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

and calculations "of the Hconourable Member for
Lisketu:d . (Mr.. Charles Buller), but those ealculaticrns
had been read so rapidly by him that he was unable to follow
him through them even were he willing, which at that late
hour he was not, to trouble the House by replying to them.
But since he had submitted his own calculations to the House
on a former occasion, .be bad sent to the Factory Inspectors,
who had submitted them to sit of the Most etperienced master
manufacturers in Lancashire. That- calculation showed that
the necessary reduction of wages, consequent on this measure
being carried, would he between 23 and 25 per Cent. ; and he
could assure the House that the master manufacturers he -al-
luded to had made calculations from their own books,'
and -they all concurred that his calculation was'
thoroughly a correct one. Now if the House Should
be of opinion that one of the two things which be (Sir J.
Graham) feared would happen—either that this dreadful dimi-
nution of wages would occur, or that our machinery and
capital would fly to other lands, and cause a consequent awful
diminution in the labour of our own ; if the House should think
either oe both of these evils would result, surely it must pause
before consenting to a measure like this.—( Hear; hear.) He
was bound to state he felt himself and his Hon. Colleagues
behind him most painfully situated in being opposed by a great
body of gentlemen with whom he had voted with very great
satisfaction, and from whom the Government' had received a
constant and cordial support. Rut he (Sir J: Graham.) was so
deeply impressed with the magnitudeof the interests involved
in the principle then under discussion, that he felt—and
said it most sincerely, and with pain—that he could not yield
one point on the present occasion.—( Loud cheers.) All was
&esti° the -balance to him compared with the sense of duty
which controlled him.--(Loud cheers.) He was quite satis- -
fled our.-manufacturing and commercial prosperity was at
stake, and on this prosperitythe House might depend that the
peace, happiness, and'_future prosperity of this country were
indissolubly connected.—( Loud cheers.) To nothing
could he (Sir James Graham) consent which might
threaten Seriously to interfere with our commercial
end manufacturing -greatness. And it was, he conceived, the
duty of those who felt as he did, who entertained the same
opinions, the 'same views and the same fears that he did, to
resist the attempt which was now niade to confirm the vote
of the other night. He put it to the House to rescind that
vote, believing as he did, that it was a most dangerous one. .
—( Cheers.) He did feel called upon to entreat the House
carefully to reconsider the decision they had come to on
former occasion. If it was re-affirmed he should view it with
the deepest regret; if it was reversed with the highest satis-
faction; for by such a vote only could he now look forward
to the maintenance of the greatest interests of this country.
Mr. COLLETT (amidst tremendous uproar) was under-
stood to say that he should vote for the Noble Lord (Ashley)
and against the proposition of the Government.
Mr. BECKETT said that it had been stated that he was
not justified in stating what he did on a former occasion.
Did the Right Hon. Gentleman who had made that statement
recollect what he did state? If he did, he was sure he would
not have made the statement. He hoped he should stand in
in the opinion of the Committee as incapable of making
statements that he did not believe. He had stated
that he was for an Eleven Hours' Bill ; but
he was decidedly opposed to a twelve hours' one, and that was
the opinion of his constituents. Now, there was a memorial
that had been presented to the Government, and what was the
statement in that memorial? Why, they wished the present
Bill to be withdrawn, rather than have the ten hours, and they'
said that they would get as much out of an Eleven Hours' Bill
as a thirteen one.

Sir J.-GRAHAM wished to read part of the memorial. It
was signed by Mr. Marshall, and most of the principal flax-
spinners in Leeds, and a considerable portion of the woollen
manufacturers. Now what was stated in that memorial ? Why
that the hours of working fin. women and young people were not
oppressive or injurious to health—that the reduction of time
by fifty-eight hours per week, which would bo the effect of the
Noble Lord the Member for Dorsetshire's proposition, would be
followed by a serious reduction in the earnings of the women,
and would inflict upon the memorialists the most serious con-
sequences. The Honourable Member for Leeds had stated
that the manufacturers were desirous of an Eleven Hours'
Bill. Now what did the memorialists themselves state? Why
that they were desirous that no legislative enactments should
be made that would infringe upon the present system and they
trusted that the Government would withdraw the Bill, if the
ten hours' clause was insisted on.
Mr. ALDAM said that the memorial was signed by six or
seven of the largest flax-spinners in Leeds; in fact, he be.,
lieved that none of the manufacturers of that article
had refused to sign it. It was signed also by a
great number of the woollen manufacturers of that town,
and he believed ' that only ten manufacturers in the
place • had refused to append their names to it.
On the whole, the opinion of the manufacturers in Leeds was
against a Ten Hours', and in favour of an Eleven Hours', Bill.
—(Cheers.) In point of fact, the adoption of an Eleven
Hours' Bill would not make any material difference. The
present hours of labour were eleven and a half in the flax
manufacture, and eleven in the woollen manufacture. The
manufacturers of Leeds were anxious for an Eleven Hours'
Bill, as a final settlement of the question.
Mr. MITCHELL had on Tuesday conversed with one of
the largest flax 'manufacturers in the kingdom on the subject.
The Leeds manufacturers were merely flax spinners. That
gentleman was a flax manufacturer, he employed upwards of
4,000 people as bleachers, dressers, weavers, and spinners. In
answer to his question as to what would be the effect of a reduc-
tion of the hours of labour to ten hours, that gentleman had
stated that one-sixth of the men of his establishment, who
were employed in dressing, weaving, and bleaching, would be
thrown out of employment.
Lord HOWICK reminded the Hon. Member for Leeds
that they were about to divide on the question whether twelve
should be the number of hours of labour or not, and if they
vote t against the motion, if twelve should be rejected, it would
be still competent to either of them to propose that the blank
should be filled up with eleven.
Sir I. GRAHAM reminded the Committee, that the qua-
tion was. whether they should adopt ten hours or not ?
Mr. HINDLEY wished to ask the 'Chairman what was the
question upon which they were really going to divide?
Mr. GREENE (the Chairman) said that the amendment
before the House, and upon which he should first put the
question was, that the blank should be filled up with the word
" ten." If that should be rejected, it would be competent to
any Member to move that the blank should be filled up with
the word " eleven." If that were negatived, then the next
question would be that it should be filled up with the word
" twelve."

Mr. MUNTA wished to draw the attention of the Com-
mittee to a very paradoxical statement made by the Hon.
Member for Clitheroe. He had stated that no masters paid so
little as the English masters, and no men received so much as
the English workmen. Now he knew something of the manu-
facturers on the Continent, and h• believed that, in many cases
the foreign manufacturers paid much less than the English
manufacturers, and that the English workmen received much
less than many of the foreign workmen. He believed there
was not any one acquainted with the manufacturers of the
Continent who could not contradict the statement of the Hon.
Member for Clitheroe.

Strangers 'were then ordered to Withdraw, and the Committee
divided, when there appeared—
For the twelve hour clause
Against it— lB6
Majority against the Government --3
A second division then took place before strangers, were ad-
mitted, on the ten hours' clause, when there appeared—
For the clause
Against it
Majority against the clause -7
On eur return to the gallery we found
Sir JAMES GRAHAM addressing the House. He said
the House had decided that there should neither be a Twelve
Hours' nor an Eleven Hoene Bill. He respected the decision of
the House, and he had a great regard for the great interest con-
cerned; and be thought he would best discharge his duty by
postponing till Monday any further proceeding. He thought,
therefore, that all would agree with him that the Chairman
should report progress and ask leave to sit again.
Lord ASHLEY, amidst much confusion, said—No one can
he more ready than lam to bow to the decision of the House.
I ventured at the outset to make a very solemn appeal to your
feelings, and I will not presume to impugn, even in thought,
the justice or humanity of this august assembly.—( Hear.)
Although defeated now, I think I am not guilty of presump-
tion in saying that I have a right, and that I will reserve to
myself that right, of endeavouring to assert the principle I
have this evening advocated, on every legitimate occasion. I
will persevere to the very latest period of my existence ; and I
have not the slightest doubt that, in a very short time from this
period, by God's blessing, I shall hare a complete triumph.
The CHAIRUAN then reported progress, and the House
resumed.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned, at a Quarter before Two, to Monday next.

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS.

(From As Votes and Proceedtngs of the House of Commons.)
THURSDAY, MAZCIII 21.

EDINBURGH AND GLASGOW, fn., RAILWAY

BILLS.

•
Motion made, and Question put, " That the Order made on
Friday, the 15th day of this instant March, That it be an in-
struction to the Committee of Selection to refer the Edin-
burgh and Glasgow, the Slamannan and the Edinburgh,
Leith, and Newhaven Railway Bills to the same Committee, be
discharged, in so far as relates to the Edinburgh and Glasgow
Railway Bill ; and that the Committee on the said Bill have
leave to sit and proceed on Wednesday next, without further
notice :" The House divided :

MINORITY—AYES, 6b.
Baring, F. T.—Portsmouth Hodgson,lßd.—Berwick.on Tweed
Barron, Sir H. W.—Waterford Houldsworth, T.—Nottinghamsh
Bell, M.—S. Northumberland Howard, C. W. o.—Ctunt,erland
Bellew, R. M.—Louth Howard, Hon. E. G.— Morpeth
Berkeley, Hon. H. F.—Bristol Howick, Viscount—Sunderland
Blake, Martin J.—Galway James, William—Cumbertind
Bowring, Dr.—Bolton Johnstone, A.—Renfrew, Aro
Brotherton, J.—Salford Labouchere, Right Hon. Henry—
Buckley, E.—Newcastle-on-Tyne Taunton
Butler, Him. P.—Kilkenny Co.' Leader, J.-Temple—Westminster
' Miller, P. S.—Kilkenny County Macnamara, Major—flare
Byng, George—Middlesex ' "Murray,. Alex.--Kirkcudbright
Childers, John W.—Malton Mitcalfe, H.—Tynemouth •
Collett, John—Athlone MorrliOn. Ames—lnverness
Cowper, Hon. W. F.—Hertford O'Connell M. J.-Kerry
Denistoun. J.—Glasgow Pat 'hon. James—London -
Divett, Edward—Exeter :.Pbilips, U. R...-Poole
Duncan, Viscount—Bath Plurnridge, Captain—Peuryn and
Duncan, G.—Dundee Falmouth
Duncombe, T. S.--Finsbury Ramsbottom, J.—Windcor
Ebrington, Lord—Plymouth . Russell, Lord John—London
Ellice, Edward—St. Andrew's Russell, C.—Reading
Forster, M.—Berwick-onTweed dcholegeld, J.—Birmingham
French, F.—Roscommon Stock, Dr.—Cashel
Gill, T.—Plymouth Strickland, Sir o.—Preston
Gistorne,aThomas—Nottingham Turner, Edmund—Truro
Greenall, P.—Wigan Walker, R.—Bury, Lancashire
(frey, Sir George.:—Devonport Wall, C. Baring—Guildford . .
Grimsditch, T.—Macclesfield Wallace, Robert—Greenock
Guest, J. J.—Merthyr Tydvil Wawn, J. T.—South Shields
Hastie, Archibald—Paisley Wilshere, William—Yarmouth
Hawes, B.—Lambeth Wyse, Thorns—Waterford
Hay, Sir A. L—Elgin, &c.
Hinde, J. Hodgson—NewCastle- TELLERS.
upon-Tyne Gibson, T. M.—Manchester
Hindley, Charles—kshton Macaulay, "I' B.—Edinburgh

William—Lanarkshire
MAJORITY...:NOES, 66. . • •
Alba, J. P.—Cambridgeshire Loch, Jam —Kirkwall
H. B.—Marlborough Mackenzie, Thomas—Ross-shlre
Borthwick, P.—Evesham
ig,rettLeo,,rdminster
i‘Locpokelanscrhty..
Mackinnon, W. A.—Lymlegton
Baring, W.
George—Leominster
Lperb isbuyri nheir
Darby, Bradshaw, Jamea—Canterbury Mahon, Viscount— Hertford
Bruges, W. H. L.—Devizes Manners, Lord J.—Newark
Buller, Edward—Stafford ~ Marshall, Wm.—Carlisle
Burrell,.Sir C.—Shoreham ' Marsham, Lord—West Kent
Clerk. Sir G.—Stamford Marton, Geo.—Lancaster
Colquhoun, John C.—Newcastle. Master, T. W. C...Cirencester
under Lyme
_
Cosperblya.nd W...Stoke-urron.Trent Mundy, lE.7lta. in H.—Lisburne
George.—East Sussex . - Patten, J. Wilson—Lancashire
Denison, E. B.—West Yorkahir Peel, Col. Jonathan—Huntingdon
Dodd, G.—Maldstone Praed, W. T.—St. Ives
Douglas, Sir H.... Liverpool Pringle,lAlexander—S .1k rksh ire
Douglas, Sir C. E.—Warwick Rashleigh, W.—East Cornwall
Duncombe,Hon A.—East Retford Round, John—Maldon:
Egerton, W. Tatton—Cheshire Rui.hbrooke Colonel—Suffolk
Ewart, William—Dumfries Shaw, Bight' Hon. F.—Dublin Un
Filmer, Sir E.—West Kent ' Shirley, E. J —Warwickshire _—
Flower, Sir J.—Thetford Shirley, E.—Monaghan
Fuller, A. Es—East Sussex Somerset, Lord G.—Monineuthsh.
•Gaskell, James Milnes—Wenlock Sotheron, T. FL—Desires
Gladstone, W. E.—Newark-on Staunton, Sir Geo.—Poi tsmouth
Trent • Stuart, H.—Bedford 1
Gladstone, Captain—lpswich Strutt, Edward—Derby -
Glynne, Sir S. 11—Flintshire Thompson, Ald.—Sunderland
Gordon_, Hon. W.—Abenteenshi re 'horn ely,Thos.— Wolr erhampton
Gore, M.—Barnstaple . Trotter, John..-West Surrey .
Goulburn, Right on. IL—Cam. Winnington, Sir T. E.—Bewdley,
bndge University . - Wrightson, W. B.—Northallerton3
.Greene, T.G.—Lancashire TELLERS. .., ~... , -1. .
Heithcote, Sir W.—Hampshire Mackenzie, W. F.—Peebleeshlre
Hume, Joseph—Montrose, &e. Johnstone, J. 11.—Dtuagiesehirs