The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-21 00:00:00

MURDER AND ROBBERY.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, 'Mal 20

Their Lordship assembled at Five o'clock:
Messengers from the Commons • brought up several
Bills.

The Bishop of CHESTER presented several peti-
tions against the union of the sees of St. Asaph and
Bangor.. - - -
Lord CAMPBELL presented several petitions,
praying the House to legalise Presbyterian mixed
marriages.
LANCASTER AND CARLISLE RAILWAY.

anticipate any objection to the second reedit*. It
was a Bill to amend tha law relating to
factories which was passed in 1836, and the measure
was , founded on the report of the Commissioners on
that subject. He would now endeavour to explain
what difference there was between the propoSed and
the existing law. The first alteration proposed was
with respect to children in factories. At present
children from nine to thirteen years. of:age .worked
nine hours a day. Now the present Bill, in the first
place, proposed to make the age eight instead of nine,
And to decrease the hours of labour to six and a half
hours, making certain provisions with respect to the
child;eri. going to school for a certain number of hours
in each day, namely, three and a half hours in sum-
mer and two and. a half. in winter ; and the
utmost work for any male child under the
provisions of the new Act would be seven
hours. He was sure that he need not point
out to their Lordships the fact that such a Trovision
would prevent a great deal of overworking in, chil-
dren. The regulation by the law, as it now stood,
was, that all young persons between thirteen and
eighteen should be restricted to twelve hours' labour.
The present Bill made no alteration in that respect,
but it restricted the labour of females and young per-
sons. The other provisions of the Bill affected the
inspectors. In the former Bill they had the power of
acting as magistrates, and making rules and regula-
tions ; both those powers were by the present Bill
taken away. It was thought necessary that the re-
gulations should be fixed by law, and not be left to
the discretion of the inspectors. This Bill provided
that no child should be allowed to go into a factory
without a surgeon's certificate, and the expense of
those certificates was to be defrayed by the millowner.
The Bill also provided that. the existing fines upon
millowners for infringing the provisions of the factory
laws should be reduced, so as to insure their being

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE presented a
petition from the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway
Company, praying their Lordships to facilitate the
progress of this Railway Bill through Parliament.
Lord BROUGHAM did not wish to interpose any
unnecessary delay in the progress of this Bill. He
must say, however, that it was rather a novel pro-
ceeding on the part of railway jobbers to present
a petition to their Lordships, praying their Lordships
to interfere between the two Houses of Parliament,
when a conference had taken place between
them on the subject of some particular Bill. He
would just state generally the facts of the case to their
Lordships. He had consented to abandon his
opposition to the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway
Bill upon certain conditions. Had it not been for
those conditions, he would have opposed-the Bill in
every stage, and he would have devoted himself to
that opposition, and he would have done nothing else
but oppose the Bill for a period of six months.—
(Laughter.) His Noble I riends laughed, but let
them be placed in the same situation, and they would
find it no laughing matter. It was no laughing mat-
ter to be driven from your own home by a railway
being brought so near to that home as to make it
quite impossible to remain there—to be driven from
that home in which your ancestors had dwelt for up-
wards of 900 years. He had waived his objectien to
this Bill for the public good, upon two conditions.. One
of these conditions had been performed, the other had not.
It was very well to say that the condition had not
been fulfilled, because the House of Commons would
not consent to it. He could not yet discover in what
way the opposition to the clause had been raised in
the other House of Parliament. Indeed the Right
Honourable Speaker had assured him that the
clause was very much talked of in the House
before it was discussed in the Committee.
He had bargained with the parties to the Bill to
withdraw his opposition, on condition that he
should have the clause, and it was of no use for them
to say that the Commons would not agree to it. He
should therefore Oppose the Bill, as they had taken
away the condition on which "he had taken away his
opposition. Some of the members of the Company
were most respectable men, and his friends, and in-
capable of Any fraud. But some one connected with
the other parties had procured the fraud to be done. He
would ask their Lordships, how would any of them like
a jobbing rail waycom pany to cut through their grounds,
to keepa waste all round their domains for three or four
years—to drive them from the mansilns, and castles,
and villas, in which their ancestors had been dorai-
cited for centuries—and-to have their privacy broken
in upon by hordes of labourers from every part of the
United Kingdom ?—(Hear and laughter.) Still he
had pledged his word that, on condition of obtaining
the clause, he would withdraw his opposition. But.
he would not consent to be trampled upon by any
Company, because they were many and he was but
one.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.)
Lord CAMPBELL said that the opposition of his
Noble and Learned Friend might be very proper,
and the clause might be very justifiable. But the
opposition to it, as .he understood, was grounded on
the fact that it had been introduced, not in Commit-
tee, but upon bringing up the report, and that with-
out notice, so that it was passed sub silentio. It was
on that ground, as explained to their. Lordships in
the conference, that the House of Commons threw out
the clause.—(Hear, hear.) He was sure that no one
could suppose it was thrown out-to disoblige his Noble
and Learned Friend, for (as he said unfeignedly) no
one could think of disobliging his Noble and Learned
Friend, who was so courteous and obliging.—(Laugh-
ter.) The objection to the clause was, that it ought
not to have been inserted, without notice.
Lord BROUGHAM said that the. objection to
want of notice was groundless, inasmuch as the other
parties had assented to the clause.—(Hear, hear.) For
his part, he had rather throw out the Bill than accept
the cliksk4--(Hear.)
Ihe Marquis of CLANRICARDE wished to ex-
plain why he had presented the petitiOn. He had
taken no interest in the measure, but as the
petition . was placed in his hands he had"
thought it. his duty to present it. He under-
stood the facts to be, the Railroad Company
had no objection to the clause, but that the Com-
mittee .of the House of Commons looked upon it as.in
the nature of an amendment upon a Turnpike Bilt,
and therefore rejected it because it' had been intro-
duced without notice as required by tlie standing orders.
He thought this so great and important a .railway
that it ought not to stop because the House .of Com-
mons would not pass an Act to amend a Turnpike
Act., He hoped his Noble Friend would have no ob-
jection, to discuss this subject to-morrow, or Thurs-
day. The Noble Marquis concluded . by moving
that the petition should lie on the table, and that the
reasons of the House of Commons for disagreeing
with their Lordships' amendments should be printed.
—.Agreed to.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from a
place in Lancashire, in favour of the Roman Catholic
Charitable Bequests Bill.
HARBOUR_ OF PORT PATRICK.
The 'Marquis of LONDONDERRY seeing the
Noble Earl, the First Lord of the Admiralty in his
place, wished to know whether it was the intention of
the Government to withhold this year._ any grant for
the purpose of putting the harbour of Port Patrick
and Donaghadee in a proper state of repair. If that
harbour was not to be kept up as a packet-station, it
ought at least to be put in a proper state of repair, so
as not to endanger the:lives of her Majesty's subjects,
and if it was not, so the fault would be
with her Majesty's Ministers, of whom it would be
said that they would not expend the paltry sum of
8,0001. to .secure the lives of her Majesty's subjects:.
The Earl of HADDINGTON said that this sub-
ject had excited a great deal of interest. Last year
when his Noble Friend put a similar question to him,
he stated that it was not the intention of her Ma-
jesty's Government to take any vote for
the improvement of Port Patrick, as the
Grqvernmeat believed that they had done
enough towards the construction of the harbour.
Since, however, his. Noble Friend had given him
notice of this question, he had made inquiry, and he
found that .a communication had been made to the
Government, and the result of that was that the Go-

imposed in every case where it should be necessary.
The Bill also contained provisions respecting ma-
chinery, inasmuch as it provided that certain guards
should be placed round the machinery in facto-
ries, :so as to protegt the persons employed upon
it. These were the general, provisions of the
Bill. Their. Lordships were aware that there
had been consideraole difficulty in passing
this Bill through the House of Commons. The Go-
vernment, unfortunately, were compelled to differ
with some of their best supporters. But there were
times when it was the duty of the Government to be
firm. . It was the duty of the Government to inform
themselves, as well as they could, upon the particular'
subject before they proposed any law, and they bad
studiously done so with respect to this Bill.
The ]!Marquis of NORMANBY said the Noble
Lord had Introduced this Bill with sufficient clear-
ness, but, at the same time, he had not entered much
into detail as to the principles upon which the mea-
sure had been introduced by the Government. Hav-
ing occupied the department of the Government be-
fore which this subject more immediately came; he
(the Marquis of Normanby) had devoted considerable
attention to it. He felt that the present Bill did not
go far enough.—(Cheers.) His opinion, in spite
of the ironical cheer from his Noble Friends behind

him, was, that as they had once commenced inter
ference with labour, the Bill did not go far
enough. No doubt, in stating this opinion, he should
be placed with those who had been termed idle philan-
thropists ; but this would not deter him from the full
expression of his opinions upon the subject. He had
always felt that, owing to the vast accumulation of
population in the manufacturing districts, some mea-
sure of legislation' was necessary with respect to the
hours of labour of the working portion of that popu-
lation. He had observed that, for many years past,
the owners of factories had employed women and chil-
dren whenever they could; to the exclusion of the male
portion Of thepOulation; and it was a very common
thing, in the marnifacturing districts, to see a mother
and her children working, while the husband was at,
home, living in a state of forced idleness. He believed
that a limitation of the laws of labour could, in a.
great measure, remedy this evil. He did not believe
that a reduction in the hours of labour to ten hours
would injure any branch of our manufactures.
Twelve hours daily toil was too much, 'for it would
only leave about nine hours' of repose, inasmuch as
one hour and a half would be daily consumed in the
meals of the operative, and the other hour and a half
would be consumed in going to and from the factory.
Those who worked by tilling the soil did not work,
on, the average, twelve hours per day through the
year, because their hours were limited by the light of
day. • Why, then, should the operatives in the manu-
facturing districts work longer? He (the Marquis
of Normanby) 'was aware that, in expressing this
opinion, he was differing from many of those with
whom he had thi happiness usually to concur,,
He did-not intend to make any motion on the sub-
ject, or to offer any opposition to this stage of the
Bill ; he had merely risen to enter his protest
against that portion of the Bill which referred to the
hours of labour, as it his firm conviction, that
the limits which had been proposed were much too
great. He did not think it was necessary to do more
than state his opinions upon this question. Much
as he regarded its importance in itself, he regarded it
much more in consequence of the manner in
which it had been brought to its present state.
Looking to the names by which the measure had
eventually passed in the other House, he thought
the means by which those names had been obtained
were of great importance.
The Earl of DEVON put it to the Noble Mar-
quis whether it was proper that they should in that
House discuss the grounds upon which Members of
the other House had given their votes ?
Lord KENYON thought the Noble Marquis was
in perfect order in discussing the manner in which
the Bill had come up to that House ; but he was not
in order in commenting on individual votes in the
other House of Parliament.
The Marquis of NORMANBY said that he did
not mean to remark upon the individual votes. But
as it , had been asserted in the other House, dur-
ing the discussion of that Bill, that the working
classes-were not represented in Parliament, he felt it
right to express his regret that anything should have
been done to justify that statement, and to make the
people discontented with the present state of the Con-
stitution, and to impress them with the belief that
however-they might be virtually represented in Par-
•liament, their interestswere not represented. He did
not think that the seat of any one Member of the.
House of Commons would be affected by the vote
which he had given upon that question, because it did
not affect the interest of those who were directly af-
fected. In the northern division of the county of
York there was, even amongst that class of electors,
a strong feeling upon the subject • and there
would be a great deal of surprise that the Go-
vernment, which had received so great a support
there, should stake its existence upon that Bill. If he
supported the Government, he would have thought
their conduct most injudicious and unfortunate. See-
ing that be could gain nothing by resisting the second_
reading of the Bill, he would not oppose it, but con-
tent himself by giving his protest against it.
lord BROUGHAM would occupy the House
very shortly ; but he must say that from-
the very beginning of his Noble Friend's speech to
the end of it, he had only heard reasons
why he (Lord Brougham) was opposed to the Bill in
toto. . He opposed a Twelve Hours' Bill and a Ten
Hours' Bill,—(Hear, hear.)- Those who opposed any
interference with labour might go so far as to agree
with the restriction of twelve hours ; but that was no
reason why they should go a stage further, and vote
for a ten hours He had already so fully expressed
his opinions or, the subject, when the Labour in
Mines Bill was before, the .House, that it was not
necessary to 'take •al) the time of the House at any
length .in that discussion. His Noble Friend re-
gretted that the "House of Commons had come to this
decision, because' he thought that it would be the
means of 'convincing the working classes that the
Reform Bill had not done them justice-4hat they
were not- •represented in that House, because that
branch of the Legislature refused to say that the peo-
ple should have a legislative shackle put upon them,
and that they should not work as many hours as they
found themselves able to do, and as they wished to
work. These shackles would be as oppressive as any
of those brethe other side of the Atlantic. It would
place those people under the shackles of 'an Act of
Parliament, and would not leave them at liberty to
exert- their natural powers to their own best
advantage. -How would any higher class of la-
- bOurers like to be confined to ten boors of labour ?
But it was from the blunder that they would get
, twelve hours' wages for ten hours' work, that the whole
outcry, arose.—(f'!eir, hear.) He could only ascribe.
, the support of tuch a measure as this to a> mistaken
humanity on the part of its promoters.—(Hear.)
hind been said that the agricultural labourers were
exempt from such toil as those engaged in the facto-
ries. It was said that those had more bread and less
labour. But that Was not the fact, and if ever the
qUestion of the condition of labourers in the factories
came before the House, 'he would be prepared to
show that the condition of the agricultural labourers
was. much vvnrse.—(Hear, hear.) He would show
that they were hardly fed, badly clad, severely
wrought.—(Hear, hear.) He would show that in
those districts where fuel was dear, they returned—
men and boys,arstwomen, too—in inclement weather,
through rain and through snow, to houses which
did .'not • keep out the wind and the rain—to
beds which were not once dry throughout
the entire winter—(Hear, hear)—and with clothes
which, in wet seasons, were always wet.—(Hear.)
A boy of 17 followed the plough ; he was exposed to
all species of weather, and yet nobody thought of
protecting him; they left him to make his own bar-
gain, and if he was under the age that bad been
adverted to, he was left to the care of his parents as
his natural protectors. He warned their Lordships,
:not _to interfere-with the provisions of-nature 'vyhich
had implanted in parents the love of their children.
The Legislature ought to interfere between

• Yesterday morning Considerable excitement was created at
the Thames Police-court by 'a rumour that a Man named
Luke Williams, proprietor of the Chequers public-house,
Wapping-wall, had been 'robbed and murdered at a brothel,
6, Brunswick-place, Dorset.;street, Ratcliff. With the ax-.
Ception that the man still breathes, though without the
-slightest chance of recovery, the report proved but too true.
_lt seems' that Williams, though a married man, and nearly
sixty years of age, had formed a connexion with a young
woman named Rosetta sßragger, who resided at 6, Bruns-
wick-place. He had frequently been robbed in that house
before, but 'in consequence' of his attachment to the young
•woman, always refused to give the parties in charge.
`About ten minutes to nine o'clock in the forenoon of yes-
terday, information was conveyed to Sergeant Harris, the
acting inspector; that Williams had been robbed, and was
then lying insensible at his own houSe, in a most precarious
condition. • He immediately directed Wiseman; 156 K, who
• had'been-ori duty in Dorset,-sti•eet the previotis day, together
with Munford, another constable of the K diVision, to lose
. no time in taking into custody all the parties supposed to be
implieated in the robbery and assault; and, accordingly, about
three o'clock, . 'James- Halstead, a coalwhipper, Alexander
Nicholson, al milkman, Mary- Anne. Ashe, and her sister,
,Itotta Bragger, who was, the chief attraction of 'Williams
toJArtinswiek-place, were brought up to this Court, Halstead
being charged with having assaulted Williams, and the three.
latter .with having robbed hini, of about 30/.
Police constable Wiseman stated, that on Sunday-morning,
-about half-past 8 o'clock, -having been informed by Mrs.
Williams that her husband had been, robbed in. Brunswick.;
place of a 20/. note, 4.5/. note, and same-sovereigns, he went
to the place,-,and found Williams outside the door, and was
answered from the window by the prisoner Rose, who re-
) fused to admit either of Ahem. Williams then broke.a pane .
and undid the sash, when theyhot.h entered, and found the
two female prisoners and their mother. -Williams refused to
giveany of:them into.custodv. until the prisoner Nicholson,
who resided in. the house, and had part of the money-, came
honte, when he, would give him and Mary Ann Ashe in
charge... Witness called akmin at .4 in the afternoon, and saw
Williams, as he thought, insensibly drunk on a chair. Mary
Ann Ashe was there,: and 'another sister, named Louisa ;
. but-Nicholson hadnot returned. • The mother of-the female
prisoners told witness that. Williams had. been fighting with
a man outside, who first lent him a shilling. and then knocked
hini down... Mrs. Williams then came and took her husband
_home in. a cab. Yesterday morning about 9 ol.clock,. by di-
rection of Sergeant- Harris who. orderedhim to take all the
parties implicated into- easiody-, witness apprehended Nichol.-
. son on the charge of robbery. At the station house Nichols' ft
fiamitted that he saw Williams on .Saturday . morning with
his . waistcoat-pocket full of severeignt, and received a sove-
reign from,hiin to -get. a- halfrpiat of ruin Witness a,ked
Nieholson, who apPeared.todiave been 'drinking, what money
- he had then •about ,him,: mid he enswered-about a sovereign
in silver but, en being searched, 21. and .6d. in silver, and
4id. in copper, • were,foundupon him. About 11' o'clock the
two• female prisoners were
.apprehended at a cookshOp in
lleoad-street, Ratcliff.• Since then, witness'ascertained that
Williams, who, be understood, was still insensible and not
expeetedto live, had shoWn. two Bank of England notes at a
public-house in Brook-street. When, witness first saw Wil •
lianas he• had a severe. black eye, which he said lie had re-
ceived from Antall named Bragger not yet in custody. and
Who either is, or passes as, the husband; of the female prisonei
of that name. • • •
'Elizabeth Hilliersi proprietress of the King's Head,•at the
corner of Periwinkle street, Ratcliff, saw the man Williams •
'at her house-on Saturday with two notes and some 'gold and
silver, which :he milled out of his pocket,. The gold and
silver Might amount to about 4/, of 51. They, fell from him
at _the bar ; but she picked up the- money_ and returned it to
him, wrapping -tile gold In the note's, and saying " You
foothill man, take care of your money." .
RebeCca Ashe, the mother of the feMal4risoners, said that
on Sunday morning, between 11 and .12, Williams came to
the houSe drunk, and Halstead was authorised by Nicholson
.to turn hini out, 'upon which Hal:stead avid Williams struck
at each'other once. • -
• likorge 13regger said he went to: Porset-street to See his
brother for the purpose of having a
.walk, when he met two-
bolieeinin who told. him Williams had been robbed. Nichol
'son-:came there; but the policemen did not take him into
custody. He slept with Nicholson, who went out at half-
past' five on Monday morning to sell his milk. The witnesS
- said he had been all day at the hopse. No. 6, Brunswick-
••place, with the exception of having ran across•the- street to
the Lainb to get a drop of beer. When he returned be saw
Williains on rise ground, bleeding at the mouth, and Halstead
Over him. -Witness sad, " Came : we've had quite enough
' of 'that.; let us have no inoretof it."
..3fr. Rose, surgeon, Of High-street, Shadwell, sew Williams
at ten o'clock on Sunday night, when ha was quite insensible,-
Witness bel;eVed from sompe exterual injury'. •The left
eye•was.black and the' lower. lip, cut apd swollen. • Witness
could not swear positively whether the injured man-was ro-
ditCed to his present state by drunkenness or external-violence,
untTafter a post mortm -examination. Mrs. Williams could
testify es to his state before the injury ; hut she was at present
at hispld side. 'Witness endeavoured to rouse him, but in
Fain; sad there was no likelihood of his surviving two hours
longer; -neither was it probable that bis depositions could be
taken.
bik_roiedot
totohatv,hee
initiflan
her;
• —The ewmtlo34/IViseman saidthat the witness Bragger was
ietned4- thYee:t 'in:
ucustodde.Ci't oa3hdy7thhoe wads sup
itinenielliridestihn74"tuteedvtryYthrsile_obstacle in the way of the
not•
in custody? By
Mr. BALLANTYNE--Th police,
is• • •
his own showing he WasellaMw-ohir
eud intraa
ufn:fane.rred.'tallet:Petb°u.aPeledockimp,l,iaticateo:gisnt
a transaction likely
Bragger was immediately
liirt.llße_rti.L.l.Pris7Texrrisx• reman. ded.the:prisennlersakeundtepilo:tedivolentra
day, and directed that immediate• notice shouldbe given
Williams so far recovered as to be able to
We have since learned that the unfortunate man died in
the course of the evening. • -
The deceased was fifty-eight years ofuge, and Was formerly.
. a courier in the service of her Majesty's Govertnnent. He
was superannuated a few years ago on a pensiOn 'of 80/. per
annum. -

vernment had altered their former detemination,,and
they now intended, in the course of the present ses-
sion, to take a vote for the purpose of dredging the
harbour of Port Patrick and Donaghadee.
The Earl of GALLOWAY expressed a hope that
steamers of great power would be placed upon this
station.
After a few. words from the Marquis of DOWN-
SHIRE, the subject dropped.
CHESTER AND HOLYHEAD RAILWAY.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE wished to put
a question to the Government on the subject of the
Chester and Holyhead Railway, as it was called. He
wished to learn whether the Government would have
any objection to refer this Bill to a Select Committee,
inasmuch as he understood that if it should pass, a con-
siderable sum of public money would be expended by
the Government in carrying out the project ?
The Earl of DALHOUSIE said there was no ob-
jection on the part of the Government to the appoint-
ment of such a Committee, but he would remind their
Lordships that the eubject had already been fully dis-:
cussed in both Houses of Parliament. •
After a few words from Lord KENYON,
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE gave notice
that he, should to-morrow move that this Bill be re-
ferred to a• Select Committee.
YORK AND SCARBOROUGH RAILWAY
BILL.
Earl FOBTESCUE brought up the report on this
and moved that the Committee be postponed till
the 31st inst.
Earl -FITZWILLIAM thought this Compiny
ought to be allowed to make some deviation in. their
line, inasinuch as by the present plan it, would pass on
a level near to the private residences 'of many gen-
tlemen at Clifton. He had understood that in the
distance between York and Scarborough there was
to be only a' single line. He would ask their Lord--
ships if they thought it wise to allow ,of a single line
for such distance ?—(Hear, hear.) He also under-
stood that it was intended to close the line between •
Malden and Scarborough for a certain period of the
year. He hoped their Lordships would look to 'the
management of those schemes.; for, though he was a
friend_ to railways, be thought the House should look.
closely to the propriety 'of single lines for long dis-
tances, and of excluding the public from the advan-
tage of the improved communication during parts of
the year.
The Marquis of NORMANBY deprecated the
'discussion at that stage of the Bill.
After a few words from the Earl of FORTES-
CUE in explanation, the motion was agreed to.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a peti-
tion from Limerick, praying their Lordships to pass
a Bill to legalise Art-Unions.
The Earl of DARTMOUTH- presented a petition
from the. Royal Birmingham and Midland Counties
'Art-Union to the same effect.
Lord BEAUMONT said that he should to-mor-
row move for papers relating to the trial of a Maltese
British subject at Tunis.
FACTORIES BILL.
Lord _WHARNGLIFFE then rosé to move the
second reading of the Factories• Bilk Their'LOrd-
ships would no doubt expect some explanation from
[ him as to what the Bill was, although he did not ,

• ••••••-•
----
2111UNIFICENT George Bayly, Esq., of
Brunswick-terrace, Plymouth, has Oven the munificent
sum of 2,000 L t 6 trustees in perpetuity, the interest of
which is. to be appropriated for ever as follows :-201.
'year lo,the'Devon'and Corn*li Female Orphan: My-
'2ol 'l6 the trevthi "Cornwall 'lrapital riot. to
the Eye Infirmary ; and 101. to the Free School.— West

TEE SUN, LONDON, llTTEibli,:k EVENING, MAY 21, 1544.

. •

ROUSW,OF COMMONS, May 20.
The SPEAkilietOok the' Chair at Four o'clock.

MANCHESTER RAILWAY.

On the motion that this Bill be read a third time.

parent and child, the effect of which would inevitably
be to deaden, the natural feelings of nature. The
present Bill had made a great change in the law with
respect to factories—it had provided with respect to
women that they should not work over a certain num-
ber of hours, supposing that a woman was not com-
petent to make a bargain as well as any one else.
He would not object to the Bill further, except enter-
ing his protest. against it, believing that the best
course to adopt would be to leave those who laboured
in factories to legislate for themselves as to the time
they should Work.—(Hear, hear:)
The Marquis of NORMANBY explained.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA considered this Bill
to be a great improvement on the present law, but he
could not but express his regret that the limitation of
the labour of children in factories had not been re-
duced to ten hours. He believed that theutmosphere
they breathed was of the most pernicious character.
They could not compare the agricultural labourer
with the manufacturing labourer, because the former
breathed fresh air while the other inhaled
the most obnoxious vapours. He thought the
Legislature had very justly established the principle
of Interference. Ten hours was the extent of labour
which the great body of the agricultural
labourers in this country underwent. Such a
picture of misery among the agricultural labourers, as
the Noble Lord had drawn, did not, and could not
exist ; but he trusted the time would come when the
manfacturers themselves would find it to their advan-
tage to limit the hours of labour of children in their
factories.
Lord CAMPBELL supported the Bill. Re could
not agree with his Noble Friend that the Legislature
ought not to interfere, because he thought there were
cases in which the Legislature ought to interfere
with labour. He thought they could not safely go
further in the reduction of labour than twelve hours;
-and he believed that there never was an instance of
less labour than that of the manufacturers of this
country, with the exception of the case alluded to by
Sir Thomas More with respect to Utopia.—(Hear,
hear.) The 'Noble Lord, having read an extract
from the writings of Sir Thomas, proceeded :
Until his Noble Friend could persuade him that the
statement of Sir Thomas More with respect to Utopia
was correct he (Lord Campbell) should persist in
supporting the Twelve Hours' Bill.
The Earl of HADDINGTON said that her Majesty's
Government had been accused of inconsistency with
respect to this measure. He could not for a moment
Understand upon what ground this assertion had been
made. It had been said that her Majesty's Ministers, in
the other House ofParliament, were exceedinglyanxious
that their supporters Should give votes in accordance
with the wishes of their constituents, and they de-
termined upon' relying for *support with respect to
that Bill apon their political opponents. Now, he
Could not allow this foolish assertion to go forth with-
out protesting, in his place in Parliament, against it.
A more absurd proposition was never put forth, for it
was ridiculous to suppose that any Government could
resort to such a feeble attempt to obtain support for
any measure whatever.
The Earl of MINTO objected to this measure, not
on the ground of its not going far enough, but on the
ground that it went a great deal too far. He was
entirely opposed to any interference with adult la-
bour whatever. _ _ .

not aware, from the notice, of the extent to which the
Right Hon. Gentleman intended to go. He confessed
he did not see why greater facilities should be afforded
to speculators of this kind than to any others. It
had been proved before the Committee that one
hundred labourers had received five shillings each
for signing five different names, subscribing
.5,0004 in order to , make out the list for the
prospectus. That was by no means a solitary case.
Now he could not see any inconvenience, when a rail-
way was to be constructed, 'in having the
subscription lodged in Exchequer bills. He thought
that 10 per cent. was not a large sum to deposit. He
had doubts as to the propriety of making these,ex=
ceptions in favour of Railroad Bills. He asked that
before assent to this proposition, the evidence on
which the Committee had determined should be laid
upon the table. He thought this discussion should
be postponed until the evidence should be before the
House.

The. Earl of lIADDINGTON and the Marquis of
NORMANDY briefly explained.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE, in reply, denied that
the Government had used any influence to turn the
,majority in the other House of Parliament in their
-favour. He believed that the agitation which had
been got up • in.the country upon this question had
been got up for improper purposes.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered
• to be comtnittedron the'3lst inst.
.Their Lordships then :adjourned.

-Nkl W WRIT.
On the motion Of 'Sir J. CHETWODE, a new
writ was ordered for the borough of Buckingham, in
the room of Sir Thomas Fremantle, who, since his
election had accepted the office of Secretary at War.
The Whitehaven Railway Bill was read a third
time and passed.
SHEFFIELD, ASHTON-UNDER-LYNE, AND

Mr. ESTCOURT said, that an arbitration clause
had been introduced into this Bill, which, if passed,
he thought would establish a dangerous precedent.
He would, therefore, suggest that the third reading
of the Bill be postponed for a fortnight, in order that
a person might be sent down to Ashton., by the
Board of Trade, to settle the disputed point, and that
a clause founded upon his report should be in-
troduced into the Bill.

Mr. LABOUCHERE, as Chairman of the Com-
mlttee, was inclined to agree with the Hon.
-Gentleman- -in - this proposition, inasmuch as
he believed that the substantial object for which the
Committee had been appointed had been accomplished.
The simple question was how the land which the
Company were ' not about using should be appro-
priated. He was obliged to the Hon. Member for
bringing the matter before the House, and
also thought that his views were the best and
soundest that had been taken of the matter.:
After a few words from Mr. PARKER and Lord
GRANVILLE SOMERSET, the third reading was post-
poned for a fortnight.
The third reading of the Ashton and Staleybridge
Itailway Bill was likewise postponed for a fortnight.
DUBLIN AND CASHEL RAILWAY.

Mr. LABOUCIIERE despaired of being able to
add anything to what had fallen from the Right
Hon. the President of the Board of Trade. He
agreed with the Hon. Member for Montrose, that
when these undertakings were little understood it
was right to have 10 per cent. deposited, but now
that they were better understood such a regulation
was no longer necessary. At a time too when so
many persons were wanting employment, it was es-
pecially desirable to encourage these undertakings.
He could confirm the statement of the Right Hon.
Gentleman that the subject had been fully discussed
in that Committee before the recommendation had
been agreed to.
Sir R. PEEL admitted that the House was not
bound by the recommendation of the Committee, but
still, when they had appointed a Select Committee,
although their recommendation was not binding on
the House of Commons, he thought it was at least
entitled to the respectful consideration of the House..
The Committee was composed of gentlemen ! ad-
mirably qualified to decide upon the subject,
and who had the advantage of— deliberating tipon
it ; but he took higher ground 'upon this Occa-
sion. The carrying of this motion 'would materially
facilitate the passing of the Bill for the construction
of the Dublin and Cashel Railway.—(Hear, hear).
This railway had been undertaken without any
Government grant. It had been undertaken
by persons of every party in politics. It Was of great
importance that the example set in this instance
should be encouraged. It would tend to give employ-
ment to the labouring classes in Ireland ; and he
hoped, before the close of the session, that the Royal
assent would be given to a Bill for the formation of a
railway, between Dublin and Cashel.—(Cheers.)
Mr. 'VERNON SMITH wished for the postpone-
ment of the discussion ; he thought the reason given
by the Hon. Gentleman ought not to influence the
House.

Mr. GLADSTONE said the recommendation did
not extend to more than three or four lines.

Mr. R. FERGUSON said that keeping the order
as it at present stood was a practical fraud, and he
proved that it did not afford the slightest security.
After a few words from Mr. MASTERMAN,

Mr. HUME replied—He had heard no answer to
his objection, and he should, therefore, take the sense
of the House on the question.
Sir R. PEEL said the Hon. Gentleman had mis-
understood him; he had not supported the recom-
mendation for any specific Bill, but for the advantage
it would give to the formation of railways in Ireland
generally.
Mr. WARBURTON supported the motion for the
postponement.
Mr. HUME thought the question ought to be ad-
journed till they got the evidence taken before the
Committee printed. The Hon. Gentleman moved,
that the debate be adjourned.
Mr. GISBORNE thought, if the question was put
off upon the ground stated by the Hon. Member for
Montrose, it would have the effect of putting it off till
the end of the session. He hoped the House would
at once agree to the resolution.
After some observations from Mr. HUME and Mr.
GLADSTONE, the amendment of Mr. Hume was with-
drawn, and the motion was agreed to.

Mr. HAMILTON presented a petition from the
Grand Jury of Dublin, in favour of the line of Rail-
way between Dublin and Cc/vibe!.
Mr. GLADSTONE rose to move that as much of
the Fourth Report of the Select Committee on Rail
ways as related to the alteration of the 33d standing
order be adopted by the House. The adoption
of this proposition was a matter of great importance
to all-. parties connected with railway property.
In proposing the repeal of that part of the standing
order which related to deposits, he by no means
wished to cast the slightest imputation on the stand-
ing order itself. When made, it might have been the
best which the House could adopt, and he had no
doubt it was a wise and salutary provision.—(Hear.)
Its operation had been this, that money was ad-
vanced, and so far the House had a guarantee that
the
,parties connected with the Bill were acting
bona fide. But, with regard to the persons by whom
the money was to be deposited, the Standing Order
Was not complied with, for the money was principally
advanced by persons interested in the new
scheme who had the. command of capital.
The standing order was passed with a view of dis-
countenancing unsound speculations, but it operated
also to check those speculations which were sound in
themselves, and at a time when trade was depressed,
when it was rather desirable to stimulate undertakings
of this description. So far as regarded those periods
which were not periods of active speculation generally
the reduction' of the deposits would produce almost
unmixed good. It might be asked what security had
they except from the deposits ? His answer was,
they did not propose to do away with
the deposits altogether, but to reduce them,
and the great advantage of deposits was not so much
in their amount as in their being deposits of any
amount. But he thought it would be necessary that the
- House should 'take some measures to make a more
strict examination into Railway Bills than heretofore
—that they should look more narrowly into the
public reasons and objects of such Bill than
- they were-"previously .accustomed to do—(Hear)
—because he admitted that if it was probable they
should continue for future years to abide by the same
unregulated proceedings with regard to Railway Bills,
which prevailed to a great extent up to the present
time, the proposition which he now made, although it
might be deserving of adoption on some grounds,
would, on, the whole,: be liable to grave objections.
He was not now prepared
.to explain in definite terms
the precise nature of the measure to which he referred,
because its precise hature was now occupying the
anxious attention of the COmmittee to which that
House had delegated 'inquiry upon the whole subject
of railways I- but he did say that some measure for
,the examination of railway schemes was requisite, and
it was because he -believed that proposition to be in-
disputable, that he ventured to put it to the House
that they might proceed so far as to part with a cer-
tain portion of the security which they had hitherto
possessed. The proposition which he now made to the
Hotise would have the effect of assimilating the rule of
the House of Commons to the rule which subsiited in
the House of Lords, and he had been apprised on good
authority that that rule was not adopted by the House
of Lords without mature consideration, which he
thought an additional recommendation for the adop-
tion- of his proposition. He therefore begged leave to
move that the standing Order, No. 33 be rescinded.
There was another matter to which he wished to refer.
It had been suggested that the parties, instead of being
obliged to deposit money, should be allowed
.to deposit
Exchequer bills or other public securities. It ap-
peared to those parties' that they were obliged to
leave money in an unfruitful state when it was thus
deposited. But there was nothing in the Act of
Parliament which should prevent the invest-
ment of ,those deposits in the public secu-
rities after the deposits had been, made.
He did not think it would be expedient that Parlia-
ment should require the money to lie without pro-
dueing • interest, -because that would be imposing a
pecuniary fine. Such was not the case as the law
stood at that moment, and therefore the Committee
had not made any recommendation. .
The Clerk having read 'the Order at full length; .
Mr. HUME said he had listened with great
attention to what -had fallen from the Right Inn.
Gentleman, but, looking at the-evils which the stand-
ing order was intended to prevent, he had great
doubts as to the propriety of abrogating it. He was