The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-11 00:00:00

THE STN, LONDON, SATURDAY

creation who laboured twelve or fourteen hours a day ?
(Hear, hear.) What recreation could there be for
persons who went to their work at six in the morning,
and never left it, until half-past seven at night?—(llear,
hear.) Where and how was this recreation to be ob-
tained?--(llear, hear.) Those who supported the
Noble Lord were charged with pandering to the passions
of the people. Were not those who made this charge
guilty of something like hypocrisy when they talked of
the necessity of administering-to the healthy recreation
of the people?—(Hear, hear.) Throughout the whole
of that- discussion, there had been a contrariety
of statement, a variety of allegation which was
excessively amusing, and he might say mysterious. On
the one hand, it was stated that these factories were a
kind of earthly paradise ; on the other, that they were
the receptacles of reeking disease and oppression. He
knew that the master manufacturers of this country
formed a body who were to be highly valued for their
general benevolence • but, on the other hand, he could
not turn away from the statement made on the part of
the operatives. He supposed that most Hon. man ad had se en the deputations of operatives which had
come from Manchester and Yorkshire. The very first
question which he (Mr. Bernal) had put to these depu-
tations was, "Are you prepared to take the chance of an
abatement of wages ?" They replied, " We are." He
asked them whether the probability of a reduction of
l'iteges had been fairly laid before the artisans, and
La Wh reply was in the affirmative.—(Hear, hear.)
en e had an interview with one of those depute-
tt°lla, he asked them, were they prepared to give up a
Portion of their earnings for those shorter hours ? Their
answer wee, " Yes, we will--the probable deduction of
wages could not be greater than what we lose by the in-
4_rruption of our domestic comforts. Besides, we have
Pay
for washing, ironing, and scouring, which our
wives are net able to do."--(Hear, hear.) He could not
admit that any person supporting the proposition of the
(ale Lord was pandering to the passions of the people.
"rs-) It was impossible to deal with men and wo-
uPon the strict principles of political economy as
dealtdown in books.—(Hear, hear.) Men could not be
and with as the pieces upon a chess-board.—(Cheers
th lalighter.) This question should be dealt with by
F dictates of common sense.—(Laughter.) He would
ask whether the operatives of Manchester and the rest
rests r ashire were not able to judge of their own inte-
this 0„ Wear.) Suppose you were to give a go-bye to
of th-Cestion, would there not be still a sore in the minds
wouldlle°Ple? If the go-bye were given to the question,
of Co not the feeling of the people be that the House
terest
gUt lionsrinti°na did not represent the feelings nor the in-
or tile workingpposite classes.—(H
(Sir J.'Grahamear hear.) )
had
The
Creed to M
-eie '
of r. Horner's statement respecting the state
tomanufactures in Switzerland, where there were fac-
nries in which people worked fourteen or sixteen hours.
ot why not refer to Massachusets ?—(Cheers.) Why
lot to other places where there was no limitation to
lours oflabOur?—(Cheers.) If the Right Hon. Baronet
bees
his argument to be valid, he ought to- abandon
Bill altogether.—(Cheers.) With all the research of
,Ze, Right Hon. Baronet,- he would ask whether he did
find that the labour of twelve hours was more than
omen
were capable of enduring ? The surgeons
trunined before the Commission declared that they
°ught ten hours more than the period during which
itonsen could continue to labour in the factories.—(Hear,
~eat) would not trouble
.the House by referring to
Particular points of the evidence, such as the condition
bi women who were on the point of parturition.—(Hear,
d:itsra:) There had been reference, in the course of the
te, to the hard labour which was suffered by
4711e,_11 in the agricultural districts. But it was
"5 he denied that, in agricultural labour,
Womencee were not employed, •except upon extraordinary
re„ltai,. °as, more than eight hours.—(Hear, hear.) The
lipon the subject of factories showed that life
jt WasSn°rtened by in-door employment.—(Hear, hear.)
ete xare to see an old man in a factory. It was rarely
kent n,tilat a man lived long enough in factory employ-
hu to be able to use spectacles.—(Cheers and a
gu•)- This was a question of principle upon which
to oiliest insist that all personal and party feelings ought
beeginve waY, and he hoped that the clause, having once
Introduced, would never be abandoned.
and
air. G. KNIGHT considered the question so peculiar so •
of the
Important, as to require the deepest consideration
the House. He had carefully revolved in his mind
feshror°visions of the 'Bill, with a sincere desire so to
.n it that it should secure the true interests of the
,
leer"K classes. From all that he had been able to
hob;
on this subject--in despite of the arguments of the
th_oie Lord the Member for London—he had come to
the conclusion that we • should not be damaged in
the ei Nobler market by accepting the clause of
Lord dthe Member ' for Dorsetshire.
wsZtviction was that the measure of the Noble Lord
strike Lot only lead to a reduction of wages, but would
dest at the root of employment, and. lead to the
tress ructi°ll of the trade. They all recollected the dis-
and destitution which had been produced within
the last
erne three or four years by the mills working short
110,._. If the mills should work short time permanently,
hew would it be possible for the people to live?—(Hear,
10:11%) If the trade of the country should be permanently
ti: _e the depression would be
permanent also. In a short
Lme after a Ten Hours' Bill should be passed they would
ee 903 e labourers who were now most anxious for the
-
ss'N' of such a measure tugging and tearing at each
other
ro
ct. o. the purpose of procuring employment. He had
tea wed leters from persons who were residing in the
th2lurtieturing districts, and who were conversant with
wrltefl'elings of the workmen in those districts. The
rs
•Ationai those letters stated, that in their opinion the
'Pen n. Prosperity would be seriously endangered by a
the .°nrs' Bill. All those who were best informed on
Thet'°
reect dreaded the introduction of such a measure.
we. vernrnent Bill took care of the children, and that
all that was necessary. He thought the present
ettese,ll.B:Bl°n would do much good, by attracting public
-zon to the real merits of the question. It would
the
'Ps
'ea much more agreeable to him to have supported
t 'motion of the Noble Lord ; and it was with great
heeret that he felt himself bound to oppose it. But be-
V( Zing, as he did, that it would be most for the benefit
11,'"e country that the motion of the Noble Lord should
th rjected, he felt bound to vote against it.—(lronical
",eying.)
tis_alr- C. BL LLER said that the Right Hon. Gentleman
11.!c ;?lember for Nottingham had exhibited a most a,sto-
Ishew instance offorgetfulness.—(Cheers and laughter.)
tie had forgotten the reasons which had induced him to
the no lets than three votes in support of the measure of
had Noble Lord.—(A laugh.) The Hon. Gentleman
ap„,_
,11Ot found out any new argument or new fact. It
q 471,47 that all that was required was that his mind re-
laueli.‘s°rne time for the arguments to be absorbed.—(A
reason Hon. Gentleman said that the great
had tiZbY he had changed his mind was that he had
• "her, he' had given his last three votes to get
such k`'heers and laughter.) Now he must say that
(Lac tht case of. habitual and continued intoxication—
at ngn tr)--lasting through three several votes, given
tei-c perval of a week from each other—such
"fee --T4 and habitual intoxication he bad never
lied co aeard confessed to the House—(Laughter)—
had ecnsidering how plain the arguments were which
the "iloYinced the lion. Gentleman, and how completely
theta „„11'. Gentlenian's mind had been closed against
conehi7til that evening, he could not but come to the
very Op, that the Hon. Gentleman must, have been
*ish indeed.-(Roars of laughter.) But he did not
tatttte '0 divert the attention of the House to personal
been mu
tilis own speeches on former occasions had
nommented on and much misrepresented,
to s
Pere id not desire to draw the attention of the House
nstion
„i oral matter, when they were discussing a great
Rhicb Principle, the magnitude and importance of
toHaste' it was
impossible to overrate--(Cheers)—and to
vlolfettty and p
le time by diverting their attention
It
, a ry personalities.—(Cheers.) This ques-
°f 'B4 neen greatly prejudiced by the introduction
1,17413:P0t:nal allusions and arguments. Since he had given
ad eeenwuen they had last discussed this question, he
,-,,Otletrc some of the largest master manufacturers of the
"tat tG There was a painful lea' press ion upon his mind
40 1;46 vehement opposition or Oita class arose not
as " from a dread or a dislike of
had fee of tls,e measure itself,
which
5.4 d been indignation at certain st.atenent.ai
4„acter , °lade. and which were injurious to she env.
kti ‘-q the master manufacturers of the country...-.
ileat) He had never dwelt on those statements
tt,,,urJostification for his vote. He did not dispute the
Ale aeY of oThethe statements of the. Noble Lord the
btletlits nligtaporsetshire. He admitted that those state-
ta3c, he de apply to partial and exceptional cases,
nied that those partial and exceptional
the k, would be considered as fair samples of
this de traal state of the manufacturing districts. In
tieecor._ to the tone of their opponents had been
44 factul.lll-1Y 10w. They said nothing about principle.
athey ([,beersGovernment had thrown principle overboard
adteai—and had taken refuge in degree. His Hon.
a.L.tartned Friend the,Membey for Bath had, without
nstt' degree of success, tried to test the House by
tiPle ing hie the • •
•or
e,_ principle of the question. The prin-
aedn the Hon. and Learned Gentleman con-
i ture'
to iatetwreas, that it was unjustifiable for the Leg sla
4r. re'
110 D
—l3llcli cr
r. not say unjustifiable.
ietra with. adult it was inexpedient
.to 1n:9:-
nit labour. Now the House maintained
I,sabWoua:inilisr tifiable to. interfere with the contracts for
vatted factories, and her Majesty's Government sup-
seppo. He would venture to say that they were
arena in that respect by the master manuta
I,ai.„ t the country. There were four instances,
,"cula, in which the rinci le of interference with
the tabour had been acknPowledpged The first was ,in
fore the lithe Miners and Colliers *Bill, which was be-
gantd
Af,?..euse last year. In that Bill the Noble Lord
the Sent:tn.! Y) was supported by the Right Hon. Baronet
ie as4ry for the Elaine Department, who defended
ill Of th !,_.inost useful measure. Then there was the
"Jowl_
.? night Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Glad-
lerenci Coal-whippers Bill. That was an inter-
take e with adult labour.—(Hear, hear.) But he would
fere a much stronger
.case, and that the inter-
Then with the emigration of Hill Coolies. Could they
1_" upon that as a non-interference with adult labour?
acque.lll3_ there was another instance, and that was the
the' :ruw_Lhichlie Government had taken' with respect to
cluesti sYstem. As had been said that night, the
on before the House was simply one of degree. He
admittedheat.., that they had a case to make out.—(Hear,
,) It had been said that the Legislature
I.:lK,nt not to interfere without good cause.—(Hear, hear.)
4wtiEots true, but that principle would apply to all
et had
n beell- Now as to the good cause for interference,
turn admitted that the labourers in the manufac-
tiasslg tomis were not so healthy as labourers of a similar
that 411. the manufacturing districts. He did not say
but h_ taiwas owing to manufacturing labour entirely,
In th_e,d'd assume from that that there was something
quite; Utbour in the manufacturing districts which re-
ses..,_", interference on the part of the Legislature. The
1,-o;sanc view he took of the case was that labour of twelve
dition as ay was inconsistent with a proper moral con-
People, welleing, and proper recreation of the
Pa°Ple, ne itight Hon. Baronet had generously cora*

t erward and said that he would do a great deal towards
Ithe amusement of the people. But thre was something
beyond the recreation of the people required. • There
were other elements required for the well-being
of the people. The third reason for interference
by the Legislature was that, since the first discussion of
this subject, a statement had been made public by the
master manufacturers themselves, that three-fifths of
the persons employed in manufactures were females.
This he thought was a very powerful rcason for inter-
ference with adult labour by the Legislature. The
principal argument used against this interference was
that it would reduce the wages of the labourer, and the
argument used by the Government was, that if any
farther restriction were to be placed on the manufac-
turers they would be driven out of the foreign market.
He would ask with what decency did this argument
come from the Government?—(Hear, hear.) Had this
never been stated in former debates, and passed over by
the Government without notice? How often had this
fact been urged by the gentlemen who advocated
the repeal of the corn-laws ?—(Hear, hear.) It
was now generally admitted, that the great bulk of the
manufacturing classes themselves were desirous of
change—that they were sensible of the evils under
which they laboured. The Hon. Member for Oldham
said he specifically put the question at a public meeting
of operatives, " Are you prepared to submit to a re-
duction of wages, in order to work a less number of
hours ?" and they answered they were. His impres-
sion was, that the Government should receive this ques-
ion as a whole, and take into especial account the pro-
bableimprovement in the condition of the labouring po-
pulation. If they would legislate on those considerations,
be believed there would not be the slightest danger to
be apprehended to manufactures. A great deal had
been said about the wickedness of exciting the feelings
of the people, and they had been cautioned, in solemn
tones of warning, against raising expectations which
were doomed to disappointment. That sort of danger
might be urged in almost every change—there was ge-
nerally more or less of risk. He had no fear of such
danger—(Hear, hear)—but was there no danger to
be apprehended on the other side ? Did they incur no
risk by refusing to legislate ? Was there no counter-
balancing evil? Whether was it more dangerous to expect
nothing from legislation or everything from it?—(Hear.)
Was it not injudicious to allow a feeling of sickening
disgust and hopelessness to take possession of the minds
of the peeple—was it right to encourage a belief that the
Legislature would only consult the interests of the upper
classes—of the landlords—and that the moral and phy-
sical condition of the people would not occupy their at-
tention?—(Hear.) When a great practical measure was
brought forward was it wise to exhibit so much indiffer-
ence? These observations did not apply to the Factories
Bill alone, but to the questions of education, and to an
enlarged field of employment, as if these measures were
beyond the cognisance of Parliament, and as if they
would say " Go and shift for yourselves."—(Hear, hear.)
The people would say that they were left unprotected by
the Legislature, although they had to bear such heavy
burdens of taxation.—(Cheers.)
Mr. ROEBUCK .said there was still more danger in
telling the, people they must expect everything from
Legislatures than from trusting to themselves.—(Hear,
hear.) It was the most dangerous thing for the peeple
to be told by anybody in whom they had confidence that
the rate of wages was to be regulated by Act of Parlia-
ment. The rate of wages, as attempted to be regulated
by the Noble Lord, was wholly futile. Its only. object,
if carried into effect, would be step by step to increase
the number of the labouring population, and to create a
low rate of wages.—(Hear, hear.) Let not his Hon. and
Learned Friend meet him with any taunts of humanity—
le;: him not turn round, and, after painting the picture
of misery in its strongest colours, say—" Do you con-
template that with satisfaction ?" " Are you, or are
you, not prepared to legislate for this misery ?" He
acknowledged the horror of the picture, but he quar-
relled with the remedy. The remedy proposed, and he
said it advisedly, was an aggravation of the evil.—(Hear.)
His Hon. and Learned Friend, and every Honourable
Member-who bad spoken on the subject that night,
had contrived to escape from the real question—they
confined themfelves to an exaggeration of the mischief,
but did not point out the effects of the remedy. The
Noble Lord, the Member for Sunderland, indulged in a
day dream of a new era of enlightened legislation—lie
magnanimously termed it bold legislation. Let him
(Mr. Roebuck) give it another term—rash legislation.
" Fools rush in—" He would not finish the quota-
tion.—(Great laughter.) He wanted to know what was
the object of the Noble Lord's (Lord Ashley's) proposal
—what were the grounds of his interference ? He had
challenged the Noble Lord and his supporters on this
subject before, but he had had no answer. His Hon.
and Learned Friend acknowledged that interference
with labour ought to be an exception to the general
rule. The principle was to let things go on according
to the ordinary causes which regulated ordinary con-
tracts between man and man. On this subject he had
been grievously misrepresented on a former occasion.
What he said was, that the general rule respecting
contracts should be to let those persons enter
into them who, being most interested, were naturally
most alive to the difficulties incidentally connected with
them, and who were best calculated to form a judg-
ment of those incidents. That was the rule ; and his
Hon. and Learned Friend said he acknowledged the
justice of the doctrine; the departure from it he admitted
ought to be only the exception. He took it that all
the labouring populasion of this country, according
to the general rule, entered into contracts with the
master for the best wages they could obtain for their
labour. But the Noble Lord said he would show them
the cause for their interference. He met the Noble
Lord, and said, " Very well ; but you must point out the
circumstances that form the exceptional rule." But
what did he show?—and now he would challenge an
answer to the statement. The Noble Lord stated that
the labouring population in the manufacturing districts
were so congregated together that they were
more alive to the influence of publicity and responsibility
than any other portion of the working classes. He
would tell the Noble Lord that the factory population
were better off, better paid, . better fed, better clothed,
and better lodged than any other portion of the labour-
ing population.—(Hear, hear.) NQw, he defied the
Noble Lord tv deny that position. He defied them to
show there was any one reason for interfering with
factory labourer except the one of easiness to interfere
with it. The condition of the factory labourer was
better, he repeated, than any other part of the population
of the United Kingdom. That required an answer.—
(Cries of " Oh.") He repeated that required an an-
swer; and all the humanity-mongers would not drive
him from his position. 'Were they worse off—he said
better? Now, they would never drive him from that
position. The Noble Lord, the Member for Sunder-
land had mystified his arguments, and talked a great of
what might be done. He regretted that the Right
Honourable Baronet had invaded the principle of
interference with labour, and the Honourable and
Learned Member had sarcastically taunted the
Hon. Member for Nottinghamshire with voting three
times for the Noble Lord, and now about to vote with
the Government, but the Hon. Gentleman ought to turn
to his left and right, and there he would find abundant
examples of such inconsistency. Those who kept a
glass-house should not throw stones. He should
not be so ready with his sarcasm when
those friends were around him.—(Hear.) He
honoured the boldness of the Hon. Gentlemen oppo-
site, who had dared to oppose this system of " humanity
mongering"—they 'fiad stood out against it in spite of
all temptations held out both by friends and foes—from
foes that would wish to put them down, in consequence
of disaffection in their own ranks, and of friends who
shot their shafts from aside at the Right Hon. Baronet.
But to return to the question before the House. Had
they in any way laid the grounds to show why they
should interfere with the free exercise of labour, or if
so, had they proved that it would benefit the labouring
man ? The Noble Lord the Member for Sunderland
had threatened them with the consequences of rejecting
the proposition of the Noble Lord the Member for Dor-
setshire—he said, beware how you disregard the condi-
tion of the labouring population. He (Mr. Roebuck),
as well as many on that side of the House, said, when
speaking of the wishes of the labouring population,
that all they wanted was a due and a fair
representation in that House. He was not, now about
to be alarmed by the Noble Lord's sudden alarm at
popu:ar demonstrations, the more so when he recol-
lected the Noble Lord's decided opposition to the
strongly-expressed wish of the people. on the subject of
the franchise. Be (Mr. Roebuck) should confess that
he had such respeet for the opinions of the people, that
he did not want to Woe them second-hand from any
person, no matter who he might be. His desire was,
that the people should have the power of sending their
representatives to that House to speak their opinions,
and not to take the pseudo humanity of any man. When
he said this, he did not mind also stating, that when he
heard the Noble Lord the Member for Sunderland talk
of consequences, he could afford to treat the warning
with indifference. He certainly could not at all under-
stand the arguments of the Noble Lord the Member for
Sunderland --in fact, he could not glean any
meaning from any one syllable of that Noble
Lord's speech.—(Hear and laughter.) In saying this,
he begged to state he meant no disrespect to the Noble
Lord, far from it, for he usually attached much respect
both to his personal character and the character of his
mind ; but, in the present case, he certainly could not
see from what source he gained his knowledge. Was it
from the " Moral World" of Mr. Owen?—(A laugh.) He
thought if the Noble Lord reflected closely, he would
view himself something in the light of a plagiarist of
that visionary gentleman and great master of political
economy, and that like him, he was about to introduce
some new and bold scheme of legislation.—(Laughter.)
He (Mr. Roebuck) asserted boldly that prices could not
rise on account of the ruinous foreign competition
with which this urinary had to struggle. In the
countries competing with England, there was
no interference with the rights of labour, there
was Increasing knowledge with a low price
of food, and all these facts compelled the English
manufacturers to sell at the lowest possible price, and to
that price they were now reduced, and beyond it they
could not go if they hoped to be enabled to combat the
competition of foreign markets. To this assertion of
his a distinct and direct answer should be given, and not
by vague generalities. If they imposed the restrictions
proposed by the measure of the Noble Lord, how was it
possible that England could compete with other nations,
who had so much greater fttcilities than she possessed?
Then came the next proposition, namely, that of falling
profits ; And it was proposed to keep them up by a re-
duction of the hops of labour. He thought his Hon,
and Learned Friend, who LA spelsen rs short time ago,
might have paid a little more attentive totke POW*
of those who were the lights cf political seitipee, Tille
next point to which he should refer, was what he
thought the great crime of those who took part in
this discussion.; When the question was put to
the people as to whether they were prepared to chance
this subject, the reply might be " yes.' But he would
ask, had it ever been distinctly answered by those people
whether they thought that this memo) would OW

wages to fall, and if so whether they were prepared to
tak the consequence? No such question had ever been
put as to whether they were willing to chance it—for if
it had, the answer -would be—" we are willing to
chance it, because we believe wages will not fall."
He had put the question in the manufacturing districts,
and the answer had invariably been, if they did believe
that wages were to fall, they would have been the first
to oppose the measure.—(Hear, hear.) And why ? The
measure was simple enough : at present the people were
only able by their labour to obtain that which was
nothing beyond a comfortable subsistence—certainly not
that subsistence which a man would consider luxury.
It was a life of hard work, and it was hardy paid. He
sympathised with them, and he wished their condition
was ten thousand degrees better. But that was not the
question here ; the question was, could the House make
it better. The labourers wished to work for the means
of subsistence, and they were unwilling to forego any
portion of those means of subsistence by so many hours
of idleness. They heard much of the advantage to be
derived by the people from those two hours of leisure,
in their moral habits and manner of living. But they
might depend upon it, there would never be any im-
provement in the morality of the people, if they di-
minished their wages. Diminish their wages, and at
tha same time they would destroy every, chance of im
proving their morality. He was not there to say that
the conition of the people was such as he could desire ;
but he was there to say that their nostrum was a
piece of mischievous quackery, and which, under the
pretence of doing good, would act as a mischievous
and detestable opiate ; they were doing all they could to
spoil and deteriorate the condition of the people, under
' the pretence of alleviating their misery. Before they
came to anything like reasoning legislation, they
must do more than lay as their ground for doing so great
misery on the part of the people. They could go to Ire-
land, and they could ask the same question. What did
they see there ? A labouring population sufferingunder
greater misery than it was pretended was suffered by the
labouring population of this country. And he wanted to
know where was the gentleman so full of humanity on
the other side of the House, who had listened to the
statements that had bees made, and who had suddenly
turned round, and said it was in the power of the House
of Commons to alleviate the miseries of the people of Ire-
land. Were they prepared to listen to these statements?
Then how black was their guilt that they had done
nothing to alleviate these evils ? Why, had they not
before—at least those who had more than a mere pre-
tence to the name of legislators—(Laughter)—attempted
to do this, or told them that the distress of Ireland could
not be alleviated by any Act of Parliament ? If he
(Mr. Roebuck) by obtaining statements of unheard of
misery among the peeple of Ireland, had demanded that
a portion of the land should be taken away from the
landlords of Ireland for the purpose of alleviating that
distress, why, would they not have said that
he was a madman, that he was a fool—or worse
than a fool—a desperate knave ? Yet that
was a distinctly analagous case to that of
the Noble Lord opposite. He had painted the whole-
sale misery, or what he considered the misery, of the
manufacturing districts. He (Mr. Roebuck) charged the
Noble Lord with gross exaggeration; he had only read
one half of the evidence. He charged him with mis-
stating and misrepresenting evidence; he charged him
before the assembled Commons of England with a total
and gross disregard of the evidence he had pat into
his bands. He was not there to make any underhand
charges.—(A laugh.) lie was not there to question the
motives of the Noble Lord; he spoke only of his acts.
He contended he was dealing with evidence which he
had grossly misapprehended, and that he had misrepre-
sented facts.—(oh, oh.) The facts were not as he had
stated them. That labouring population of which he
had given so lamentable an account, was the class the
farthest removed from misery and degradation. He
would do all that could be done to better the condition
of the people. He would secure them an education
based on the broad principles of Christian legislation.
He would do all they could do and all they ought to do,
but he contended that no legislative enactment could
raise the rate of wages. Those who endeavoured to
limit the hours of labour did in reality establish a
minimum of wages, and would give the labouring
classes a right to demand a fixed rate of wages for less
work. They would have the right, and having the
right would enforce it; and if they did enforce it, adieu
at once to all the means of sustaining the population
of the country by labour. They would then behold
a deteriorated people; then they would learn the con-
sequences of their misplaced humanity; they would see
a people made miserable from their injudicious inter-
ference, and the labourers would learn too late the un-
happiness of having listened to their ignorance, and the
House would have learned too late how fatal and mis-
chievous is the acting on insufficient and ill-digested
evidence.
Mr. FERRAND said the Hon. and Learned Member
had made a speech attacking the motives of those who
supported the Ten Hours' Bill, and boasting that he was
the friend of the working classes. He could tell him
that the working classes considered him one of
their bitterest enemies. They had assisted him
in procuring the liberation of Mr. Oastler from prison.
They were anxious for his release, that he might
aid them in obtaining the measure he advocated to-
night. The working classes had advocatCd the measure
themselves for twelve years, and it was a question they
would continue to agitate till they had succeeded. It
had been said by one party in that House that they
ought not to interfere with labour—that the masters and
men were free agents, and they had no right to inter-
fere with the Contracts they chose to make. There was
then the proposition of the Government, and then the
ten hours' proposition. With regard to the la-
bourers being free agents, he begged of the
House to recollect the engagements entered
into by some manufacturers of Manchester with
the Poor-law Commissioners. They proposed to
draw a number of labourers from the agricultural into
the manufacturing districts, and he had an important
return in his band, showing what the result of that had
been.. The result was laid on the table of the House on
the 12th of May, 1843. It showed that 4,228 labourers
were induced to leave the agricultural districts under a
promise of their condition being improved. Out of this
number there were several mothers, who had only from
45. 6d. to ss. 6d. a week. There were twenty-six fathers
who received wages from ss. to 9s. a week ; seventy-two
who received from 9s. to 12s. ; fourteen who received
from 12s. to 'lss., and two who received from 15s. to 20s.
Instead of their wages of labourbeing increased they were
reduced below the standard in the districts they had
left. In 1841 the Hon. Member for Stockport, the Hon.
and Learned Member for Bolton, and both the Members
for Sheffield declared the manufacturing labourers of
Manchester were existing on 14d. a day ; and the
Member for Manchester declared there were many in-
stances of persons pawning their clothes to redeem their
bedding for the night, and pawning their bedding in the
morning to redeem their clothes. He would not now
weary the House by entering into the details of the op-
pressions inflicted on the working classes by the truck-shop
system. The only means of rescuing them was by passing
a Ten Hours' Bill, and they were determined to have it
whether their wages were reduced or not. They
studied the question in all its bearings, and he was
satisfied two-thirds of the adult labourers in the manu-
facturing districts were more competent to judge of the
nowl
ss
aqdudesrteisosnedt.haHn th-f
handof talniosaecnown•hnot m
of hneo
than sixteen individuals who appeared before the magis-
trates of Manchester asking their aid to remove- them to
the agricultural districts from which they had been
kidnapped. He did not want to extenuate the conduct
of the landed proprietors who lent their aid to
this system, and he thought the conduct of the
Poor-law Commissioners ought to be reprobated.
Those men represented their case to the magis-
trates, and the magistrates expressed their in-
dignation at the mode in which they had been
treated, and said that those who caused it ought to
be prosecuted. Thelate Member for Kendal was one of
the magistrates who presided on the bench, and he ad-
vised that Mr. Muckeridge, who was employed as the
agent between the Poor-law Commissioners and the
manufacturers, should be called, when it was provided,
that measures should be taken to send them home. He
did not wish to enter into many details of this kind—
(" Hear, hear, " and " Question, question.") He would
not have spoken on the subject at all, but that he was
requested to do so, and if Hon. Gentlemen heard him
out, he would not detain them very long. It had been
said, that the mothers remained at home to take care
of and provide for their families. The reports of the
factory inspectors showed, that instead of remaining at
home to attend to their household duties, they were obliged
to work in the mills, and sacrifice their lives to obtain
the means of subsistence for their families. In the
autumn of 1842, the working classes in the manu-
facturing districts took the advice of the Hon. Member for
Halifax. They were told that if they would better their
condition they would refuse to work, they would lesson
their toil. They accordingly acted on the advice,
and in rags they traversed the country, and it was
not until the military were called out and blood was
spilt that the majesty of the law was asserted. The
working classes would not be satisfied with any mea-
sure, but that of the Right Hon. the Member for
Dorsetshire. At present the hours of work for young
persons between the ages of thirteen and eighteen were
sixteen and a half, while the hours for sleep, recreation,
&c., only amounted to seven and a half ; and mothers
of families worked seventeen hours and a half per day,
and had only six hours and a half for sleep and recrea-
tion. If, then, they refused this measure to the people,
the day would come when the working classes would
extract it from their unwilling hands.
Mr. MUNTZ said there was one circumstance connected
with this debate, which appeared to him to have been
lost sight of by all, by the lawyers and the philosophers.
That was whether any vote of that House could prevent
the evils so much complained of. His opinion was that
no vote could prevent those evils ; and he would recom-
mend the Right Hon. Baronet to concede that which he
could not prevent taken place. The peOple had power
in their hands, and of that power they would be sure to
make use, They wanted a Ten Hours' Bill—that he
ascertained from themselves—and that they • would
effect by a strike, which would be more
injurious to trade than a Ten Hours' Bill.
He had 'asked every one of the parties with whom he
had come in contact on this subject, whether they were
prepared to put up with an abatement of wages, in case
the Ten Hours' Bill tended to produce such an effect,
and the invariable answer was, that they were.
The advantages which they expected to derive from
having more time, more comfort, and more amusement,
would more than counterbalance the loss sustained
in wages.--(Hear, hear.) He believed the working-
glasses were right in the view which they tpok of this
Pe§tiaft • hot though. there would peceßarily 'be some
mil.rednqion in raltos it lyould not be et 'all in propOk:-
t:toa to the benefit derived, N'Oly, who were the pptrties
to be acted upon Why. they were onty the women.
It was said that women,en, being moss .7.4l.itable fur this
species of labour, always obtained a preference over the
PPII, provided they could do the required quantity of
wwit, and that the wen. wp;e eerevelled, in many in-

stances, to walk about unemployed while the women were
at work. It Was argued that if the women worked only
a rational time, the men would have more work, and he
confessed that he .thought the argument was a good
one.—(Hear, hear.) He was quite willing to admit,
that as a general principle this was improper legislation.
But he asked, what had they to do with principles ?
(Laughter.) Had there been any principle of legislation
in that House for the last thirty years ? He
had searched very carefully for principles of legislation,
and he must certainly confess that he could not find any
principle of legislation in connection with any 'one Go-
vernment. The whole of the legislation had been a le-
gislation of expediency—entirely a legislation of expe-
diency.—(Hear.) Well, then, upon what principle were
they to go then into cold philosophical calcu-
lations when the interests of the people were con-
cerned—when every measure which was brought forward
for the last five-and-twenty years against their interest
had been founded on the principle of expediency ?
(Hear, hear.) He denied their right to treat the ques-
tion in that manner. Talk of philosophical legislation!
Why it was merely- an idea.—(Hear, hear.) Philosophy
was brought forward at a time when it could
be but of little use. For his . own • part,
he repudiated the principle of interference
altogether—(llear, hear)—but believing that they could
not prevent the proposed change, he thought the House
would do well to try the experiment. What was the
worst which could happen ? Why a few months' inter-
ference. Their export trade was not worth their having.
—(Hear, hear.) Did not the Right Hon. Baronet tell
them the other night, when speaking on the Bank
question, that if there was any improper interference,
he would come down to the House to rectify it. Could
he not, then, come down to the House to rectify any
improper interference with trade? Did he think that, in
such a case, the people would not assist him ?—(Hear,
hear.) Why, it was making a mountain of a mole-
hill to suppose that there would be any dif-
ficulty. What were the laws which had been introduced
for the last - five-and-twenty years, materiallyinter-
fering with the interests of the country? Why, there
were these five excrescences in their system of govern-
ment—the corn-laws, the poor-laws, the truck-laws, the
emigration-laws, and, last of all, the factory-laws. He
need not say anything on the question of the corn-laws.
What did they do by the poor-laws ? Why they placed
men in such a condition, that whereas no honest indus-
trious man, of good character, could ensure to himself
labour, when he applied for relief they said to him " No,
no, we cannot give you out-door relief ; that is impos-
sible ; you must go into the house, you must submit
to the workhouse" test ; you must sell what little you
have got, and yourself, your:. wife, and your family
must be separated from each other, in order that you
may receive relief." That principle was still worse than
the principle_orthe corn-laws.—(Hear, hear.) The next
question was the truck question. He contended
that they had no right at all to interfere
with the trade of barter ; that it was in
every sense of the word justifiable and right They
only interfered in consequence of their system of
legislation being so bad. Look next at the emigration
question. Now it appeared to him that nothing could
be so unnatural as to pay a large sum to export, men
because their laws were
,so bad that they could not
live here.—(Hear, hear.) It was unquestionable
moreover, that whenever they exported their population
they exported the best men—the worst would not go.—
(Hear, hear.) Now, he contended that these four
questions of law were contrary to principle, contrary to
right, and contrary to the interests of the country ;
and they were all founded on the principle of
expediency. The Right Honourable Baronet had spoken
of going out of power, in case he were defeated on this
question. He hbped the Ministry would not do that, as
it might turn out that no other Ministry could come
into power.—(Laughter.) He had a great accession in
the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath. It was quite
clear that all the knowledge, all the intelligence, all the
of the House, was law, and all thephilosophy
concen-
trated in that one quarter—(Laughter)—and if the Go-
vernment took the advice of that Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman, it appeared to him, from his own statement,
he did not deny that it was so, in fact—that they must
be right.—(Great laughter.) He really did not think
he could agree with the Hon. Member for Bath.—
(Laughter.) He saw him going here, there, and every-
where, and finding fault with everybody.—(Cheers.)
He did not, however, propose any remedy himself, al-
though he opposed a Ten Hours' Bill.—(Hear, hear.)
The Government had done all they possibly could to
oppose the proposal of the Noble Lord, and the wisest
thing which they could do now was' to give way. He was
quite satisfied that if they did not they would even-
tually repent of their decision. He was as sure as he
was of his own existence, that if they did not grant the
measure in a decent manner they would have to grant
it in an indecent manner.—(Laughter.) He only re-
gretted that the Noble Lord had not gone for a Ten
Hours Bill at once. He would like to see the thing
fairly tried, and he would take his chance of the result.
Let them have none of this petty legislation, but let
them have such legislation as would convince the work-
ing classes that they were really anxious for their benefit.
Mr. M. PHILIPS complained of the gross exaggera-
tion which had been put forth respecting the treatment
of females and children in the factories. He must have
been in the whole course of his life under a great delu-
sion, if it was possible to restrict the labour of the
country without restricting the trade. He did not think
that the Legislature would either benefit the country,
or do credit to itself by adopting a scheme
which was merely an experiment, and would
prove in its results to be a legislative farce.—(Cheers
and laughter.) He had never held any other
than one opinion upon this question--(Cheers and
laughter)—and no fear of unpopularity would prevent
him from expressing that opinion.—(Cheers, laughter,
and great interruption.) . It had been felt and thought,
in the manufacturing districts, that the House had
been too prone to the other side of the question.
The Noble Lord the Member for Dorsetshire had com-
plained of the inspectors giving notice to the millowners
of their visits of inspection. He had on that occasion
joined the Noble Lord in making the same complaint,
and had stated that the plan he himself adopted in visit.
ing factories, was to give no notice, and the consequence
had been, that on the first visit he had paid to a factory,
accompanied by his friend Mr. Potter, the late
Member for. Wigan, he had found one of
those individuals who haunted the lobby of the
House of Commons session after session, a dele-
gate in favour of diminishing the hours of labour,
he found this man working two children under the age
allowed by Act of Parliament. He had taxed the man
with it at the moment, and the man knew that he could
not deceive him. He had mentioned the circumstance
in his place in Parliament, but his observations had not
appeared in Hansard. A speech, however, had been
reported, which had never been delivered—(Cries
of " Question, question," " Divide, divide")—and
that led him to believe that there must
have been some interference behind the scenes. In
presenting the petition which had been sent to him he had
acted in accordance with the wishes of those who had
signed it. He could himself have wished to draw atten-
tion to the allegations of that petition. There had
been a groat deal of exaggeration on the subject.
He was not a cotton-spinner himself, but he
was convinced that there were gross exaggerations.—
(Cries of " Divide, divide.") lie denied that he had
ever received any deputatiOn to attend meetings upon
this subject and had refused to do so.—(Cries of" Divide,
divide.") He was convinced that if they legislated
on this subject they would soon be called upon to legis-
late upon wages.—(Hear, hear and cries of " Question,
question.") If they were to legislate upon wages the
operatives would be the first to suffer. The more seri-
ously he considered the question, the more he was con-
vinced that the measure of the Noble Lord would work
injury to the- working classes,
and therefore he felt it
was his duty to oppose it.
Sir R. PEEL rose, but was met with a loud cry of
" Divide, divide," " Question, question," in the midst of
which he sat down,
Mr. BROTHERTON said that many Hon. Gentle-
men wished to address the House on the subject, and
therefore he thought they ought to adjourn the debate.—
(Great confusion.)
Mr. HINDLEY hoped the Bight lion. Baronet would
consent to the proposition, as this was a most important
and grave subject, and ought to be fully considered.
After a scene of considerable confusion the debate was
adjourned.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of,
and the House adjourned at One o'Clock.

SHAYTESBURY.—On Friday Capt. Loftus's troop of
the Queen's Own Dorset Yeomanry Cavalry dined toge-
ther at the Talbot's Head Inn, Iwerne Minster, to spend
their forfeits, preparatory' to assembling on permanent
duty at Blandford on the 9th inst. The occasion passed
off with the greatest conviviality. Mr. John Mill, Mr.
Wm. Foot, and Mr. Edward Buckland, all of Shaftes-
bury, left the Talbot's Head about two o'clock in the
morning in a phaeton, drawn by a high-spirited horse,
and when about midway between Iwerne and 'Shaftes-
bury the phmton was upset, and the three young
men received severe injuries. The bruises which Mr.
Mill received about the head rendered him quite insen-
sible, consequently it became necessary to place him in
a cottage by the road side, where he breathed his last on
the following Sunday. The event has caused great sen-
sation here, as Mr. Mill was only 30 years of age, and
the son of the late Rev. Mr. Mill, of this place.—Sher-
burne Journal.
LARGE EGG.—We have received from Mr. Her-
bert, of Bickerstaffe, a goose egg, weighing 9 ounces,
and measuring in length 4i inches. The goose has laid
40 eggs of the same dimensions.—Liverpool Mercury.
NEWLY-INVENTED SPECTACLES,TELESCOPES, OPERA.
GLASSES, MICROSCOPES, &c.—Messrs. S. and B. Solo-
mons, Oculists and Opticians, 39, Albemarle-street, Pic-
cadilly, have succeeded in effecting a most scientific Im-
provement in Spectacle and Telescope Lenses, &c., of the
greatest transparent power. The extraordinary advan-
tage derived from this invention is that vision becomes
preserved and strengthened, and very aged persons are
enabled to employ their sight either by day or candle-
light at the most minute occupation, and can see with
those Lenses of a much less magnifying power ; nor
will they require the frequent changes to further helps,
as the Spectacles now in common use. Also, newly.
invented Achromatic Waistcoat-pocket Telescopes and
Opera Glasses, which are invaluable at the sea side, and
on the race-course, as well as at the theatre, &c. Every
kind of Telescope for Shooting, Sea purposes, and upon
stand for Astronomical Observations, with the celebrated
Lenses of the most clear transparent brilliancy ' • the
powers are so great, and the Lenses so bright and bril-
liant, that minute objects at an extraordinary distance
brought completely under the eyes. Sportsmen are,
t7s, ande
ie Visitorsc will, indeed, have a great
Conductor
giyes immediate
relief to Old-staniling extreme cases of deafness. Caution
—Messrs, 5, and 13. Salmons, Opticians and Aurists,
are not in any way connected with a person of the same
their_itamediate neighbourhood, nor in any
nato,,
part of the country. To prevent mistakes be cautious,
and observe—Only to be had at 39, Albemarle-street,
oposite the York Hotel,
1 , • • • • • ••• •