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

Lord ; but he could not help refuting to the argument
of his Right Hon. Friend that a blow was about to be
struck at our manufactures which would affect the profits
of the manufacturer and the wages of the labourer. It
was, he thought, a remarkable circumstance that so
manufacturers should petition for that which, according
to the Right lion. Gentleman, would' he so injurious to
their interests. To esespa from: the pressure of this
argument, his Right lion. Friend threw himself back
upon a distinction. He said that the petitions in favour
of the proposal ot' the Noble Thiel 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.—(Flear, hear.) He had asked a
friend, who sat now within two of him, and who repre-
sented 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
that the limitation proposed could be effected without in-
juring 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.—(llear, hear.) That was an authority quite
equal to that which his Right lion. Friend relied on,
and he (Sir J. Graham) had, therefore, not made out
his case The operatives were not unaware of what the
effects of the measure would be upon themselves; and
they said that they preferred to have no more wages
than 75/. or 791. a_year, with which they would enjoy
some daily relaxation, and preserve the bloom and vi-
vacity of their children, to 93/. a year with, the long
hours and intolerable toil.—(Hear, hear.) They said
that they had rather do without those simple fuxuries
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 lion. 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." Ile
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 altegether 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.)
Choy 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 sym-
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 Ilours' 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 ?—(liear, bear.)
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 lie 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 tenour 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-
shester, 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 wages,
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, hoar.) 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 Hon. 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 lion.
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
acquiescing in 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 arrestedlhe evil where it
• was found of the employment of female labour, prohi-
bited the employment of females in factories for more
than twele 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-
ments of eight hours 'each, eight for labour,
eight for sleep, and eight for recreation ; and he con-
fessed ho 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 thegeneral 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 sixty-nine.
Sir R. PEEL—I said sixty-nine 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 to 44,500,000/.
sterling. What proportion did they suppose the ma-
nufactures of cotton bore to this 44,000,0001.? Cotton
manufactures, including yarns, amounted to 23,5Q0,0001. ;
linen, 4,500,0001., 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 at 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 weeks.
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 Honlburable Gentleman
said that they had done more harm to manaicturers
by allowing machinery to be exported, than they pos-
sibl/ could by limiting the number of the hours of