The Sun.
London, England, 1850-03-14 00:00:00

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Mr. BROTHERTON moved that it be an instruction
to the Committee,of Selection t 0 treat the Newcastle-
upon-Tyne Improvement, Amendment of Acts, and New
`Streets Bill, as an opposed Bill.—Agreed to.
Mr. BROTHERTON also moved that it be.an instruc-
tion to the Committee on the Newcastle-upon-Tyne Im-
provement, Amendment of Acte, and New Streets Bill,
to entertain the petition of Sir John Jervis, her
MajeFty's Attorney-General, against the said Bill, not-
withstanding that the same was deposited in the Private
Bill office later than seven clear days after the second
reading of th• said Bill.
Referred to the standing order Committee.
PETITIONS.
. .

Several petitions were presented against Sunday
Lour in the Post-office.
Mr. MUNTZ presented a petition from Birmingham,
praying for an amendment of the Factory Act.
Mr. HAMILTON presented a petition from Longford
praying for agricultural protretion.
Arr. DUNCUFT presented a petition from Oldham
praying for a❑ amendment in the Factory Act.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented a petition to tl e same
effect.
Mr. W. J. FOX presented a similar petition from
Oldham.

Mr. ELLIS presented a petition from Leicester" pray.
ink; for the extension of county courts jurisdiction.
Mr. DUNCAN present, d a petition from a place in
Scotland:praying f,r an amendment of the Factory Act.
Mr. MUNDY presented a petition in favour of pro-
tection to agrieuiture.
Sir R. li. INGLIZ presented two petitions against

the Marriage Bill; also a pc titlon from Bolton praying
for an amendment of the Factory Act.
Mr. HENRY BERKELEY presented a petition pray-
ing for the amendment of the Factory Act.
An HON. MEMBER presented a petition from Derby
praying for protection to native industry.
Mr. SPOONER presented two petitions from the me-
dical gentlemen of Birmingham, praying for an amend-
ment of the law, so as to enable medical practitioners to
receive compensation from railway companies whenever
their services were called into operation by accidents on
railways. As the law now stands, the party injured is
liable for the fees of the medical man. The Hon. Mem-
ber gave notice that to-morrow he should move that the
petition be printed in tho Votes, with the view of found-
ing a motion upon it.
Lord BROOKE presented a similar petition from
Warwick.
Lord ASHLEY presented several petitions praying
for the amendment of the Factory Act. One of them was
signed by 14,000 persons.
Sir JOSHUA WALMSLEY presented similar peti-
tions.
Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR presented similar
petit ions.
Mr. BLAIR prevented a petition praying for the re-
peal ( f all taxes upon knowledge.
Mr. GOULBURN presented a petition from Bradford
praying for an amendment of the Factory Act.
Mr. VERNON SMITH presented a petition from
Bolton against the relay system in factories.
Mr. F. 0. CONNOR presented a petition, signed by
members of the National Land Company resident in
Manchester, in favour of the winding up of the com-
pany; also petitions from places in Nottinghamshire,
and from Lincoln's Inn, playing fur a repeal of the

taxes on knowledge.
Mr. MACGREGOR presented a petition from Glas-
gow (as we understood) praying for the repeal of the
Excise duty on soap and other commodities.
Colonel SIBTHORP presented; petitions from places
in Lincolnshire against the relay system in factories.
Mr. HUME presented a similar petition from factory
workers in Huddersfield. . .

Mr. BROCKLEHURST present'd a similar petition
'rom the factory population in Macclesfield.
.TEN HOURS BILL. _ _

Sir G. STRICKLAND presented petitions from
factory workers in Preston and Bolton in favour of the
Ten Hours Bill.

MT STAFFORD and Lord JOHN MANNERS presented
similar petitions from Halifax and other parts of the
manufacturing districts.
Mr. COWAN presented several petitions from differ-
ent places in Scotland against the Marriage Affinity Bill.
Lord JOCELYN presented a petition in favour cf ex-
tending the jurisdiction of county courts.
Mr. BANKES presented a petition from Bolton pray-
ing for an effective Ten Hours' Bill.
Mr. COBDEN presented a petition from the West
Riding of Yorkshire to the same effect.
Mr. ADDERLEY presented a similar petition from
Bolton.
Mr. SPOONER also presented a similar petition from
the same place.
Mr. CARDWELL presented a petition from Liver
pool against Sunday labour in the Post-office.
SAVINGS' BANKS.

The LORD MAYOR ( f DUBLIN gave notice that to-
morrow he should put a question to the Chancellor of
the Exchequer on the suhj,ct of savings' bank!.
RAJA OF SATTARA.

Mr. HUME moved f,r a return of the amount of
money paid for the maintenance of Shahoo Maharaj,
the adopted son and h.ir c f Pertaub Shean, the late
Raja of Sllttara, of the Ranee, his widow, and the rest of
the family, since tbo Raj.'s death in October, 1847, and
the dates on which the payments were made; together
with copies or extracts of all correspondence with the
Ranee, and f the orders set t out to the present time by
the Court of Directors rf the East India Company re-
specting the future maintenance cf ;he Raja's surviving
family.
The return was agreed to withrut any opposition.
GREENWICH HOSPITAL.

Mr. HUME moved for a return of the prices of various
articles of fool, clothing, and household stores bought
for the use c f the Royal Hospital at Greenwich, and c f
the rate of wages paid to artizans employed in that es-
tablishment; together with the prices of provisions at
Bethlem Hospital; and of bread and meat bought by the
Commissariat Department, during etch of the years 1836
to 1849 inclusive (in continuation of a statement in Par-
liamentary Paper No. 189 of Session 1836).—Agreed to.
IRISH. MAGISTRACY.

Mr. F. O'CON,.\iOR wished to a,lc the Noble Lord,
the Prime .linister, if he had any objection to submit to
the House copies uf the correspondence which had
passed between him and Dr. Grattan, who bad lately
been deprived of the commission of the peace in Ireland
for presiding over a public met ting.
Lord J. RUSSELL had no objection.
Mr. F. O'CONNOR gave notice, tien, that on an early
day he should move for its production.
CHURCHYARDS OF THE METROPOLIS.

Mr. C. LUSHINGTON wished to put a question to
the Noble Lord the Member fur Bath, a question of
which he had given him only a momentary notice toeause
the cause which gave ri,e to it had only come under his
notice within the last half hour. When he came to the
House this evening he passed through St. Margaret'.
church) art, and tinder the tower of that church, and
within a f w yards sf that House, he saw an open
grave ready fir the interment of a corpse. Now it I sing
in evidence that interment in St. Margaret's churchyard
was injurious to the health of the Members of that House,
and also to society in general, he begged to ask the
Noble Lord whethLr he had any power to check or put
an end to a nuisance which was not only injurious to
Hon. M mbers sad t) society in London, but el►o con-
demned by the general voice cf the community at large?
Lord ASHLEY hoped that Her. Members would
give their attention to the report which had been
laid on the table of the House, in order that they might
see in its length and breadth the enormous mischiefs
that arise from the system of intzamural interment.
Under the Nuisance Act he and others .'.tempted to
close some of the graveyards in the metropolis ; but
the magistrates thought they had exceeded their
powers, and that they had no rat ans of
interfering with graveyards, beyond ordering now and
then that certain disinfecting substances should be scat-
tered over them.
Mr. GOULBURN said that when he was Chancellor
of the Exchequer ha was informed by the churchwar-
dens of St. Margaret's that they were then about to buy
a piece of land for a burial-ground away from the church.
Sir G. GREY said, with regard to the question cf
the Hon. Member for Westminster, the report had not
been long in the hands of the Government. That re-
port was now under their consideration; a Bill had been
prepared on the subject, and very soon after Easter the
Government expected to bring in a Bill founded on the
report.—(Hear, hear.)
THE CENSUS.
In reply to a question from Sir JOHN WALSH,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that although it was
desirable that a Bill for regulating the taking of the
census should be introduced this session, yet that so
many objections stocd in the way that it seemed to be
better to delay it for another year.
RUSSIA.

Mr. ANSTEY wished to ask the Noble Lord at the
head of the Foreign Department a question with re-
spect 4) to ,1, withdrawal cf the excess of tLe Russian
troops which at present occupied the Danubian provinces.
The Noble Lord htd stated that, in accordance with the
convention, that excess of number would le withdrawn.
Would such be the.case? If so, would any portion of
Sir W. Parker's squadron be withdrawn?
Lord PALMERSTON had already declared that le
had received the most positive assurances of the Russian
Government that the troops would be withdrawn. With
respect to the latter part of the question, the conduct of
the squadron would depend upon circumstances.
Mr. ANSTEY wished to know whether it was the
intention of the Noble Lord to withdraw the squadron,
or any past of it from the Greek waters?
Lord PALMERSTON—The service on which they
were engaged would prevent that.
BLOCKADE OF ATHENS.

Mr. G. BANKES wished to ask the Noble Lord
whether the blockade of Athens had actually ceased?
Lord PALMERSTON said that a blockade, properly
interpreted, meant the prevention of any vessels going
into or coming out of a port. The squadron before Athens
had only prevented the passing of Greek vessels from the
Piraeus. Sir W. Parker, on the Ist of the present month,
had withdrawn a portion of the squadron, on receiving
instructions from her Majesty's Government, and an in-
timation that they had accepted the good offices of the
French Government.
Mr. HUME wished to know who it was that would
have to pay the value of the ships which had been de-
tained by the British squadron?
Lord PALMERSTON said that the ships had been
detained in pledge for certain sums due to English sub-
jects, and would be detained until those claims were
satisfied, but no longer.
TEN HOURS' BILL—RELAY SISTEM IN
FACTORIES.
_ _

Mr. AGLIONBY presented a petition in favour of
this Bill.
Mr. T. M. GIBSON presented a petition signed by a
number of manufacturers and musters of Manchester as-
sembled in a public meeting. The petitioners stated that it
was understood that it was the intention of the House
to pass en Act to restrain them from working their
hands by relay?. The petitioner stated that the system
of relays enabled thorn to give more employment to
young children and females, and that a suspension of it
would interfere with the proper employment of capital.
They prayed that the House would not sanction any al-
teration in the existing law, but that if they did make
any al*ration, they wonld also extend the limits of the
time now allowed to 11 hours a day, or 63 hours a a eek.
Lord J. RUSSELL presented a petition in favour of
the Bill.
Mr. BRIGHT bad a similar petition from the hands
employed by Mr. Rayne, of Dewsbury, but an infor-
mality in it prevented him from presenting it.
FACTORY ACTS.
Lord ASHLEY rose to move for leave to bring in a
Bill to declare the intentions of the Legislature in re-
spect of the hours and mode of working under the
Factory Acts. Tho circumstances which led him to
do so, he :said, were very simple, and he would be
brief in stating them. In 1847 a Bill for regulat-
ing the time of labour in factories was introduced.
By the Act c f 1845 it was enacted that labour in factories
should be confined between the hours of half- F ast five
in the morning and eight in the evening,—a period of
fifteen hours; but by a clause it was provided that the
labour of all young persons should be calculated
from the time, when %they first commenced in the
morning and that none should work for more than
ten hours. The result was, that under the interpretation
f that Act, the system of relays and shifts were alto-
gether impossible. Aft( r the passing of the Act of
1847, it was discovered that the section limiting
the labour of younr, persons, was not so stringent
as to entirely exclude the system of relgye.

Great discontent was consequently produced among
factory operatives, cross and contradictory decisions
were given by magistrates on the clause, and no one
knew exactly what the clause was. To prevent further
litigation, a case was referred to the Court of Exchequer
for its decision, and the result was, a decision ad-
verse to the interpretation put upon the Act by
the factory inspectors • and Mr. Baron Parke
declared that the words of the Act were not
sufficiently strong to carry into effect what the court
strongly suspected was the intention of the Legislature. '
—(Hear, hear.) Believing himself that the object of the
Legislature in passing the Act was to interdict
shifts and relays, he now asked for leave to bring
in a Bill to more effectively carry out that object.
Mr. Baron Parke gave it as his opinion that the in-
tention of the Legislature was that relays and shifts
should not be allowed, but the words of the Act were not
sufficiently stringent to prohibit them. But that was
not all, for Mr. Inspecter Horner, in hia report of
December, 1849, stated that he knew cf his
own knowledge that it was the intention of the
framers of the Bill of 1844, that the
working by shifts as had been practised in 1833 should
be prohibited. In 1844 the inspectors were called upon
to suggest an enactment which should remedy the defect
in the Act of 1833; and in the following year, doubts
havirg arisen as to whether the Act of 1844 really did
prohibit relays, the S(cretary of State wrote to the in-
spectors, telling them that as he interpreted the law the
relay and shift system was interdicted. They had there-
fore the fullest testimony as to the intentions of the
framers of the Bill, but in addition to that testimony, he
recollected perfectly well that in the year that the Bill
was before the House ho moved an amendment, which
he carried twice, that the labour of each day should be
from six to six, with two hours for meals. Now let him
call the attention of the House to the reason and neces-
sity if the Bill. He remembered well that the Act was
granted not simply upon the arguments relating to health
and suffering, but in order that the working people
should have ample time every evening for domestic re-
creation and moral improvement, so as always to keep
their body and souls in a healthful condition.—(Hear.)
Now, let the House see the effects of the shifts and relay
system. A gentleman writes thus to me—
Mr. BRIGHT asked if the Noble Lord would give the
name of the writer ? . .

Lord ASHLEY said be would not. He would state
that the letter was written from Stale-bridge in March,
1849. He would also state, on his word of honour as
a gentleman that the writer was a person fully compe-
tent to give information on the subject. The Noble
Lord continued—The writer of that letter said—" I have
teen to-day to see some factories which are worked
under the relay system. * • * In one
factory I found 335 young persons and women
working by relay. They are set out at different
times in the day, so as to bring the actual working
within ten hours. They are sent out of the mill without
any regard to the distance from their homes (some of
them living two miles off), and without regard to the
state of the weather.—(Hear, hear.) The lads c f
thirteen, up to eighteen, and the young girls
and women, are to be seen wandering about the
streets, and to what temptations to vice and profligacy
they are thus exposed I need not say." There was
another very strong argument at ainst the system of
shifts and relays. It was the utter impossibility of de-
tecting evasions of the law, and the great facilities that
it gave to employers to keep the parties employed during
the whole time, and so as greatly to exceed the ten
hours, and sometimes eleven and twelve. Mr. Inspector
Ball said, in one mill an employer had given work to
more than 1,000 hands, and stated that if he had the
power of distributing his hands, under the relay system,
he should have no difficulty in cheating the inspector.
The Noble Lord then went through a series of state-
ments by millowners, in order to show that it was per-
fectly impossible to detect the frauds practised in the
system of relays of labour, and then proceeded to say
that seeing that such was the case, upon evidence which
was unquestionable, he bad thought it to be his duty to
bring in a Bill to reduce, if not to negative the evil. In
doing this, he would keep to one particular point of
the mischief arising from the continuity of labour.
—(Hear, hear.) He would undertake to prove every
single assertion that he made from fects, so that he
should have the full concurrence of the whole House
in the passing of that Bill.—(Hear, hear.) They all
remembered the prophecies which had been made re-
specting the Ten Hours' Bill in 1844 and 1847. They
all remembered that it had been unhesitatingly pre-
dicted, that if that Bill was passed, that it would be of
the most serious detriment to the manufacturing in-
terests—that the rate of wages would be most mis-
chievously raised ; and that the trade would
the country.—(Hear, hear.) Durirg the debate
of 1844, when the Hon. Member for Bradford was
making a most eloquent speech, he had said to a friend
who was sitting by his side, " You hear that glowing
eulogium upon the manufacturing interests—how will it
he injured by this Bill?" The reply was, " Not at all."—
(Hear, hear, and cheers.) The Eleven Hours' Bill
had now been in operation fur three years,
and the Ten Hours' Bill for two years short of
six months, and yet not :e of those predicted evils
had occurred. The prophecies bad all been falsified.
He remembered that a gentleman now no longer in the
House, Mr. Mark Philips, and the Hon. Member for
Loncashire, were heard to cry out that if the Ten flours
Bill passel labour would cease and capital be palalysed
in this country—that it would produce a similar result
here to that produced by the resolution of the
Edict of Nantes on the industry e f France.
But was that the case ? Since 1848 vast
improvements in machinery bad been made, new mills
erected, and vast sums of money invested in this branch
of trade that were to lead to nothing but ruin. If be
e ere answered in this way, that they wore forced
by the Bill itself to a xpend all this capital
to meet the changed circumstances, all he could
say was that the Ten Hours Bill was the best
Act that had been passed for many years. But these
gentlemen were not men to cast their money into the
sea without some chance of a return. Tho third argu-
ment was that production would be diminished by one-
sixth in proportion to the reduction of time. What had
taken place ? In the two years, 1845 and 1846, imme-
diately preceding the limitation of time, the exports
of cotton amounted to ten places of figures, making
somewhere about 20,000,000,000 yards. In the two
years succeeding that limitation 1848 and 1849, this
amounted to 24,000,000,000 yards, the excess of the two
amounting to 275,000,000 of yards. The same was the
case with twisted yarn; the increase in that article
amounted to 3,000,000 lbs. A petition which had been
presented from Manchester stated, as a plea,
that a diminution of produce would take place
if this Act passed. He bad shown how far this was true.
It was also stated that a reduction of wages would take
place. He would enter on that subject also. He should
show that wages had not been reduced, but on the con-
trary they had increased. He had said there would be
a rise of a ages without any fear of combination, and he
would ask any Member of the House if his predictions
had not been verified. lie should be able to
show that very great improvement in the moral, social,
and physical condition had taken place iu consequence
of the passing of the Act, and it was a matter of
astonishment that such beneficial results could hare
been produced in so short a period. He could
occupy the House from that time until to-morrow in citing
instances to prove the correctness of this statement, but
one or two cases would be a sufficient evidence of the
vital improvement which bad taken place throughout the
manufacturing districts. The first assertion made by
the opponents of the measure was that wages
would be reduced in many instances to the mini-
mum of subsistence. Now, he admitted that wages
had diminished, continued stationary, and increased
There was not a single instance in which wages had
been diminished where the piece wages had been
brought down one-sixth, in proportion to a reduction of
one-sixth of time. In the spinning department of one
mill the reduction of time was one-sixth, and the re-
duet. on of wages one-tenth.—(Hear, hear.) The
gentleman to whom it belonged told him that
the total loss on a mule, calculating the work at
ten instead of twelve hours was only 55., but that was
to be divided among four parties, and the difference to
each would consequently he very small. In the manu-
factory or weaving department there was an in-
, crease instead of a loss on a mule, and the
manufacturer told him that the general improve-
ment, in all the hands, was at least 50 per cent.
In instance had the wages loin reduced (see sixth ; in
some instances they had risen, in others they had ben
reduced ; but not more than one-seventeenth. lie ven-
tured in the year 1844 to tell the House a few home
truths, which he would now take the liberty of repeating,
because the life of the working man was made up with
small details. lie would show that the working man
had been more than compensated for any re-
duction that might taken place in his wages
from reducing the number of hours from twelve
to ten by his improved condition. Now, here was an
instance which was given to him by an operative who
worked in a factory, and which was a fair sample of the
whole state of the factory labourers. Under the twelve
hour system there was himself and seven chil-
dren worked ini the factory, their weekly earnings
amounted to 21. 155., and after deducting
10s. for rent there was left 21. 59. Now this family re-
quired in the course of the week 26 meals,—that was
four meals for five days, and three meals for two days.
Twenty-six meals at Is. Bid. a piece, con-
sumed the whole amount after pa) ing the rent.
Now look how it was under the Ten Hours. The very
same parties were now working under the operation of
the Ten Hours. Now, all allowing for various reduc-
tions, which amounted to about an average of 7} per
cent., the total receipts of the family were 2L I Is. a
week. Deduct, as before, 10s. for rent and other expenses
and it left 21. Is. The saving in the meals amounted
to 4s. 6,1.; and then came another consideration well
worthy of the attention of the House, 18d. a week was
soved, because the eldest daughter, being no longer re-
quired at the mills, can make the gowns of the family.—
The positive saving, therefore, was ss. 4d. a week. That
operative, and others like him, were better off under the
operation of the Ten Hours' Act than they were with
higher wages under the Twelve Hours Act, and were,
besides, vastly more improved in health. The clerk of
the St. John's Female Society had informed him that
the number of members of the society was 300, of whom
17-20ths were factory workers. In 1846 and 1847
the aggregate deficiency in their contributions
amounted to 41., but in 1848-9 the balance
of income over expenditure amounted to 44/ ;
and they expected an equal surplus this year; and
that officer also reported—" My opinion is that a great
saving has been effected here, and the general health of
the population has been considerably improved
since the Ten Hours Act came int) operation."
TLe Odd Fellows in connexion with the Wes-
leyan Methodists bore similar testimony. That cf itself
was a sufficient proof that the system was good,
and it was ascertained that the recreation thus
olifbetaiorfedth,
eproopveedraituivsetr,uamn instrumental t
the
ei ntshpperi
noclnaoesnreg
Instead sgtt eht ahe den
superannuated, as was formerly goworking
,