The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-03 00:00:00

IMPER I

We find in the New Bedford Mercury (American
paper) a long and minute account of a mutiny which oc-
curred on board the whaling ship Sharon, in Nov., 1842,
and of the manner in which the ship was retaken from
the mutineers by a single person, Mr. Clough, the third
mate. The Sharon, after a cruise near the Caroline Islands,
procured supplies at Ascension, and was preparing
fur the voyage, when eleven of her crew deserted, and
were not retaken. She shipped a new crew of 17, in-
cluding six natives of the islands. On Sunday, NOYGM•
ber 6, in latitude 2 degrees 20 seconds north, longitude
162 degrees east, both boats were lowered in chase of
whales ; Captain Norris, a Portuguese boy who acted as
steward, and three of the natives being left ?ri board.
The boats soon captured a whale, which. the
ship took alongside, and the boats went in pur-
suit of another. At 3 o'clock p.m. the boat
of Mr. Smith, the mate, being about a mile
and a half from the ship perceived a signal fly-
ing, and pulled towards her On coming within hailing
distance, they were told by the boy, who was aloft,. that
the natives had killed Captain
then,
naked, leaped upon the Norris, and were in posses-
siondared the crew to come on boa'ril.bti.
tese el' the natives,
. entirely
and, brandishing. a spear,
missiles had been collected for their
guard at each side, and hammers
utbmuch injury.
armed. native stood
use, and were hurled
furiously at the boat, though witng pins,
, and and other
The mate then waited for the other
con-
sulted as to the best method of retakinn"
It was proposed that the boats should retaking the
ship,
board her, one upon each side, at the samanene'
but Mr. Smith, the mate, who had become mastertlme ;
by the captain's death, proposed that both crews ,
should make the attack with one boat, and leave him
in the other. This proposal was received with no
favour, the men declaring they would sooner start for
the nearest land and risk the chance of escape. Mr.
Clough, who acted as Mr. Smith's steersman, had
several times darted his lance at the savage cm the
taffrail ; but the distance was too great and he 're-
quested to be rowed nearer ; but Mr. Smith thought
the danger too great and refused to approach the
ship. Mr. Clough proposed several other devices,
but, in default of aid from others, resolyed to re-
take the ship himself. He accordingly, after dark,
was taken by the boat ahead of the ship at some distance,

NORTH (VALES ClRCUlT.—Claster, Apr
(Before Mr. Justice CRESSWELL.)
SENTENCE ON WINTERBoTTOM FOR FORGERY.—At the
sitting of the Court this morning, the Attorney-General
prayed the judgment of the Court on John Kenyon Winter-
bottom, who was tried at the Winter Assizes in December
last, before Mr. Baron Gurney, on a charge of forgery. Tha
trial excited an unusual degree of interest, from the fact of
the prisoner having filled the office of chief magistrate of the
borough of Stockport, and also the responsible one of town
clerk, besides being the legal adviser of many influential
families in the county.
After some delay the prisoner was placed at the bar. He
appeared very much emaciated, and was greatly agitated.
His Loßpsuip then proceeded to pass sentence upon him
in nearly the following terms :—John Kenyon Winterbottom,
at the last assizes held in this place you were indicted under
the statute of the Ist of Wm. IV., c. 66, and that indictment
charged you with having in your custody and possession, a
certain bill of exchange in this form :
Manchester, Dec. 20, 1839.
"At seven days' sight pay to Mrs. Elizabeth Isherwood,
widow, Miriam Isherwood, spinster, Ann Magdalene Isher-
wood, spinster, also Anna Maria Isherwood, now the wife of
Chas. Bellairs, Esq., or order, the executrixes of the late John
Isherwoed, Esq., five thousand pounds in full, for loss under
policy No. 11,012."
And that you feloniously did forge on the back of that bill
of exchange a certain endorsement, which was as follows:
" Ann Magdalene Isherwood," with intent to defraud John
Petty Muspratt and others, as trustees of the Pelican Life
Office. The second count charged you with having a bill
of exchange in your possession with a certain forged en-
dorsement on the back of it, namely, that of Ann Magdalene
Isherwood, and that you, well knowing the same to have
been forged, did offer, utter, dispose of, and put off, the
sail last-mentioned bill of exchange, with intent to de-
fraud John Petty Muspratt and others, as trustees of the
Pelican Life Office. There were other counts in the in-
dictment charging you with the intent to defraud Abraham
Wildey Roberts and others, and also with intent to defraud
John Jackson. The jury found you guilty of having
uttered this bill, with the forged endorsement on it, you
well knowing. it to be forged. Your counsel at the trial
took several objections which were reserved by the Learned
Baron who tried you for the consideration of all the
Judges. The objections were, first, that the bill of ex-
change being made payable to the order of severul per-
sons, could only be negotiable on the endorsement of all
the payees, and that, therefore, the forgery of the name
of one person only was not a forgery of the felonious
character alleged in the indictment. On the case being
argued before the Judges, these objections were unavailing.
The Learned Judge before whom you were tried reports
the objection to those counts which charged the intent to
defraud John Jackson, to be founded on a misapprehension
of the evidence. It was supposed that you had not obtained
money from the bank of which he was the manager. The
Learned Judge reports that you had crone so, and therefore
this objection was unavailing. [His Lordship then read the
clause et the statute above referred to, and then proceeded.]
Now the question considered by the Judges was, whether
this endorsement of Ann Magdalene Isherwood was a
forged endorsement on the bill of exchange, within the
meaning of the statute, and after hearing the case elabo-
rately argued by counsel for you, and after discussing it
among themselves, the Judges were unanimously of opinion
that, although the property in the bill of exchange could
not be transferred without the endorsement of the others,
yet that it was necessary that Ann Magdalene Isherwood
should endorse the bill, and that a forgery of her endorse-
ment is a forgery clearly coming within the meaning of the
statute I have quoted. The judgment is that this con-
viction is a valid one, and you must now receive the sen-
tence which the law awards for the offence of which you
have been convicted, and I am sure I need only refer to the
report of the Learned Judge who tried you to show how
serious a case bad been made out against you; that it is, in
reality, a forgery committed under circumstances of very
great aggravation. The Learned Baron states, in his report,
that yon were a solicitor at Stockport, in considerable
practice ; that up to this time you had always main-
tained a respectable character ; that you were the con-
fidential adviser of Mr. John Isherwood, of Marple Hall, in
this county, who died in the year 1839, leaving his wife and
daughters as his executors. Having been employed on some
business after Mr. Isherwood's death, you got possession of
the policy, which, without their knowledge, you presented
to Mr. Tate, agent to the Pelican Life -office. Mr. Tate
proposed to pay you a bill at seven days' sight. These
terms you accepted and obtained the bill, being told at the
time it must be endorsed by every one of the payees. These
endorsements you subsequently professed to have obtained,
and then paid it to your credit in the bank at Stockport, and
in the course of a month afterwards you drew out of the
bank upwards of 4,0001. All this was clearly proved to
have taken place without the knowledge of the executrixes,
while you were amusing them by telling them it was neces-
sary a Canterbury probate should be taken out before the
money could be received, but that the office was pay-
ing interest for it. It appears that you were confidentially
consulted by this family, and it must be apparent to any
one who considers the case, that there is scarcely any class of
men in the country who have more power for good or for evil
than attorneys. Scarcely any class of men are trusted to such
an extent, and incur such responsibility as they do. If an
estate is to be purchased or sold, an attorney is employed to
transact the buisiness ; if a marriage settlement is to be ex-
ecuted, an attorney is called in ; or if a will is to be made,
their professional assistance is generally obtained, and they
are frequently entrusted by the family in arranging the affairs
of the deceased. Such was your employment ; and it is very
painful to find that a man who has hitherto maintained so
respectable a character shoal(' so grossly have betrayed the
trust reposed in him. I cannot but regard your case as one
of the most aggravated in its complexion I ever heard of,
and therefore the punishment must be in accordance with
your offence. The sentence of the Court is, that you be trans-
ported beyond the seas for the term of your natural life.
The prisoner was then removed from the bar supported by
two of the assistants in the gaol. He appeared to be deeply
affected, as also did many others in Court.
Wni
MALICIOUS SROOTINCL—James Berry, 23, John Hammond,
30, George Hammond, 22, Thomas Hammond, 28, and
Webb, 40, were charged with maliciously shooting at John
Eden, with intent to murder, to maim, disable, disfigure, or
do him some grievous bodily harm.
The case arose out of night poaching, with which the pri-
soners were also charged. It appeared that on the night of
Sunday, the sth of Januery, the prisoners and several others
were out in a cover belonging to Mr. T. Langford Brooke, at
Mere Hall, in this county, when a party of keepers in the
employment of Mr. Brooke came up. A fight commenced,
one of the keepers giving the first blow and during the affray
the prisoner Berry fired his gun at John Eden, but the latter
being in a stooping
close to his head.
grievous
The jury
The remainder'nf the
position, the shot went over his shoulder
b 0
dfoundharm, all Guiandltyh
eo
if ,
eshooting
dwgei t
sheni
tnetneenetd ttohednoi
to is years' transportation,
day Was ozcupied with Mint cases.

The Earl of Falmouth has contributed 501., and
Lady Bassett a donation of 1001., to the local fund for the
extension and improvement of the Penryn Docks and Fal-
mouth Harboui,

HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 2.

The SPEAKER took the chair at Four o'clock.
The Pudsey Gas Bill was read a third time and passed.
Mr. W. PATTEN presented a petition against the
Liverpool Guardian Gas Bill.
THE GRANT TO MAYNOOTH.
Mr. ORMSBY GORE presented a petition from
Wrockwardine (Shropshire) against the increased grant
to Meynooth College.
Mr. STURT presented petitions to the same effect ;
but the designations of the petitions were not heard in
the gallery.
Lord RENDLESHAM presented similar petitions
from Wycombe and several other places.
Lord ASHLEY presented several petitions to the
same effect, and also several against the sale of intoxi-
cating liquors on the Sabbath.
Colonel VERNER presented petitions from places in
the north of Ireland against the grant, and in favour of
the Church Education Society.
Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN and other Hon. Mem-
bers presented petitions against any increased grant to
Maynooth College.
Mr. M. GIBSON presented three petitions from Bury
St. Edmund's, Sudbury, and another place in Suffolk,
praying that no grant of public money should be given
to any description of priests whatever.—(Laughter.)
PROSECUTIONS FOR POOR-RATES.
Sir J. EASTHOPE rose to present petitions from
Ann Ward and Thomas Lukin, prisoners in the House
of Correction, in the county of Leicester, complaining
of their imprisonment, with hard labour, for the non-
payment of costs arising out of their inability to pay
poor-rates. These persons were now undergoing a
sentence of' imprisonment, with hard labour, in the
prison of Leicester for the non payment of poor-rates,
and he was so convinced of the illegality and injustice
of the whole proceeding, that he had requested his Hon.
Friend the Member for Finsbury, in the event of his
(Sir John Easthope's) absence, to present these
petitions, so that not a moment might be lost in
laying before the House the case of the petitioners.
When he explained the nature of the petitions, he
thought the feeling of the House would be so generally
in favour of the prayer of them, that no impediment
would be allowed to interfere with the speedy redress of
the grievances complained of. Thomas Lukin,it appeared,
was assessed in the sum of five shillings to the poor-
rates of the parish. He could not pay it, owing to the
poverty of his circumstances ; he was summoned by the
magistrates at Ashby-de-la- Zouch, and a distress war-
rant was issued to raise the amount upon his goods and
chattels. He had not, however, sufficient in his house
to defray the assessment, and he was in consequence, on
the 11th of July, committed to the gaol in Leicester.
The inhabitants of that town, hearing of his great poverty,
paid the rate, and he was released from prison. In a short
time after he was summoned for the costs, at least four
times the amount of the principal ; but if he had not
had sufficient to pay the rate he certainly could not be
expected to pay the costs. He was not heard before
the magistrate, but was again incarcerated in the gaol
of Leicester. The petitioner prayed that imme-
diate redress should be given. He (Sir J. East-
hope) might add that the petitioner had a wife
and four children. He could refer to his employer, and
all who knew him, for the excellence of- his character.
The next case was that of Ann Ward, and it was very
nearly similar to the other. She was a widow, her
husband having been killed eleven years before. She
lived as a lodger with her daughter, and was assessed
to the poor-rate in the sum of three shillings. She was
also committed to prison, and the people of Leicestet shire
interfered, and paid the money. A distress warrant was
afterwards levied for the costs, and the petitioner was
committed, with hard labour, a second time to prison, in
default of payment. It was his impression that these
cases required redress, and he hoped the House would
take the earliest opportunity of giving it.
The SPEAKER said that according to the rule of the
House, the Hon. Baronet should have previously given
notice that he would move that the petitions be printed,
before calling the attention of the House to his motion.
He could row move that the petitions be printed, and
then take the first opportunity of bringing the matter
before the House.
Sir J. EASTHOPE lamented exceedingly that he had
not done so ; but he would now move that the petitions
be printed with the votes, and to-morrow he would bring
his motion before the House.
IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT.
Lord SANDON presented a petition from Liverpool,
signed by 1,400 persons, praying foe the repeal of the
enactment abolishing imprisonment for debt, passed last
session, upon the grounds of no equivalent punishment.
Mr. COBDEN presented a petition from the calico
printers of Stockport, praying that the -Bill brought in
by Lord Ashley, should not be passed into law.
NAVY HALF-PAY.
Captain PECHELL presented a petition from one
hundred masters and paymasters in the Royal Navy,
complaining of the manner in which they had been
treated let the Board of Admiralty, iu not awarding to
them that portion of half pay which the late Com-
mittee of Inquiry into the state and condition of
naval officers had awarded to them. The Hon.
and Gallant Member at the same time intimated that
he would draw the attention of the House to the case
of the petitioners, when the navy estimates came under
discussion on Friday, on which day he would move that
the petition be printed with the votes.
DUTY ON MALT.
The Hole. and GALLANT MEMBER also presented a
petition from the maltsters •of Brighton and Lewes,
praying the Howe to abolish the duty on malt.
NOTICES OF MOTION.
Sir HOWARD DOUGLAS gave notice, that on the
House going into Committee on the Army Estimates, he
would call attention to the present condition of regimental
staff officers, paymasters, &c., with a view to Parliament
taking into consideration the expediency of extending to
that meritorious class of officers the privilege of retiring
under certain circumstances upon full pay.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' ACT.
Mr. 11. BERKELEY gave notice of his intention on a
future day to move for leave to bring in a Bill to amend
the Insolvent Debtors' Act, passed in the last session of
Parliament. The Hon. Member also gave notice that
on the 25th instant he would move for a Select Com-
mittee to inquire into the past operation of the same law.
MAYNOOTH.
Sir R. INGLIS presented several petitions from places
in the counties of Oxford, Cornwall, and other parts of
England, against any further grant to Maynooth.
Colonel SIBTHORP presented petitions from the
mayor, clergy, and a great number of the inhabitants of
the city of Lincoln, and from another place in the county
of Lincoln, to the same effect.
SMOKE-PROHIBITION BILL.
Mr. MACKINNON moved the second reading of this

Bill.
Mr. HAWES opposed the Bill as impracticable, and
he should therefore take the sense of the House upon it.
He hoped that the Hon. Gentleman would withdraw the
Bill for the present, and wait for the general Bill of the
Noble Lord opposite.
Mr. BORTHWICK supported the Bill.
Mr. ORD had but one or two observations to make in
reference to this measure. The Hon. Member assumed
provisions of the Bill had particular
that there existed a smoke nuisance which could be put
down, and the
reference to the occupiers of chimneys and furnaces.
Who were occupiers of chimneys?—(Laughter.) He
and other Hon. Members on that side denied the practi-
cability of complying with the requisitions of this Bill.
The Earl of LINCOLN said that a Bill should be
introduced for ttae purpose of constituting local bodies to
take into consideration the effects of smoke in their dis-
tricts ; it would be peremptory to appoint inspectors
before that could be done If the Honourable Gentle-
man still persevered in his intention to refer the Bill
to a Select Committee, he (the Earl of Lincoln)
would vote for the second reading of the Bill.
He was sure, when the Hon. Gentleman reflected upon
the large amount of property destroyed by the smoke
nuisance, he would not be inclined to throw any impedi-
ment in the way of legislation upon this subject.
A short time ago a nursery-gardener in the neighbour-
hoodextensive chimneys,
of this metropolis was in the habit of raising ex-
pensive and valuable plants, but, from the erection of two
he was compelled to abandon a
lucrative occupation. Now by the introduction of
some patent apparatus into the two chimneys he
believed the gardener was afterwards enabled
to resume his business with his former success.
The experiment was tried, and the nuisance was abo-
lished. He did not wish to trespass longer on the atten-
tion of the House, but would conclude by saying that if
the Hon. Member pressed his motion to a division he
would vote for it, but he would earnestly recommend the
Hon. Gentleman to postpone the second reading until
the Sanitary Bill had been introduced.
Mr. LABOUCHERE thought the best mode would
be to withhold the consideration of this matter for the
present, as the Government bad announced their inten-
tion of bringing forward a measure which would embrace
it. It would be a mere waste of time ender such circum-
stances to refer the matter to a Select Committee. He
would vote against the second reading of the Bill.
Mr. SPOON `lt hoped his Hon. Friend the Member for
Leamington would postpone the second reading of this
Bill. Suppose the most complete apparatus were to be
employed far effecting the object which the lion. Gen-
tleman had in view there was nothing to compel the
workmenthereto put it into effective use. and without their
was
co- operation it would be utterly futile to at-
tempt to carry the Bill into effect. Besides,
a very great doubt whether the
consumption of smoke would not compel a very much
larger consumption of fuel. The Hon. Gentleman oppo-
site (Mr. Hawes) had complained that this Bill was a
mere waste of
go further and say, that if they attempted to carry this
legislation, but he (Mr. Spooner) would
Bill into effect they
the countr as would not only entirely
would excite such an amount of op-
position throuprevent any benefit being derived from it, but which would
y
also very greatly militate against any really good mea•
sure. Another inconvenience arising from the measure,
as it stood, ghout
claiming to be exempt from its operation. He believed,
was, that every manufacturing interest was
indeed, that there was a notice on the books for exclud-
ing the i
-rem trade i
glass trade, or any trade ? lie trusted,
other
nuisance than thattofroamdeliwvi:liloiling
therefore, that the Honourable Gentleman would not
and if the iron trade, why not the
press this Bill
it was quite an impracticable measure. Ho did not a
nuisance at all; _fhoorushese,
ebyeelnieivieidt
were that
be-
lieve that the smoke from manufactories was any greater
withdraw it, and leave an opportunity for a really good
and lie trusted that he would therefore
measure to be introduced at a future period.
Lord FRANCIS EGERTON said that he could not
possibly assent to the assertion that the smoke from
manufactories was no nuisance, or even a small nuisance,
for he knew that in the place which he had the honour
to represent it vvas felt to be a great nuisance, and he
conceivers 'that to talli, of tbis period for legislatidli
on the subject being too early, or that discussiQn was
unnecessary in that House, was
quite beside the facts
pf tip case. Ife was favourable to the object Qf

Gentleman.
Mr. BROTHERTON said that the details of the Bill
might be greatly modified and improved. In that case, he
hoped that the lion. Member would not press for the
second reading of the Bill. He should remark that there
were chimneys belonging to certain manufactories in
Manchester, where there was a strong feeling on this
subject, from which there was no more smoke than from
a private dwelling-house. There was no doubt that great
attention would be paid to the correction of the Bill by
the Select Committee.
Sir ROBERT PEEL said that no one could be more
competent to make a suggestion on the matter than the
Hon. Gentleman who had just spoken. It was impossible
to make any rule with respect to the suppression of a
general nuisance which would not create some local nui-
sances. The Select Committee would consider whe-
ther the provisions of this Bill could be safely
adopted. He was very certain that the time
of the Committee would not be lost. Under-
standing that the Bill was not to be pressed until
the measure for improving the sanitary condition of
large towns was before the House, he thought there
could be no objection to the second reading, and refer-
ring the Bill to the consideration of a Select Comrnitiee.
Mr. HAWES was perfectly satisfied with the course
proposed by the Right Honourable Gentleman, but he
should like to know whether the Committee would
have power to take evidence upon certain points of the

Be. B.
Mr. RICARDO reminded the Hon. Member for
Lambeth that the Government were going to introduce
a Bill affecting the same subject. and it would be there-
fore all labour lost to make any inquiry into the nature of
this Bill. For his part, he would rather the matter should
rest with the Government, entrusted to the hands of a
Committee. There were two parties affected by this
Bill. The one was the party who was annoyed by
smoke; the ( ther, was the party who lived by smoke. Now
i he could only say, on the part of his constituents, that
they would have to give up business altogether if they
were not allowed to smoke. They were now in a state
of uncertainty, and there was no doubt they would re-
main so until the intentions and measure of the Govern-
ment on this subject were before the House.
Mr. WILLIAMS said a few words, after which
Mr. MACKINNON said he wished to say a few words
in explanation. It should be recollected that a Com-
mittee of that House reported that the nuisance of smoke
could and ought to be prevented; and added, that if the
Government did not take up the matter with a view to
legislation, some individual Member ought. Was not
that recommendation worthy of regard? lie had merely
followed the recommendation of the Committee.
The Right Hon. Member for Taunton had accused him
of putting himself forward on this occasion, when the
matter might better be left in the hands of the Govern-
ment. But in fact, he had done nothing more than act
upon the instructions of the Committee. If the Noble
Lord (Lord Lincoln) did not feel inclined to proceed
with his measure he (Mr. Mackinnon) should proceed
with the present Bill, but not otherwise.
The amendment was then withdrawn ; the Bill was
read a second time, and ordered to be referred to a Select
Committee.
INFEFTMENT (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The LORD ADVOCATE postponed the second
reading of this Bill till this day week.
HERITABLE JURISDICTIONS (SCOTLAND)
BILL.
This Bill was read a second time.
CALICO PRINT WORKS.
Mr. M. GIBSON, having inquired whether it was the
intention to proceed with Lord Ashley's Bill for the
regulation of calico print works, presented five petitions
from various manufacturing places against any restric-
tion of their labour.
Mr. HAWES presented _petitions from West Ham, in
Essex, and other places, to the same effect
Lord ASHLEY presented a petition from 500 opera-
tives at Crayford, in Kent, expressing their desire that
the measure should pass into law, suggesting some
amendments ; and stating their wish that even a modi-
fied measure should be passed, rather than that the Bill
should be altogether lost.
On the motion that the Bill be read a second time,
Sir J. GRAHAM said that when the Noble Lord
first brought the measure before the House he deemed
it his duty to give it his most earnest and anxious con-
sideration. Ile believed the Bill was ir.troduced on the
I2th of March—(Laughter)—and with a view to the
discussion which must certainly arise on the second
reading, he bad endeavoured, with the assistance
of his colleagues in the Government, to institute
such inquiries as should place thein'in the posses-
sion of the fullest information respecting every
portion of its details that it was possible to obtain.
For that purpose he had made it his business to extend
his investigations to every part of the manufacturing dis-
tricts of the United Kingdom. The House was aware
that the factory inspectors had certain districts assigned
them, in which they had respectively appointed sub-in-
spectors. It was the business of these sub-inspectors
to place themselves in personal communication
with the individuals most looked up to among the indus-
trial classes. Into the hands of every one of these
sub-inspectors a copy of the Bill had been placed,
with instructions to ascertain the effects its clauses were
likely to have on the manufacturing community; and since
the first reading, on March 12, lie had assembled these
factory inspectors, and a portion of the sub-inspectors in
London, in order to get the most precise infor-
mation, and the fullest information which through their
inquiries had been obtained. Ha had given to the Bill
itself, and to the information which he had received, his
most earnest attention. As he had stated to the House
at the time this Bill was introduced, and as he stated
now, it was his most anxious desire to give his full acce-
dence to the measure of the Noble Lord (Lent Ashley),
and it was a sense of duty alone which restrained him
from giving his support to the object of the Noble Lori.
He would further state what had been the result of the
inquiries as to the information which had been received,
and which had determined himself and his col-
leagues as to the course which they intended to
pursue with respect to this Bill. If he assented
to the second reading of the Bill, he begged
it to be distinctly understood that neither himself
nor the Government would consider themselves for one
moment as pledged to all the details of the enact-
ments proposed by the Noble Lord, many of which
it would be his painful duty, but still his duty, to
resist. lie was bound to sly that there were many pro-
visions in that Bill to which he could not assent, but still
he was not prepared on the part of the Government to
deny that some regulation respecting the employment
of children and females in print-works was necessary ;
and, admitting that necessity, he could not oppose the
second reading of the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) When as-
senting to the principle of a Bill on the second reading,
it was not usual to go into details, but when he recol
lected the importance of the interests involved, he
thought it was right that he should state to the House
what were the provisions of the Bill to which he ob-
jected, and what were the amendments which he, in
Committee, intended to suggest as preferable to the pro-
visions proposed by the Noble Lord. In the first place,
he objected to the great extension of the objects of the
Bill, which was apparent from comparing the interpreta-
tion clause with the title. The extension which must
take place in consequence of the construction which
must be put upon the first clause of the Bill, he hail the
most insuperable objection to. The title of the Bill
referred only to the labour of children em-
ployed in calico print-works, but by the inter-
pretation clause the operation of the measure was
extended far beyond print works. By that clause the
provisions of the Bill were extended to all mills, or se-
parate houses where dying, bleaching, or calendaring
was carried on. If this was grounded on analogy with
the Factory Bill it would be found that no analogy
existed between them. In factories the labour was de-
pendant altogether on machinery which might be stopped
at any fixed hour. But the converse of the fact applied
to the subject at present under discussion ; it was un-
connected with machinery and depended almost entirely
upon the state of the atmosphere. He was bound fur-
ther to state that it appeared, as far as his inquiries ex-
tended, although in print-works children were exten-
sively employed, yet that in dying, bleaching and calen-
daring, the number of children employed was very few.
His first objection was to extending the provisions of
this Bill beyond print works to bleaching grounds,
dying manufactories, and calendaring works.
There were peculiarities connected with those works,
which he had specified at considerable length on former
occasions ; and one of the most painful circumstances
connected with the trade, was that the demand, and
consequently the labour, was not continuous throughout
the year. There was a very great demand for labour
at certain periods, while at other periods there was a
great falling off. The trade, during the spring and
autumn, gave employment to an increased number of
workers, and demanded an extension of the hours of
labour ; but after that period the demand relaxed, and
many of those workers were, comparatively speaking,
unemployed. During this period of the time, every-
thing depended on the work being executed with
the greatest possible dispatch. Everything, in
fact, was secondary to the promptitude with
which the market was supplied ; and he so far
therefore disagreed with the Bill of the Noble Lord, that
its provisions did not meet these peculiar circumstances.
He was not, therefore, prepared to assent to that part
of the Bill which enacted that children should only work
eight hours each day, or on alternate days twelve hours.
Having stated his objections to the Bill of the Noble
Lord, he should now refer to those provisions, after the
second reading, to which he would be ready to assent.
He would say, on the part of the Government
and for
himself, that they Were q 44 prepared to accede to that
part of the Noble Lord's measure which restricted the
hours of labour of children under eight years of age.
lie agreed to the provision of the Bill which proposed to
do away night- work by children, because the same
principle had been more than once affirmed by the House
in reference to females. In the Act of last session the
House thought it right to regulate the night labour of
females in factories, and he was therefore now prepared to
agree to that part of the Bill which provided that children
between the ages of eight and thirteen should not be
• employed in calico factories at night. It now became ne-
cessary for him to make allusion to the Noble ford's
definition of a 604. The ISoble I,ard prlpsed to
e4ahlieh' a • doitbie definition, varying in winter and
summer ; but, upon the whole, he (Sir J. Graham) was
, inclined to think it would be better to have only a single
definition of the night,—(liear, hear.) ge would, how-