The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-04 00:00:00

clause the labour there was excessive, and they had the means I said, and he (Lord J. Russell) had heard manufacturers de-
of enforcing it in the case of those children. He doubted clue the same thing, that it was their opinions that if the
whether it would be wise to interfere in other cases, but where corn-laws were totally repealed, the consequence would be
200 or 300 were brought together, and where they had an op- I that labouring persons would declare they would not remain in
portunity of giving them instruction, he thought they were j factories longer than for ten hours a day. Why, if that was
ustitled in interfering.—( Hear, hear.) With regard to women the case, those ten hours' labour would only produce the
he was quite aware that the law made a distinction in their j same quantity of manufactured articles which would be pro-
case. There were circumstances with regard to the female i duced if the Noble Lord's proposal took place. And they
sex which rendered it desirable that their labour shouldbe re- stated that increased demand for the articles, and consequent
stricted. But still, so high was the principle of non-inter- J enhancement of the price, would take place under that state
ference with labour that it was said they ought not to inter- jof things. Without going the whole length of that proposie
fere in this case, where the parties determined for themselves I tion, he (Lord J. Russell) took it, that a great altera-
what should be the nature of their occupation. He con- , tion of the corn-laws, by which a larger quantity
fessed that a departure from the great principle of non-inter- of food would be introduced into the country, would
ference he acquiesced in with great doubt and hesitation. j promote the welfare of the manufacturing classes,
They curtailed the hours of labour in cases of females to twelve •as well as the general prosperity of the country. That was his
hours ; but this arose from the effect of the law, which they j opinion, but he owned he thought that if they were entirely to
passed, limiting the hours of labour of children. Men could take away the corn-laws, it was doubtful that those conse-
not work alone in cotton factories. They were anxious to ; quencea would follow, and that there would be an immediate
work, but it was impossible for them to do so long, as the em- I reduction to ten hours' labour. He much doubted whether
ployment of children was restricted ; they would work 15 the anxiety of parents to send their children to obtain more
hours a day, but could not do so, because the children were wages would not in many cases lead to a greater employment
prevented from working. The consequence was, that women than now took place. At all events, having those opinions,
were employed as a substitute for children ; but that was in he did not think that his Noble Friend was making a proposi-
consequence of the law which they had made on the subject.— tion extremely injurious to the country in proposing a Ten
( Hear, hear. ) They imposed upon the master the necessity of Hours' Bill. He (Lord John Russell) had not meant to have
employing females, and they gave inducements to the females entered upon this subject at all. The question, as stated by
to labour which they would not have if not for their enact • his Noble Friend, was rather an abstract question, and the
meats. New that was an argument against their interference reply of the Right Hon. Gentleman was rather to the abstract
even with the labour of children.—( Hear, hear.) But he was parts of that question. But at the same time it was extremely
inclined to think the reports of the Factory Inspectors showed I difficult to enter upon that abstract discussion, without alluding
that the evils of legislation had been less than usual in to those practical propositions which had been made to the
these cases ; but he thought the mischief of interfe- House. He should content himself, then, with declaring that
rence should be limited to these cases. Few mills he could not vote with the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Roebuck),
worked more than twelve hours, and all that his Right Hon. and that he thought the best law that could he made upon
Friend proposed was to prevent women from working more this subject would be one confining interference to persons
than twelve hours. The master-manufacturers were not ad- under twenty-one years of age working ten hours a day.
verse to that.—( Hear, hear.) The great body of them were in Mr. WARD thought he was perfectly right in giving notice
favour of it. The factory inspectors were in favour of it. It of his intention to divide on the 32d clause, which contempla ed
was an exception from what ought to be the general rule, and j the interference he so much dreaded. He agreed with the
the advantages of it in certain cases would be great; but het Noble Lord the Member for London, that when he interfered
thought it was an exception, and almost the only one, and it he should like to see his way. He (Mr. Ward) would like
grew out of their former legislation. These were the reasons very much to see his way, but that was a thing he could not do
which induced him to give the proposition his full and cordial if he followed the Noble Lord, nor did he believe that the Noble
support. He regretted that the Noble Lord had anticipated the Lord himself clearly saw his way. —( Hear, hear, and a laugh. )
discussion, whieh would more properly arise when the He ( Mr. Ward) could not see any good result that would fol.
proposition of the Nob'e Lord came before the House ; low from those new principles laid down by his Hon. Friend
hut believing that the principle of the Noble Lord, near him. Although they might make out a case to a certain
if carried out, would diminish the comforts of extent for protecting children—and in granting that he
the people and impair their moral character, and thinking granted a great deal—yet he was not sure that
that it, was due to the respect and integrity of the Noble in the Act of 1833 it was all plain sailing. They
Lord, and to the just weight which generally attached to his had ascertained, from the reports of the inspectors, that
opinions, he was desirous of not delaying in giving, perhaps, l the first operation of that Act was to drive 10,000 children
an impolitic, but at any rate a sincere reply to the arguments from good to worse employment—from the factories to the
which he brought forward.—( Cheers.) coal mines—and many of the statements on which that mea-
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Right Hon. Gentleman sure was founded had been since ascertained to be exaggerated.
who had just sat down reminded him of a speech made by Mr. He could not but feel surprised that the Noble Lord, and those
Wyndham, who talked for some time on one side of a question who supported him, so loquacious out of the House, were so
and then on the other, and at last turned round to a friend who silent in it, after the speech of the Hon. and Learned Member
Sat behind him and asked which way he should vote.—( Much for Bath.—( Hear, hear.) Some of the charges of the Noble
laughter and cheers.) He thought that some of the arguments ' Lord had recently been proved to be utterly unfounded. He
used by the Hight Hon. Gentleman against his Noble Friend held in his hand a paper containing the results of inquiries as
(Lord Howick) would be spared if he kept before his mind the 1 to no less than 412 of the principal factories in this country.
vote which he was prepared to give.—( Hear, hear.) He The Noble Lord had stated that out of 61,000 females who
could not see how the Right Hon. Gentleman could speak as he were employed in factories, there were only 10,000 married
did in favour of non-interference with labour, and still vote for women whose husbands worked in some factories. Now
new principle which interfered with labour, and even I out of 10,000 married females included in this statement,
adult labour. If the Right Hon. Gentleman meant to vote there were 5,000 husbands who were employed in the same
not only with the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, but, if, ifactories as their wives ; 3,400 more were employed
having succeeded by a majority, he gave notice of a motion to in other branches of manufacture all connected with factories,
repeal the Act of 1833, then he could understand all the former and all were contributing their share towards the support of their
part of the speech. The arguments of the Right Hon. Gee- families. Well, then, the Noble Lord talked of ill health arising
tleman were very eloquent for the purpose of shaking the Act from constant standing, privation of pure air, and other causes ;
of 1833, but he (Lord J. Russell) did not agree in the conclu- but it might be shown that this argument would apply equally
sion of the Right Hon. Gentleman. But he did not see how to other branches of industry. He spoke of accidents. Why
the Right Hon. Gentleman could reproach his Noble Friend, this paper proved that the accidents arising out of factory
because he thought it was time to interfere with labour, and labour were beyond all comparison fewer than those which oc-
eveu parental care, when he himself interfered with the labour curred in any other employment. He said that the married
and industry of the country. The Right Hon. Gentleman women were preferred, not because the labour was more suited
asked his Noble Friend whether he was in favour of a law to them, or because they would work for the least wages, but
which would compel attendance at church. He ( Lord John i because they were more attentive and docile than unmarried
Revell) thought he knew of an interference Proposed, not by females, and thus, he said,the virtues of the female were made the
his Noble Friend, but by the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, means of her injury. The mistake was, that the Noble Lord
in the course of last year—an inteference which could not' be said they had a choice. It was his peculiar error that the
carried into effect without violatiug liberty of conscience, and matter depended on that House.—( Hear, hear. ) In no branch
which would place the education of the whole of the factory of industry was female labour excluded. In agricultural pur-
children under the Bishops and clergy of the Established suits, and in every other branch of industry, women were corn-
Church.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman said pelted to do something for the support of their families ; and
if they interfered in this case, hose could they carry their in- he declared it to be his conscientious belief, that the women and
g people employed in factories were infinitely better off, as
terference into those trades, with regard to which the Pun
labour was more irksome and the confinement more unwhole- regarded wages, and morals, and comfort, than almost any
some than it was with regard to factory labour. In the first other class.—( Hear, hear.) A gentleman who had recently
place, he thought there was nothing to show that the Act of visited the factory of Mr. Ashton, expressed his astonishment
1833 had been mischievous, he thought it was beneficial, and on leaving it, that the Noble Lord should wish to interfere with
sill lately it was thought to be of advantage to the working- such a system. He had never listened to a speech with more
classes and their children. He had seen two arguments against curiosity than he had felt on hearing that of the Noble Lord,
the proposition of his Noble Friend (Lord Ashley ). The first I the Member for Sunderland. He had thought that if the
was that they ought not to interfere with labour at all. The matter could be made intelligible, it would be made so by that
second was, that their interference had been so very useful that Noble Lord. But he seemed to him only to have made darker
everything they wished had been effected. With regard to that which was dark enough before.—( Hear, hear.) He could
those employments to which the !tight Hon. Gentleman alluded, not possibly comprehend the grounds on which they were to-
the o fustian-cutters," and " pin-makers," and with which interfere with the present system. The working men had been
they had not interfered by Acts of Parliament, the hours of asked if they would chance it. The heads of families were
labour were more protracted ; while in those cases which they too prudent he hoped to do that. No man
had regulated by Act of Parliament, they found, con- could answer for the result of adopting the Noble
currently with sufficient wages, wholesome employment. Lord's proposal. That education and religion had not
Why that was not an instance to quote as conclusive against been properly attended to, and that efforts should be made to
interference by Act of Parliament. That was not an instance to secure a better system of drainage and police, they all admitted;
Meese how injurious all interference was. But in the next place, but the only question was, whether it was certain that they
Jae said he limited interference in this case—as all legislation would improve the condition of the working man by restricting
was linaited—by the principle that you might interfere where the hours of labour. It seemed to him that this was the most
more good than harm was effected by such interference.— singular, cruel, and unwise experiment, which had ever sug-
Hear hear.) He thought that the Secretary of State had gested itself to the minds of practical legislators.—( Hear,
taken that principle that night. The Right Hon. Gentleman hear.) Even documents on which the Noble Lord had relied
had said that they naturally interfered in factories—that they slid not bear out his views. The Noble Lord had quoted, on
were large establishments, where the inspectors could enter several occasions, the evidence of Mr. Horner. The Hon.
and make their investigations without any exercise of tyranny Member then quoted a reprint of Mr. Horner, who said that he
—without any interference with the professional business ; had visited a great number of factories within the last
whereas there were some employments in which it was im- four years, and he considered it his duty to say that the
possible to interfere without inconvenience and without great statements of oppression and ill health were greatly exagge-
tyranny, and, in short, without much greater evil than good rated. The mass of persons employed in factories were well
being produced. What was their ptinciple of criminal law clothed, well fed, and healthy. He had voted with the
:They transported a person, or sent him to prison, because Noble Lord last year against the employment of women in
lie had stolen a loaf. Why, there were persons who committed mines, because that was a question of morality ; but because he
acts of ingratitude, and who brought their benefactors to an thought the interference in this case would be attended with in-
untimely grave by their persecutions and ill conduct, and who jurious results, he should give it his decided opposition.
were far more guilty--far more criminal—than the poor man Lord ASHLEY said that an Hon. Member had made so
who stole the loaf. Yet they did not proceed by law to punish direct a challenge to him that it was indispensably necessary
}aim as they did the other ; and why so ? Because if they for him to take up the time of the House with some observa-
attempted such interference, and went through all the transact- tiont. He would not now travel into the part of the question
Lions of private life—though they would find more guilt, which he had already discussed upon the 15th of last month.
more real criminality—their interference would do more harm He hoped that in the few observations which he had to make, he
than good ; and, because, in the other case they could easily should not be provoked to imitate the language which had
point their finger to the man who stole the loaf. There was I been used towards him. He thought the question was too im-
an overt act. Whereas, if they went into the various relations portant, too mighty, to: be interrupted by poor and miserable
of private life, though they would find more criminality of con- t personalities. In referring to the authorities produced before the
ducto et their interference would destroy the peace and har- Committee of the House of Commons in 1837, he found it
mony of social life, and be productive of greater evil.—( Hear, t stated, without contradiction, that the employment of women
hear.) The same principle they should apply in this case. in the factories was detrimental to health, and often destructive
Whenever he thought he could see that he would do of morals. (The Noble Lord then read extracts from the evi-
good then he would interfere • but when he dence taken before the Committee, but in a tone so rapid and
ctid not see that good would result from interference indistinct that it was impossible to follow him.) He had had
then he would stop.—( Hear, hear.) The same rules communications with Mr. Henry Ashworth, and the reply of
wbont were adopted with regard to criminal legislation, he that gentleman was not of a nature to satisfy him that his state-
would apply to the present case. In the year 1833, the first loments were erroneous. In a further correspondence with Mr.
tpleatioe: was, whether they would interfere at all. Looking Ashworth, he stated that, upon all inquiries, he had found
back to tiat period, he thought he hail then said that Govern- that his former statements were borne out. Upon the most
-merit were quite agreed as to the appointment of a Commission j careful examination that he could give to all the statements,
to investigate the subject. That Commission reported certain written and verbal, which had been made to him, he had ar-
propositions, which, in the Bill which was then passed on the rived at the conclusion that his representations in the House
subject, were carried much farther. Among other things, had been understated rather than overstated. The statement
they advised the Government not to be deterred by the saying which he had made respecting the employment of women
that the thing was impracticable and impossible, because it was was fully borne out by all the evidence, and it
the custom to apply those words to whatever was considered in- was clearly proved that the proportion f women
eonvenient to certain parties, and contrary to usual custom. and young persons employed had been greatly in-
Now, what was the statement o. that Commission with regard creased since the year 1839. With respect to the
to the employment of young children ?—what faults did they difference of age of those employed in the manufacturing and
observe ? First, the common, general deterioration of the those employed in the agricultural districts, it should be recol-
ihysical constitution, and the production of general ITted that only 8 per cent. of the working people in the ma-
totis.eee e ; secondly, the exclusion from the means nufacturing districts were above 40 years of age, whilst of
obtaining education, moral and religious, or the those employed in the agricultural districts there were 50
*leans of enabling them to profit by elementary instruction, by rer cent. above it. To he sure, if the statements made by the
reason the excessive fatigue they underwent in the factories Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bright) were correct, this calculation
during the, day. Those were two reasons which appeared to was not correct, yet he had taken the greatest pains to inform
him (Lord .1. Russell) sufficient for interference. They were himself on the subject. His ( Lord Ashley's) statements re-
not reasons fourseled upon an economical question of the pro- ferred to the spinning and :manufacturing of cotton, and in sup-
duction of wealth--but one was founded on the physical elide port of what he advanced he would refer to Inspector Horner's
produced to the persons employed; the other upon the pr Ma- reports. He craved the indulgence of the House whilst he re-
non oi Ilse means of education and moral and religious in. hutted certain charges that had gone forth, throwing aspersions
squetion. He (Lord J. Russe.l) said both those questions—. of a very grave nature on his charaeter. He held in his hand
the physical deterioration of the people of this ' country and a letter signed by Mr. Ashworth, on behalf of himself and 200
their moral and religious education—were questions in country,
other M
anufacturers, that put forward statements which me-
at:: State had
an interest, and the State having seen that it fleeted upon his (Lord Ashley's) veracity, and which he felt
could intemer ein that instance with advantage, a law had been bound to aswer. The letter of Mr. Ashworth stated that the
proposed on the subject by the then Government, and that law only witness that Lord Ashley hadquoted by name in
NO been carried—he forgot by what divisions—but at all events his speech on the recent debate, was thoroughly discre-
is.). the general assent of Parliament. He believed that that dited and was finally abandoned even by the Noble Lo-d
hew
_had produced good and useful effects in its operation ; himself. Mr. Ashworth said he could not say how many .of
and wi, en
he saw such principles accompanied by such results ~the facts," which the Noble Lord had stated were furnished
iu experience and in practice lie did refuse his consent to the . by Dodd.lV Why',
m,hea.(nLeor disavowedrdAshley)
alicaiddddisucrlianiginhodis
hspaveeincgh,rion_
general prineiple of non-interference, to the principle that they the most distinct
were never to Otermeddle, and that they were only doing harm . ceived any of the information he stated to the House from
by attempting to control the natural authority c.f parents over Dodd,
ing and so far
le debate. from having m
Again so entioned his name, he never did
their children, and the freedom of adults in the disposal of
so dur the wh far from not quoting
their labour. He mid that when a sound principle showed in any witness by name, but William Dodd, he had quoted 29 se-
practiee good results, he would rather proceed than be de. pirate and distinct witnesses, and mentioned their names ; as
leered from proceeding. With regard to the question of the in- : also the evidence of several factory inspectors.—( Hear, hear. )
troduetion of adult labour, he owned ,he, did not think the . It was really unpardonable that a document should be pub-
Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of wtate for the Home lished in all the newspapers, containing such gross aspersions on
Department had that night made a greater advance in showing his veracity, and such unfounded min-statements.—( Hear.)
reasons for the introduction of that part of the Bill than he had This letter, signed by Mr. Ashworth, on behalf of those 200
on a former occasion. He (Lord John Russell) had already mill-owners, further set forth, that he (Lord Ashley) had, in his
:said that be had certainly heard as much as made him believe speech, quoted only those portion of M. Villerme's pamphlet
more strongly on that point, that the best course would have n hich were for his own argument, and exempted these por-
been to have introduced a Bill which did not apply to the tions of it which were against his position. He (Lord Ashley )
labour of persons who were more than eighteen or twenty-one had quoted that passage in the pamphlet which stated " that
years of age. He thought that twenty-one, as in the Bill of the sacrifice of human life, consequent upon factory labour, was
,1541, would have been the better limit, and with that hardly more deplorable than the developement of scrofula,
proposal there should be the proposal of the Noble which took place in the masses of our working people engaged
Lord the Member for Dorsetshire, to limit the in manufactures." Mr. Ashworth writes, that " the Noble
time of labour, first to eleven hours, and next to Lord had not quoted that part of M.Villerme's pamphlet which
ten. That would have been a better principle than that of referred to the establishing of a maximum of labour as unwise
ewunediate interference with adult labour. Let them recollect and inexpedient." After much search, he ( Lord Ashley) had
theee were two principles in the Present Bill—one was inter-. certainly found such a passage. But he would read for the
fererece with the control of a parent over his child ; the other House the sentences with which M. Villerne concluded his
was interference with the rule which gave to every adult per- pamphlet •. •if there had been one argument necessary for
son the
in the
freepowerto choose his own occupation, to employ his putting manufnctures under the restriction of law, and deter-
labour manner he chose. Now, he thought it would mining the maximum of daily toil, surely it ahauld be applied
have been better to have
principles, and to have ve only interfered with one of those in the case of children—those creatures who were sacrificed in
legislation. As the leftevilt the other as beyond the scope of the laborious employments of factory labour. Twelve years ago
worth interference by legislation,
to remed was hardly a measure on this subject had been
propounded and rejected,
Gentleman stated that that evil9' great progress since
,seeing that the Right Hon. but the principle of restriction had made
had been produced by the le • that time. In many foreign countries the restrictive principle had
gislation regarding children, that
nin the mills where they em- been adopted and pursued. The negro had been emancipated,
toy young people but twelve ho
beyond that time, and that that evilra they would not be worked and the public mind had taken up the question, and, sooner or
Bill, he (Lord John Russell) owned
dght be remedied by this later, the result would be favourable to the cause of humanity,
that he thought the but that result they should hasten by all possible means.'' Such
House, having already assenteNdd
in no
totheprinciple, there were the words of M. Villerme ; and yet he( Lord Ashley) had ,
would be a far greater e
refusing its ben so grossly aspersed for quoting the opinions of this writer;
assent to the proposition of the Noble Lord, than and the country were told by this Mr. Ashworth, and the 200
in rejecting the proposal of the Hon. and Learned Member master-manufacturers that no confi
derce could be placed in
for Bath ; therefore, he (Lord John Russell) agreed with Lord Ashle 's statements, who had so perverted illerm4's 1
the Government to-night. At the same time, with regard to meaning. He had been '
charged with gross exaggeration, and
the proposal of the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, he with painting the evils of the factory system in too strong
Must say the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had not gone very colours. Now he would read to the House a letter worn Mr.
who had
deeply into the argument. He had ranked all those WI 1: am Kenworthy, the member of an eminent commercial firm,
voted for the proposition of the Noble Lord the Member for and he would remind the House that Mr. Kenworthy's
Doreetshire in ono class—those belonging to the other side of testimony, as regarded cotton-spinning, was the very
.the those, who, he said, were much annoyed by the
Hon. best that could be had, for Mr. Kenworthy had been an
member
!or Stockport going into the agricultural districts, operative himself, and passed through all the various degrees
s- of
ft firm.factory H
laboure saidnn
until he became the principal of a
appointed at fins:kng themselves in the cold
and those on that side of the House whowereregions
of much
oP do ic
that "the occupations of the factory I
team and would g.tadly seize an opportunity
to embarrassP rea
labourers cried loudly for relief and relaxation, and for a re-
oity
Ministers.—( Hear, helsr- )
hy, the Hon. and Learned swicted term of labour. Let the British nation be degraded
ve interfered in that matter. If he jno longer
efbytolerating such a system—a system exercising a
Member had better not he.
could give a good reason for ro','°win''
breathed
nothingtheir remaining
Let
them
influence over the unhappy people employed in
that that vote was wrong,
or that adult labour should be fre'e, relieve
tof those weakly and emaciated creatures,
'let him use his arguments it.
to convince them of that; but thatin an atmosphere in
he should set himself up as , and curtail thme
containing the whole of the wisdom they l but noxious gases, and antes-
supposing the House, and as which
of motive excep,t in mental, in a high degree, to human life. Thousands had their j
supposing that there could be no purity
hit possession—(Hear, hear)—he ( LordJ'sm, Russell) really l miseries protracted under the delusive belief that danger
thought, without taking .• to - 1
any paans
those who voted with him, that It was takingwhichpetition. He entreated all parties to go into the considers
-
he believed the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was 1. ardly ' of this subject, and to snatch from the vortex ~;.f
entitled lion
to.—(Hear, and cheers.) They might have leMen disease, and immorality, and crime the manufacturing popula-
exceedingly mistaken in votilfor the Noble Lord's proposition.
At the same time what he tion who were involved in it." Why, in the speech which he
strong,
heard since had not induced e
.him to think they were so far conclusive and striking, as those expressions of Mr.
I (Lord Ashley) had made, he had said nothing so
was only a few nights ago
that wrong ; and particularly as it i nothing so
her for Stockport declare thatthe he bad heard the Hon. Hem- Kenworthy. As he was thus put upon his defence he would,
time at present which
to labour in factories was unreasonable.r Sheffield (Mr. Ward) to the language of
was given in addition to the authorities he had already quoted, refer the
Surely if the time that was employed (Hear, hear.) Why, Hon. Member fo
was nothing so far wrong or irrational in
was unreasonable, there the Rev. Mr. Hearn, the Roman Catholic priest of Manchester.
his Noble Friend at- ;It would hard] be supposed that that reverend gentleman had I
tempting to alter, that unreasonable time? Then, it t sympathy y'h(Lord Ahl ) That reverend gen.
wasany s ey.