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

tleman, in a publication then in his (Lord Ashley's) hand, said,
" This was not the first time he had addressed the public on the
subject. of factory labour. When he reflected on the respon-
Bible situation he held in that town, and that a
whole mass of his people wart engaged in that
labour, he felt he should be warring against justice and against
his own conscience if he did not stand forward to claim protec-
tion for the factory children and women." Now had he ( Lord
Ashley) stated anything beyond that ?—(" Hear, hear," loud
cries of "Divide, divide," and confusion.) He was stating
facts—quoting facts—and he only did so on compulsion—he
only did so because the statements he had made had that night
been questioned.—( Hear, hear.) He would now go to Halifax,
where Mr. Robert Sutton, as he understood a most highly
respectable man, had publicly stated, " that the factory people
could not stand such excessive and protracted labour, which
incapacitated all of them for the proper duties of life, and more
especially the women for those domestic duties which nature
had specially awarded to them." Had he (Lord Ashley) stated
anything but this ?—( Hear, hear, and confusion.) He was
a, are he was trespassing on the patience of the House, but
when he commenced his address he stated that he had not in-
tended to have said one word upon the subject that night, but
as he had been called to account so sharply for his conduct and
his statements, he had felt called upon, in duty to the cause and
to himself, to reply to the charges which had been made.
—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear." Amidst great con-
fusion the Noble Lord then read several extracts
from speeches made by Mr. Samuel Smith. an eminent
surgeon of the north, at a meeting (as we thought) at Chorley,
and by Mr. John Moore, at a meeting at Bolton.) The latter
gentleman, who had been a medical practitioner in Bolton for
upwards of forty years, had declared publicly that the race was
rapidly degenerating, and that unless something were done the
most serious evils to society would take place.—(Great con-
fusion, and loud cries of " Divide.") He (Lord Ashley) had
never said more than this. As, however, the House was se
impatient, many as were the authorities he had it in his power
still to produce, he would not detain them. What he had
stated had been forced from him.—( Hear, hear.) He never
intended to have said a word that night, but for the attack
made upon him, and in addressing the House at all he had
been forced into it in self-defence, to show that all he had
stated in his speech upon a former occasion had been borne out
by facts and statements that nothing could impugn.—( Hear,
hear, and loud cries of " Divide.")
Mr. C. WOOD rose with Mr. Bright, Mr. Ainsworth, and
others, amidst a complete shout of " Divide, divide," " Oh,
oh," and other discordant cries. The other Hon. Gentlemen
succumbed to the storm, but Mr. Wood persevered, and after
a struggle with the House, was permitted to address them,
though amidst continued interruptions. The Hon. Gentleman
was understood to say that no one in that House was more sa-
tisfied than he was that the Noble Lord who had just sat down
was incapable of wilfully making any mis-statement in that
House, or anywhere else. The statements, too, which he had
mate, and which, no doubt, he thought himself compelled to
make, had nothing to do with the question before the House.
—( Hear, hear.) The question of the Hon. and Learned Alem •
ber for Bath was simply this, whether they should or should not
interfere with the labour of young people. For his (Mr.
Wood's) part, he never in his life came to a conclusion more un-
hesitatingly than he did this night, that it was his duty to
vote with the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath; for he
knew nothing more unsafe or unwise than to interfere with that
discretion which all persons had a right to exercise as regarded
their own labour.—( Hear and confusion.) In his opinion the
House ought not to interfere upon the subject at all ; but if it
would do so, then the next best thing he and others could do
was to persuade the House to interfere as little as possible.
He could not acquit the Government of depai ting from a
general rule and principle for the first time. They were now,
for the first time, about setting the example of violating an-
other principle. The Government admitted that they had
abandoned principles, and now there was nothing to guide
them but the caprice of Hon. Members, and where this was to
stop it was impossible to tell. The First Lord of the Trea-
sury, and the Secretary of State for the Home Department,
had stated that it was a necessary consequence of the Bill of
1833, which regulated the labour of children in factories. Ac-
cording to his (Mr. Wood's) opinion, that measure was
founded upon a different principle, namely, protecting those
who could not protect themselves.—(Cries of " Divide,
&vide.") That measure was not to restrict the labour of
children alone, but factory labour altogether. If it was the object
of the Government to restrict the hours of labour of all persons
in factories to ten, eleven, or twelve hours, let that be stated
--let there be no shuffling, but let the Government bring in a
Bill on the subject.—( Cries of " Divide, divide.") He be-
lieved it was most injurious to the workman himself to in-
terfere with his labour, and he for one was unwilling to do by
legislation for any man what he could do for himself. He
knew that a public meeting of his constituents had been held
on this question, and that the opinion of that meeting was in
favour of a Ten Hours' Bill. But that did not at all affect
what he had stated in that House, that up to the time of hold-
ing that meeting no representation on the subject had reached
him. The inference he drew from this was, that they did not
take much interest in the matter. He did not believe that
the measure would improve either the morals, the religion, or
the education of the working classes, but any other measure
that would better their condition he should be ready to support.
Mr. P. AINSWORTH rose to complain of a matter some-
what personal to himself. At an early part of the evening, the
Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had accused him of in-
tolerance, and this charge he denied was well founded. With
respect to the Bill, he thought a limitation might be effected.
The legislative regulations that had been already introduced in
the factories had done no harm to the masters, and had effected
great good for the working classes; even with respect to the
cleanliness and ventilation of the mills this had been the case ;
it had also done much for the education of the children in these
districts, which heretofore had been totally neglected. If the
Government would proceed wisely and judiciously, he thought
much good might be done by legislation ; and when the propo-
sition came before the House, he should be prepared to support
the plan which the House had already sanctioned, by rejecting
both the proposal for ten hours and twelve hours, the plan
of fixing eleven hours as the limit of labour.
Mr. ROEBUCK said he had never made any charge of
a particular nature against the Hon. Member, of intolerance.
While speaking, he heard a running commentary behind him,
and he made a general observation that those who had changed
very often themselves were often the most intolerant to change
in others. . .

Mr. FIELDEN and M. C. BULLER rose together, but the
latter Hon Gentleman having given way,
Mr. FIELDEN commenced by referring to a statement of
the Hon. Member for Halifax (Mr. C. Wood) that the workers
of that place were not in favour of a Ten Hours' Bill. He went
amongst the constituency of the Hon. Gentleman to ascertain
that fact. He attended a meeting there, and, after reading the
the words of the Hon. Gentleman, he put this question to
them—" Has Mr. Wood fairly represented you when he made
this statement? "—cries of " No, no."—(Laughter.) Then
he put this question to them—" Do you wish a Ten Hours'
Factory Bill to be passed without delay ? "—cries of " Yes,
yes."—(Loud laughter.) He then put a third question to
them—( Laughter)—" Are you willing to run the risk of
wages being reduced if a Ten Hours' Factory Bill
be passed?"—loud cries of "We are, we are." He then
put a fourth question to them.—( A laugh.) "Do you autho-
rise me to state this in the House of Commons ?"—cries of
" Yes, yes." He knew the Hon. Member had as kind a feeling
towards the people of Halifax as anybody, but he did not repre-
sent their feelings fairly on this subject; and if he went to Ha-
lifax—( Laught er)—to the Odd Fellows Hall—( Loud laughter)
—he was convinced he would come from the meeting as well
persuaded as he (Mr. Fielden) was, that they had not properly
represented their feelings on this subject. He had no such fears
as those entertained by the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath,
with regard to legislation on this 'subject. The Hon. and
Learned Gentleman said that the factory labourers had the
power to protect themselves, and had thrown out hints that if
they held out for a short time they would accomplish their ob-
ject. Did they wish, then, to have a turn-out in Yorkshire ?
( Hear, hear.) Was it wise to encourage such a thing ?---
(Hear, hear,) He believed they would not succeed. They
were helpless, and that was the reason they ought to interfere.
He had always thought the business of the Legislature was to
protect the weak against the strong.—( Hear, hear.) That
was the principle of protection he contended for; and he had
never thought it was very wrong to attempt to do that.—( Hear,
hear.) If they were of that opinion, they should not be de-
terred from carrying the principle into practice.—
( Hear' hear.) Their own inspectors recommended it,
They should not forget that the poor had at one time a claim
of maintenance upon the land.—( Hear, hear.) They were
deprived of that right. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman
assisted in depriving them of it. That was protection from
lawyers.—(Laughter.) No humane man in the country would
agree with the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. He believed
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman knew nothing of the effect
of shortening the duration of the hours of labour. —( Laughter. )
( The Hon. Gentleman went on making allusions to the Hon.
and Learned Member for Bath, who sat exactly under him,
which excited considerable merriment in the House, but from
the low tone of voice in which the Hon. Member spoke, and the
la,ghter of the House, their import did not reach us.) He
denied that a curtailment of the hours of labour would have
the effect ascribed to it. He appealed to the Hon. Member fur
Sheffield on the point. The period of the labour of some of
the constituents of the Hon. Member was reduced to 7/1 hours
a day, and they got more wages fur those 76 hours labour than
when they worked twelve hours. He thought it would be
hard to convince the people of Sheffield that they were not
benefited by this.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) He could say
that all which had been advanced by several Hon. Members of
this House was contrary to the interests-of the working classes.
He thought that if the hours of labour were restricted to ten
hours instead of twelve, it would tend much to Improve the
moral and physical condition of the people.
Mr. PHILIPS could say that he seldom had heard a speech
more strongly marked by an anti-national spirit than that of
the Hon. Member for Oldham. With respect to the town of
Sheffield, he (Mr. M. Philips) could assure the House that
the system of combination lately adopted in that town, by
which the duration of the hour of labour was diminished, had
driven many of the principal manufacturers out of the country.
He himself had been engaged in the foreign trade of this
country, and he understood that there was no town throughout
England had suffered wore than Sheffield from these eh corn-
stances. If in extending the operation of these prin-
ciples to other towns, they thought they would secure higher
wages, he could assure them they were much mistaken ;
for the result would be, that they would be placing the interests
of those trades in jeopardy. He had the interests of the ope-
ratives of the country too much at heart to adopt this mea-
; sure, and he should, consequently, vote for the motion of his
Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Bath, for he cer-
tainly could not reconcile with his conscience the justice of in-
terfering, in the slightest degree, with the application of adult
labour. The Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for
the Home Department had stated that many of his (Mr. P.'s)
constituents were in favour of a limitation of labour, or at least
regarded the matter with indifference. Now, the fact was,
that property had been so considerably diminished in many
parts of Lancashire, that many of the manufacturers looked
with apparent indifference upon the whole matter. In the
town of Manchester there was not more than twelve mills
which worked more than twelve hours. He, for one, was
most anxious that the artisan should not he obliged to
work more than ten hours ; but he thought, in the
the present state of the country, this could not be done.
It they worked more than twelve hours a day, those doing so of
course received the higher wages for it. The Hon. Member
sat down amidst much confusion and cries of "divide, divide."
Mr. PARKER thought, after what had been stated con-
cerning Sheffield, they must feel convinced of the propriety of
allowing the labourers to be perfectly free agents in this
matter. He was also very much opposed to any inter-
ference with employment of adult labour, because he
thought any such interference would be fraught with
the utmost danger, and have a decided tendency to destroy the 1
prosperity of the country. He felt convinced, therefore, that
the only plan for this House to adopt was a plain and intelli-
gible proposition ; and instead of talking of ten or twelve hours,
declare that they would not interfere with adult labour, but
that all labourers who had arrived at the years of discretion,
should exercise their labour as they liked; and that the House had
no right to interfere with their free-will in the slightest degree.
With respect to infant labour, he considered it to be a different
question, but this was a question upon which he should not
then speals,,but leave it to others better acquainted with the
matter.—The House then divided—
Forind going into Committee
For 11Ir. Roebuck's amendment ... 76
Majority against the amendment......... 206
dTh immediately
house
a ot
ECCLESIASTICALet
ilthenoyn resumed,ow fe nDtr into
5 llco ntid CommitteeoacyL COURTS
Ln xfßpet
rTr o
beingfo
going
nrmCommit-
anfixed
for proceeding with the Committee.
BILL.g athintoe on
day
On the mi
tee on this Bill,