The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-23 00:00:00

partment, who usked whether they would apply the axe
to the root of the commercial greatness of the country?
His Noble Friend talked of applying it to the root of the
moral evil ; but the Right Hon. Gentleman altered the
application of the expression as used by his Noble Friend.
But was it possible that the commercial greatness of this
country depended on keeping children at work twelve
hours, instead of ten? In 1833 a gentleman, in whose
political sentiments he did not coincide—the late Mr.
Cobbett—said he had heard of the greatness of the coun-
try depending, on some occasions, on the learned pro-
f• • • •ns, on other on able statesmen ; but he had never
• heard of its consisting in working little girls two
• • a dEty: He could not see, as stated by the Right
Hon. Gentleman, how a diminution of 25 per cent.
would result from a remission of one-sixth of the labour.

—(Hear, hear.) He could not see how the diminution
could amount to more than the diminution of time.—
(Hear, hear.) Even if it were the fact, which he did
not believe it was, that the manufactures of the country
would be perilled by the ten hours' system, yet he was
not prepared to say that the moral aspect was not to be
preferred to the commercial one.—(Hear, hear.)
When they were told that the children were brought
up decrepit and depraved, he doubted whether the com-
mere'al view should not give weight to the consideration
which would remedy this state of things.—(Hear.) If
there was a loss in wages to the workmen he would
make it up to them by more healthy and vigorous con-
stitutions and by a higher tone of moral feeling.—
(Hear.) It had been asked how the workmen were to
live. He would say there was no danger of starving in
this country.—(" Oh, oh," and Hear, hear.) He be-
lieved that those who received the highest wages were
not the most moral or the most provident.—(lronical
cheers.) He had only stated what he had been told
His object would be to put every person on such a foot-
ing that the might get as good wages as he could.—
(Cheers.) That met with a general assent, and it ought
to be the object which every wise legislator should have
in view. The present system had been productive of a
vicious state of society. Men were now supported by their
wives and children, which induced them to make early
marriages. - He thought great confusion had been intro-
duced into the debate, in consequence of the course
adopted by the Government. The decision of the
House of Commons had been already twice come to on
the subject, and if the Government had a majority on
the present debate, there would be two conflicting deci-
sions. A case better decided he did not know in the
course of his Parliamentary career. They now sought to
change the opinions of their usual supporters, but not
a single independent supporter of the Government
went with them on the late decision.
Mr. CARDWELL said that he had endeavoured to
possess himself of the real merits of the question now
before the House, and although he had not the good for-
tune of coming to the same conclusion as the Noble Lord
(Lord Ashley) and could not, therefore, give his vote on
what he knew was the popular side of it, yet he begged
to assure the Noble Lord and the Committee that the
main object present to his mind in coming to a sound
conviction on the subject, had been not to come to any
conclusion which would impede the growing prosperity
of the great operative classes of this country.—(Hear,
hear.) In reference to the public this subject had been
remarkably divided into two sides, one sustaining the
commercial view of the subject, and the other resting
almost entirely on the basis of humanity and morality.
An Hon. Gentleman adopted an illustration which he
believed was not new from him ; it had been taken he
believed from the classical historian of Manchester, who
said that those engaged in manufacturing pursuits
"passed through the, fire to Moloch, and through filth to
Mammon." Such was the language addressed to those
who felt called on by their convictions to vote against
him on this subject. He did not deny that it
was possible to take the commercial view of the
subject alone, and that there might be sordid men, who
would extract as great an amount of wealth as they could,
regardless of the sufferings of others. He admitted that
such a view of the case might be taken, but he denied
that it was possible, fit= the nature of the case, for any
person who looked at the subject with judgment, and
applied his mind firmly to its consideration, to leave out
the commercial view of the subject altogether, and rest
it solely on morality and humanity.—(Cheers.) Was it
possible for persons who had the least experience on the
subject, or who, having no experience, possessed an or-
dinary capacity, and applied it diligently to the consi-
deration of the case, to take a view regarding solely the
physical :and moral well-being of the operative, and
leaving out from his consideration the commercial view,
which so deeply affectrd the interests of the operative
classes themselves ?—(Hear, hear.) He would ask the
`House to consider how largely the operatives of the com-
munity were benefited by the prosperity of British com-
merce.—(Heu, hear.) In proportion to the results
affected by i how trifling was their most extensive
charity?—(Cheers.) In proportion to it, how meagre
was their best contrived legislation? He said, there-
fore, that to talk for a single moment of taking
the view of the question apart from commer-
cial considerations, and resting it on the basis
of' humanity and morality, was not becoming
the dignity of the House of Commons.—(Cries of
" Hear, hear.") He begged of them to beware, lest, by
opposing a Ten Hours' Bill, they might not give occasion
to those for whose benefit he knew it was intended most
ttybitterly rue it.—(Hear.) In legislating on this subject.
there were two objects which they must be most desirous
of combining. One was that they should give really
efficient protection to those who, from their tender
years, were incapable of protecting themselves ; the
other was, that they should leave free as the winds
of heaven, to the judgment, management, and economy
of the individuals themselves, the labour of those Who
were capable of protecting themselves—(Hear, hear)—
that labour which, as had been so often observed, was
the only property they possessed.—(Oheers.) He
found that her Majesty's Government, in the Bill which
they had laid on the table of the House, endeavoured to
effect these two objects—the protecting of those who
wanted protection, and the leaving of freedom to those
who were capable of protecting themselves.—(Hear.)
He did not think* that to effect those two
objects was wholly incompatible. The best arrangements
which could possibly be made was that which would
combine those two objects. They had endeavoured to
limit the hours of labour for children to such an amount
that after devoting sufficient time to labour they would
be able to employ the remaining hours of the day in
securing a good system of education. The Hon. Gen-
tleman had spoken of a system of relays. Now he (Mr.
Cardwell) had to complain of the caution which was
observed in Opeaking of the subject of relays. Were
they driving at a uniform Ten Hours' Bill?—{Hear.)
That was a question which pressed itself very much on
his mind in considering the subject. He might be told
that the Noble Lord had said nothing about relays. If
he (Lord Ashley) intended that relays should be com-
bined with a ten hours' system, he had no right to say
that he had the feeling of the large body of the mill-
owners-with him. He (Mr. Car.iwell) knew that many
persons who came here in deputations said that what
‘hey wanted was a uniform Ten Hours' Bill.—(Hear.)
Were they prepared to put this in practice?—(Hear.)
Let them take care that they would not leave the great
proportion of the children in this country in a much
worse position than they were at present.—(Hear.)
He should be extremely reluctant to cast the slightest
Aspersion on the motives of any individual, but he must
say he honestly believed that the persons in that House
who advocated the view of the Noble Lord the Member
for Dorsetshire, did so with the utmost sincerity and the
purest philanthropy, but at the same time they deceived
themselves. He begged them to consider what
would be the effect of a Ten Hours' Bill.
The effect would be that the adults would do
less and the children more work. Of the wages
earned a larger portion would be screwed out of the
sinews of the young than from those of the adult. That
was a result against which, on grounds of morality and
humanity, the Committee was bound to guard with the
utmost possible vigilance. In seeking for a Ten Hours'
Bill they were not seeking for a practical measure, and
'rue humanity was always practical. The proposal,
.N.refore, which was now brought forward, with no doubt
th 6 best intentions, was net founded upon true humanity.
On the subject of reduced wages he had heard most
strange doctrines.—(Cheers and counter-cheers.) From
the speech of the Hon. Gentleman who spoke last he
was at a loss to learn whether he thought low or high
wages better. The conclusion which he (Mr. C.)
should have drawn from the Hon. Gentleman's observa-
tions, if he were allowed to apply to them the common
principles of logic, was, that in low wages, there was a
,:protection against profligacy and improvident
wanagement— (Opposition cheers and laughter)
umol that they would promote the social virtues
in a very great degree----(Hear, hear)--and that
they' -were a great good,'which the House in its wisdom
should take upon itself to effect. But he was
astonished
to heOr the Noble Member for Dorsetshire
speak of
wages ._a if they were measured in direct mathematical
proportion' to the number of hours during which the
operative we irked.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman
who spoke la 4 made the same mistake. Wages were
measured by a different standard. They were
paid out of the profits of the establishment.
Without profits there could be no wages,
and
unless a set of pi?slanthropists were found to under-
take the trade and commerce of the country, it must be
:Assumed that there should be some profit. Then it was
.quite clear that if they took away part of the profit they
*sok away from the wages. They had it from high
-authority, that the reduction in wages would be 25 per
-cent., and he (Mr. C.) had no hesitation in believing that
it would reach that amount. Another question which
Hon. Gentlemen iorgot was, that of machinery. In
these days of improvezient, machinery, if not worn out,
became useless, and was aiived to be renewed in a few
pers. This part of the su
li
L.,iect, however, he only wi-
verted to in passing. The m 7. Gentlemen who spoke
fast talked of workmen being repaid for the loss in their
vrages by an increase of health. Now, his expe-
rience showed him that when there were low
wages, there were also always nume. 'roils complaints
of suffering • and though they had often heard of com-
binations of operatives to obtain a fair di.,y's wages for
a fair day's work, they had never heard of Combinations
.
to enforce short hours. Besides, it was to be borne in
mind that the operatives who petitioned in f: virour of ten
hours were under the impression that the Nt able Lord's
proposition would be carried without any re. suction in
wages at all ; and that Manchester was place .rde Ten
d wit
the words " Less work—more wages—sign fni
Hours' Bill!"—(Hear.) That fallacy was very common.
the
If they thought that we had nothing to fear from fo-
reign competition they wire greatly mistaken, and they
would find eventually that under the name of humanity
'they were inflicting a great cruelty on both operative
stud master. The commercial prosperity of thi ti country
was owing to the paradox, that the master mane tiVtiriTrs
paid the lowest wages, and that the operatives receivati
the highest wages that any master paid or any operative
received in the world. Strange as that might: seem to
be, it was perfectly true; and the explanation. w, is this,
that the master paid more money, but got s
g renter
, amount of work, while the workman received
so much
nore money as to enable him to live better thtLit any
~Other operative in the world. That was bra fight *bout

by the superior economy, energy, and management of the
people of this country. All that had been done consis-
tently with a gradual and steady amelioration, such as
the present Bill offered, in the condition of the
younger branches of the community. He believed
that the worst enemies to the country generally,
and above all to those operative classes which were de-
serving of their best regards, were those who, through
mistaken zeal. would allow themselves to follow blindly
any impulse of humanity, without having carefully con-
sidered its consequences.—(Cheers.) He firmly be-
lieved that they were doing all that they could to de-
prive the operative classes of this country of that which,
more than charity or legislative protection, constituted
their real good—he meant the commercial prosperity of
that country.—(Cheers.)
- -

- -
Mr. BROTHERTON said that this question had
agitated the country for twenty-eight years, and it was
high time that it should be set at rest. He certainly
concurred with the Noble Lord the Member for Dorset-
shire as to the limit of ten hours. He might be mis•
taken in his view, which perhaps was contracted on
the subject, but still he thought that humanity, morality,
and sound policy, supported his view, and on those
grounds he justified the vote which he had given the
other evening, and which he was prepared to renew
on the present occasion. And he thought there was a
departure from principle in legislating upon this subject.
He was of a different opinion from the Inspectors of
Factories, and others well acquainted with the matter were
of opinion that human labour in connection with machinery
was not free labour. Besides, they had already inter-
fered. Before there was any legislative interference it
was customary for factories to work fourteen or fifteen
hours a day; and Lord Kenyon, in the year 1819, stated
in the House of Lords that the factories of Lancashire
worked fourteen hours and a half a day. Thus, when
there was no legislation there excessive labour was car-
ried on. It was said, too, that if trade was perfectly
free and unrestricted in factories, there would be no de-
mand for legislation. Why, in the years 1835, 1836,
and 1837, when trade was rather brisk, there were no
less than 3,000 convictions for infractions of the Fac-
tories Act, and the penalties paid amounted to 6,000 L
Even now, at the present moment, they found females
and married women working fourteen hours a day. It
was said that it was wrong to lay any restrictions upon
labour. He reminded Hon. Gentlemen that a restric-
tion was laid on labour in one case, at least, by the very
highest authority, " Six days shalt thou labour, and on
the seventh thou shalt rest.' That was a law directly
opposed to the political economist.—(Hear, hear.) If
they carried out their principle to its highest extent,
and if they found that fourteen, fifteen, or sixteen hours
per clay did not enable them to compete with foreign na-
tions, they must then work on the seventh day. Ten
hours a day he thought was sufficient for man, woman,
or child, and with that length of time it would be found
that the business of factories was quite healthy.
lie was sure that if all worked a moderate time they

would have nothing to fear from competition. He
might, perhaps, have somewhat different ti sews to many
on this subject. He might, perhaps, make admissions
which would be laid hold of by those who went for inter-
minable labour. But he did not care for that. He ad

witted that if they decreased the hours of labour they
must increase the cost of manufactures. But, then, the
question was who was to bear this ? He had seen a
calculation with regard to a particular mill as to the
amount which would be lost in consequence of the reduc-
tion of the hours of labour. Therefore, admitting that
there would be a reduction in the amount of wages, it
was necessary for gentlemen to see in what way that
would operate. They purchased foreign materials,
which were manufactured in this country and exported,
in competition with foreign manufactures. Now of
course the difference between the price of the
raw material and the amount which they ob-
tained for the manufacture when it was exported,
was the amount received for labour, interest of capital,
and profit. In order, therefore, to compete with
foreigners, they continued making improvements in
machinery. They had reduced the hours of labour
from seventy-seven per week to seventy-two, and from
seventy-two to sixty-nine, without, he believed, in-
juring their commerce. In 1816 they exported ten
millions of pounds of cotton twist; in 1843 he believed
they exported 113 millions.(Hear, hear.) But, with
regard to the wages of those employed in cotton mills
there had been very little difference indeed. For the
last fifteen years the money wages had been about the
same. He had procured returns of the wages paid in a
number of factories in 1832, and he found that the
average rate of wages for men, women, and children
working in mills was from 9s. 6d. to 12s. per head. He
had also got returns in reference to a number of
factories in the year 1844, and he found that the
average rate of wages was nearly the same, perhaps a
little more than in 1832. There was no trade in which
wages were so regular as in factories, and this was,
because in factories great numbers were collected
together. As in the army and in the navy, so here, they
could not be altering wages every day. Whether times
were brisk or slack, the wages continued about the same.
Persons who were employed separately—take, for in-
stance, the case of the hand-loom weavers were
obliged to compete with each other. This naturally
lowered wages ; for the manufacturers would say, " The
times are bad, and if you cannot take less wages we
cannot give you work." In factories, as he had already
said, there was very little fluctuation with regard to the
wages of persons employed in factories. Now the great
end of this legislation was, he conceived, to protect the
young ; and this could not be done unless they had a sys-
tem which embrace& all ages. The reason why the dif-
ferent Acts which had been passed had always failed
of their efficiency was that they had only legislated for
children, and aor persons of 16 or 18 years of age,
whereas the gre object was to legislate for all under
21—that there should be ono uniform time for all. That
was the great object which he had always had in view ;
and he believed that legislation of this kind would
benefit both masters and operatives. He did not believe
that the wages of the operative would be reduced by
this measure.—(Hear.) If they were, there was one
day in the week on which the operatives worked for the
bread tax ,• and if they found that they could not coin-
pete with foreigners without taking off that tax, and
even the tax upon cotton, they must be prepared to
make the necessary sacrifice.—(Hear, hear.) He
thought that great philanthropy had been manifested
by Hon. Gentlemen opposite in coming forward to ad-
vocate this humane measure ; and he thought the whole
nation would feel that it was their duty to proceed fur-
ther, if necessary, by removing all those restrictions and
burdens which pressed upon the manufacturing interests.
He believed that by passing this Bill they would give
satisfaction to the operative classes, and set this question
completely at rest, and make the people generally pros-
perous, contented, and happy. With these views he
should certainly vote for the Bill.—(Cheers.)
Lord J. MANNERS said it had been his intention to
give a silent vote on this Bill ; but after the challenge
which had been thrown out by the Hon. Member for
Manchester, he could not adhere to his intention. The
Hon. Member had asked him if in the short tour which
he had made in company with his Hon. Friends, the
Members for Canterbury and Sandwich, he saw anything
which would bear out the harrowing picture drawn by
the Noble Lord, the Member for Dorsetshire. He had
great pleasure in telling him that he did not.—(" Hear,
hear," from the Opposition benches.) If the House
would permit him to give a general detail of what he
saw in visiting these great establishments, he would
state that their general charaeteristics were a small town
of well-built cottages of two stories each, with two rooms
on each story, with large windows, with plenty of furni-
ture, with capacious back-yards, and with an ample sup-
ply of coal and water—all at a rent of three shillings
a week, which, he believed, was generally stopped out of
the wages. He saw, besides, most minute supervision in
every part of these establishments on the part of the
manufacturer. Every shop was licensed by him; everybody
was dependent upon him for the exercise of his calling
and for his very existence.—(Hear.) He entirely concur-
red with the Noble Lord (Stanley) as to the difficulty of
arriving at anything like sound conclusions as to the
sanitary condition of the manufacturing classes, because
he was convinced that an appearance of health might
exist notwithstanding its absence.—(Hear, hear.) Ruddy
cheeks and blooming lips might be produced as well by
over excitement as by genuine health. He had no hesi-
tation in saying that the appearance of the young women
in the manufacturing districts was generally healthy.
So much for the appearance of the people. He believed
that the wages of men, women, and children, averaged
9s. or 10s. a week. Thirty shillings was the income of
the inhabitants of a cottage, which would amply pro-
vide the conveniences and eomforts of existence.—
(Hear, hear.) He had thus endeavoured to answer the
general challenge of the Hon. Member for Manchester,
and he would now proceed to notice a more particular
one. The Hon. Member asked him if it was true, as
had been reported, that they had had some talk with the
agricultural immigrants, and he wished to know the re-
sult of that conversation? Now he (Lord J. Manners)
fund, in a brief note which he took at the time, the fol-
lowing allusion :—" One cottage we entered was that of
a woman from Hampshire, with ten children when she
came. When asked if she would like to go back, she
shook her head, laughed, and said No.' She was
cooking dinner for her children, when they should come
oi t
payots n b
hise n c
tribute
.
orut of the mill ; it was beef and potatoes."—(Hear, hear,
font
ehne a bOl Pe sio )
ofN praise to w
the ashappyto
to be conduct
of those great and wealthy manufacturers whose fac-
tories he had visited.—(C •
visited.—(Cgs of "Hear, hear.")
But he must now remark that what he had
thus stated did not, in his opinion, militate against the
proposal of the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.) His
pro-
posal was to limit the period of labour for females
and
young people to ten hours. His statement was that,
owing to the mothers of families being compelled to
work twelve hours, that deplorable disorganization and
reverse of the order of nature had taken place which he
had described with such painful particularity. He be-
lieved the statements of the Noble Lord to be substan-
tially correct.—(Hear, hear.) What he had seen in
Bolton, contrasted with what he had seen in Turton,
showed him how great might be the contrast between
the spectacles exhibited in two places situated at a short
distance from each other. It was said that wages
would be reduced if this Bill were passed. Was
that the opinion of the three or four hundred manu-
facturers who had signed the petition in its favour ?
He believed that the
Committee could wisely, because
humanely, accede to the proposition of his Noble Friend,
and it should have his hearty and cordial support. He
would advise the House to consider what the effect of
their decision upon this question would be upon the
country. The hour might be at hand when
the House would—not only in practice, but in
theory and name—cease to be the representa-
tives of the people of England. He would
entreat the House to reflect upon what happened in the
last three years. Had they learned nothing from the
manufacturing insurrections in the North, and the
agrarian insurrection in Wales ?—.—(Cheers.) Had they
learned nothing from the conflagrations in Cambridge,
and Suffolk, and other parts of the country ?—(Cheers
and counter-cheers.) _ If the House continued to dig'.

regard the sufferings of their fellow-countrymen, that
night would seem to justify those excesses.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. WARD was of opinion that all the state-
ments of the Noble Lord tended to bear out the ar-
guments, urged by those who opposed the motion.
The Noble Lord had said, from his own observation, that
the habitations of the poor were, in space and airiness,
superior to those of the agricultural labourers, and that
their wages averaged ten shillings a head. The Noble
Lord had further testified that in the district, which the
Hon. Member for Knaresborough represented as a Pan-
demonium, the people were far better off than in
agricultural districts. That was the district in which
the Hon. Member for Manchester had told them that
the immigrants from the agricultural districts said
that they would prefer transportation to going back to
Buckinghamshire.—(Cheers.) With all these proofs
before it, he hoped the Committee would re-consider
the decision to which it had come, and that they would
so re-consider it upon the evidence of the Noble Lord
himself as to what he had seen. All were agreed that
there was a great pressure upon the labouring popula-
tion of the country. He could show an infinitely worse
case in the town which he represented than any which
the Noble Lord had adduced. The children, from stern
necessity, and not from avarice, were compelled to la-
bour from an early age. There was no time for recrea-
tion—no time for education—no time for moral training.
—(Hear.) It would certainly be better for all classes
if the operatives could earn as much in ten hours
as in twelve. They did not want Mr. Horner to inform
them as to the evils of excessive working. But the
pressure was universal—every one was compelled to
work.—(Hear, hear.) He was the representative of one
of the largest working men's constituencies in this
country, and he said that he knew the evil existed, and
that it could not be cured by an Act of Parliament. He
believed that the proposition of the Noble Lord had
given a great impulse to Chartist principles.—(Hear,
hear, and Oh, oh.) He believed that all the theories
which he had heard in the course of this debate had
been previously advocated in the Chartist press, and at
those meetings where Mr. Oastler and his party attended.
He regretted that the respectable names which were
found amongst the leaders of the party to which he
was attached had lent their sanction to those doctrines
which he had often heard before, but never before from men
who were not too ridiculous to be seriously attended to. The
Noble Lord the Member for Sunderland did not indeed
express an entire concurrence in these doctrines ;
but he expressed a modified concurrence with them,
and the result would be to associate the concur-
rence of many respectable political men in that
House with the names of mere demagogues out of it.
He said afterwards he wished every man to earn as
high wages as he could, and contended that a slight
curtailment of the hours of labour would not affect them
as a class. He (Mr. Ward) must entreat the House to
recollect that the home trade of this country was wholly
insufficient to supply the slightest diminution that might
take place in the foreign. They were warned the other
night by. the Right Hon. Baronet. opposite (Sir R. Peel)
that they had to deal with an export trade
of forty millions, thirty-six of which belonged
purely to the foreign trade of this country; and he, for
his own part, was satisfied that in any new curtailment
of labour that Committee might authorise, it would be
impossible to fill up the gap. They proposed to cut off
an amount of production which was equivalent to seven
weeks in the year; and it had been said by the sup-
porters of the curtailment, that in consequence of it
new mills would be erected, and new hands be put to
work. lie (Mr. Ward) very much doubted this.—
(Hear, hear.) It must be recollected they had been
told that this Bill was only the first step in this sort of
legislation, for the Noble Lord (Ashley) and others,
when appealed to, had admitted that other branches of
industry would be subjected to the same process.—
(Hear, hear.) Every business which called for their
sympathy and assistance was to have it.—(Hear, hear.)
And then they were told by the Hon. Member for Old-
ham (Mr. Fielden) that eight hours was the proper time
for work—the proper proportion of the twenty-four
hours that man should give to labour. But the working
man himself went much further than this, for he
argued for six hours, for four hours, for two,
for one.—(Laughter.) He did not say that
the working people advocated getting a liveli-
hood without labour at all,—but they almost ap-
proached it. They thought and argued that the same
amount of wages would in the end be divided amongst
them for a few hours' labour as for fourteen.—(" No.")
Why, he (Mr. Ward) could show evidence of what he
said—evidence of the operatives themselves, who main-
tained that within three months of the passing-of that
Bill they would get the same wages for ten hours as they
now did for twelve, and they calculated on another ad-
vantage, namely, that there would be the same demand
for work as before, and which would call into action
many persons who now did no work at all. And, if ne-
cessary, they were prepared to require that no person
should work for more than nine, or even eighthours ; for
they said it was better they should be compelled, by le-
gislative enactment, to work those hours only, rather
than have any persons whatever that did not work at all.
—( Hear, hear, from Mr. Ferrand.) Well, then, who would
invest capital under such a precarious system as this ?
(Hear, hear.) No one !—(Hear, hear.) And the con-
sequence would lie that foreign capital would step in and
take the trade which now belonged to us. And
as to the working people themselves, they would
ultimately place them at the mercy of mere
capitalists, and they would sharpen the competition
which was already too intense.—( Hear, hear) Now,
to reverse the decision which the House came to the
other evening would certainly have its advantages, but
he trusted they should find sense enough in that House
which would induce Hon. Members to do manfully
that which they ought to do. They must combat the
theories now so widely disseminated, not only by indi-
viduals but by the press, and which were really calcu-
lated to reverse all the sound notions which had hitherto
prevailed upon these subjects.—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr.
Ward) found the Government accused by those jour-
nals, which usually supported them, with being parties
to the bringing of the Queen's name into contempt, and
with standing between her Majesty and that House
which she so ardently wished to grant, by reducing to
a proper standard the labour of her sex.—(Hear, hear.)
Now, was there a man in that Committee—was there a
reasoning man in the country—that believed the Queen
could do this?—(Cheers.) The dire necessity for labour
over-ruled them all, and their best intentions too.—
(Hear, hear.) If a Committee of that House could
do this, how was it that the Noble Lord, the Member
for London (Lord John Russell) had not attempted
the task during the ten years he had been in office?—
(Cheers.) He then was responsible for all the unneces-
sary toil, and anguish, and immorality which had been
endured for the last ten years.—(Hear, hear.) If he
(Mr. Ward) felt that the House was competent to this
task—if even he could indulge the honest hope of it—
why he would join with the Noble Lord (Ashley), and
go at once, not for a Ten Hours' Bill—for that would
be a paltry pittance--but he would go at once for an
Eight Hours' Bill—he would give at once the means of
making up for the misery and long suffering which the
manufacturing operatives had gone through. That
would be the rational course. But the House must not
stop there. What did they mean to do with agriculture?
—(Cheers.) He (Mr. Ward) knew something of these
matters—he had seen the miserable shifts to which the
labourers had been reduced.—(Hear, hear.) They could
not leave them or their wages as they now were, if they
determined to interfere with the operatives. As to their
power to regulate wages, it was mere nonsense. If they
really wished to benefit operative and labourer they
must ease the struggle for bread. They could do this,
but they would not, for to their corn laws they clung as
tenaciously as ever. The Noble Lord sometimes
taunted (not personally certainly), but classes with
a want of humanity, while at the same time
he indulged in what he (Mr. Ward) must be
allowed to regard as a spurious humanity of his
own. Why, he could tell that Noble Lord that a very
large portion of his fellow-countrymen looked with .ex-
ceeding suspicion upon him, so long as they saw him
voting for that cruel Bill, which enhanced the price of
every loaf of bread.—(Loud cheers.) There must be no
mincing of these matters.—(Cheers.) He made no accu-
sations personally against the Noble Lord ; but he and
others were not going to stand there to be taunted with
inhumanity by those very persons whose votes in that
House alone occasioned, by the high price of bread, all
those hours of exhausting toil which they affected so
feelingly to bewail. As to married females, the Noble
Lord had made, as he had done on several other points,
great exaggerations. The employment of married fe-
males in mills was extremely small. He believed that
generally they would find in the northern districts of
England married females performing their domestic
duties. For his own part, he should go with perfect
confidence to his constituents, in consequence of the vote
he should give uzin the subject.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir R. INGLIb then rose to address the House. Ile
believed that never but on the present occasion had
there been an instance of Ministers deriving support
from their habitual opponents, and being opposed by
those who usually supported them.—(Hear, hear.) The
proposition they were now called upon to affirm was
this—whether they should rescind a solemn decision of
the House to which the Committee had come, after
some considerable debate, and to which a larger ma-
jority had given their support then attended her Ma-
jesty's late Ministers?- (Hear, hear.) He recollected an
instance in which a resolution of the House was re-
scinded, but that was with respect to the malt-tax.
That was during the Government of Lord Grey; but
then 5,000,0001. could not be sacrificed.--(Hear,
hear.) He warned his Right Hon. Friend at the head
of the Government to consider this question well before
he decided upon the course he would pursue. They had
led thousands to suppose that they would have less
labour, and they must take care how they disappointed
such expectations. He (Sir R Inglis) had received
statements from Leeds, Brandon, Bolton, Huddersfield,
Preston, Manchester, and other places, in all of which
the parties thanked them for the vote came to by
the House the other night.—(Hear, hear.) The people
of Leeds
i:l7,
19aectlhr
omsbt
ea
rt es d
who that v
ot
toheyd FoarvethteheiNrojobyul thanks
lefLordpsprtoo he
potsi_
tion, andi.
taken.—(Rear,
to
i stt
hh ihNgehoa
Government
l. Lord)eHo or.
Friend himself
immssreelelfmf foraahitne
et
pdhree
sp etanh tet
believed,r heaet
thht
haoadert
ero
e
whether the Noble Lord the Member for the
City of London should be there, or his Noble Friend
the Member for Dorsetshire, the Bill was, in fact, car-
ried.—(Cheers.) It was useless to suppose, whatever
majority they might get in that House, that when
public opinion was arrayed against them a Ministry
could prevail.—(Hear, hear.) When the Ecclesiastical
Bill was before them last year, he urged upon them that
they could not carry the Bill, end he told them not to
drag their supporters through the dirt, as he was sure a
portion of that dirt would stick to them.—(Hear, hear.)
The opposition to his Noble Friend might be for a mo •
ment successful, but ultimately the present Ministers
would be compelled to come forward with a Bill em-
bodying nearly all the propositions of his Noble Friend.
—(Hear, hear.) And what would be the effect of that?
Why, they would have lost the grace of concession.—