certain degree
the principles which he advocated; but of two evils
he was prepared to accept the least. In addres-
sing himself to this question he certainly felt consi-
derable difficulty. He hardly knew how to deal with
the arguments of the Noble Lctrd who had introduced
the amendment. If he were to address himself to the
conclusion to which his arguments tended, it involved
no less than suspending the whole of the labour per-
formed by women and children in this country. If
on the contrary, he were to address himself merely to
the verbal amendment, that was a question which
they might argue upon its own merits ; but he did
not see how he was to avoid addressing himself as
well to the Noble Lord's premises as to his conclusions.
—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord, in a considerable
part of his speech, inferred the greater security of
the labour of the manufacturing classes from the
greater productiveness of that labour. Now, it
was unqueitionable that the labour of the operative
classes had been of late years in a marvellous degree
productive, but they were not to infer, the severity
of labour to which the improvement of machinery
had been applied, from increased productiveness.
Upon that ground they might argue that the labour of
a man who was a slave, or one who followed the plough,
was more severe than the one who scratched the ground.
There could be no doubt that the closeness of rooms
and the exhalations that took place in factories was
most detrimental to health ; but it must be
remembered that inconveniences, dangers, and difficulties
were incidental to all sorts of arts and manufactures,
It was not, however, upon this they were to arrive at any
conclusion. There could be no doubt that serious physical
consequences had arisen to young females and children
in factories, but it must be recollected that they were
subject to similar inconveniences in other walks of
life.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord more particularly
alluded to the opinion on this subject of medical men
taken in 1839. That might be all very well ; but
if he would refer to the opinion given by the
medical actuary upon the evidence collected in 1835,
he alluded to Dr. Mitchell, he would find a very dif-
ferent statement made. That Learned Gentleman
stated that he saw no grounds for warranting the sup-
position that factory labour in any material degree dif-
fered from its effects on the human frame to any other kind
of labour, &c., facts that all the investigations that had
taken place showed that the laudatory and condem-
natory assertions that had been made were alike unfounded.
Among other allegations of the Noble Lord was
one, that the health of the females was most
seriously injured by this species of employment ; but
this had also been met by the testimony of Dr.
Mitchell, and other medical gentlemen, mem-
bers of the Commission of 1833-34. Evidence
wns given before that Committee that the allegation was
altogether without foundation. They really must not
take it for granted, that the condition of the
persons employed in factories was so desperate
as the Noble Lord would have them to
believe. They bad agents employed by the
Government, Commissioners of the Poor-law and Sub-
CommissionerN making inquiries most deeply and
anxiously into all these matters. Under such advice
and agency, at a period beginning with the year 1833,
great exertions were officially made to induce the sur-
plus agricultUral population, for whom work could
not be found in their own districts, to migrate to where
the demand for labour was greater and the remuneration
for it far higher: These Commissioners, in their first
Report, stated the rate of wages in the manu•
facturing districts for a family including three
or four members, as at least double what a
family of the same description could earn in the
agricultural counties. Well, a migration took place, in
the first year he had referred to, to a very considerable
extent. Dr. Kay, had described in his report the
result of such , emigration both to the parishes
from which it took place, and to the emigrants and their
families, as of the most happy and beneficial character.
The same went on for a series of three or four

years till the year 1837, which had been marked
as the commencement of that stagnation of
trade and bitter distress of which the House and
the country had had but too strong evidence.
The lion. Gentleman then referred to a statement made
by Sir H. Verney, which showed that the condition of
the manufacturing labourers was far better than that
of the agricultural labourers. Some of the latter,
who went to Wolverhampton and other places,
obtained three times more wages than they
did at home ; and their improved condition
induced others to follow their example. The lion. Gen-
tleman referred to a statement made by the lion. Mem-
ber for Durham, which showed that the average weekly
earnings of families who emigrated under the superin-
dence of the Poor-law Commissioners themselves, were
395. 4d. in 1836 ; 345. ld. in the following year, and 395.
41d. in the year after. These farts proved that the
condition of the manufacturing labourer was far
better than that of the agricultural labourers.
The Noble Lord opposite had referred to the moral con-
dition of the manufacturing classes. Now he (Mr. War-
burton) thought that, considering how those people were
congregated together, the state of morality among them
was not inferior to other classes similarly situated ; and
he thought if the same inquiry and same tests were ap-
plied to the higher classes, as were in the case of the
manufacturing classes, they would not find the for-
mer so vastly superior in a moral point of view.
Now the improvidence and extravagance attributed in
this case was not by any means peculiar to those who
congregated in factories ; they extended equally to the
handloom weavers. The Rev. Mr. Brian, speaking of
the Spitalfields' weavers,observed that from the domestic
habits of the people, and from their manufactures being
carried on entirely in their own homes, it might
be expected that they would present a perfect
example to other classes ; but, on the contrary, from
the variable nature of the demand, depending, as it
did, on fluctuations in the state of commerce, and in the
caprices of fashion, the greatest improvidence and extra-
vagance prevailed among the inhabitants of the
cottages in that part of London in which silk
manufacture was carried on. Let them not suppose,
therefore, that extravagance and profligacy belonged
exclusively to factories. The Report respecting the
hand-loom weavers spoke of the insalubrity of the
dwellings in the parish of St. John's. If they
were to deal with this evil at all, they
must deal with it universally ; it would be
necessary to lay the axe to the root of the tree.
Were they prepared, upon such premises as those ad-
vanced by the Noble Lord, to arrive at the same conclu-
sion as the Noble Lord ? Were they prepared,
upon such arguments, to agree to a modification
of the rules and regulations respecting labour,
which now prevailed in this country ? From
the arguments which had been advanced by the
Noble Lord, he (Mr. Warburton) was not prepared to
agree to this. Nobody could dispute what the result of
the amendment of the Noble Lord, if carried, would be.
Everybody must admit that if they limited to ten hours
the labour of women and children, they must also limit
to ten hours the labour of the men. He did not think

there was any difference of opinion upon this point.
He was sure the Noble Lord had the most humane feel-
ing in endeavouring to restrict the hours of labour in
factories to ten hours. Would it not, however, be well
to look to the arguments of the labourers themselves ?
They stated that limiting the hours of labour would tend
to increase wages, that they would get more wages for
less toil. He admitted that no person would suffer
much if they were in the state they were in at the close
of the war in 1641, when they had no foreign competi-
tors, but it was different when they had to compete