The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-27 00:00:00

PRIVILEGE:

Mr. ROEBUCK rose amidst loud cries of " Hear,
hear,"and considerable confusion, in consequence of some
lion. Members not having taken their places. We un-
derstood the Hon. Member to say (for he spoke in so low
a tone as to be scarcely audible in the gallery) that he
would not have risen if he had not felt himself
imperatively called upon to address the House.
lion. Members would bear in mind, that on the last even-
ing on which the House met, an Hon. Member opposite,
namely, the Hon. Member for Canterbury, thought
fit, in the performance of his duty, to. make
certain observations upon himself. To those observations
he had given what answer he thought sufficient. The
attack was made upon him in a speech which was some •
what elaborate ; but he thought the House would admit
that he (Mr. Roebuck) did not lose his temper on that
occasion—(Hear, hear)—and that he spoke in such an
off-hand way, that it might have been supposed that the
matter would he suffered to rest.
An Mx. MEMBER here rose to order. If the Hon.
Member meant to complain of any proceeding tending
to cause a breach of the peace, he ought not to use lan-
guage tending to create a broach of the peace.—(Hear.)
The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member was perfectly
in order.—(Cheers.)
Mr. ROEBUCK said, that btfore he read to the
House a letter which he bad received from the Hon.
Member for Canterbury, he would at once state that he
had no wish to give that Hon. Member the least offence.
He then said, and he now repeated, that whenever he
was called on to account for, or explain anything that he
might have said (as we understood), he should be pre-
pared to do so.--(Repeated cries Of " Speak up.") He
did not regret anything which had been said by him
after the sort of node--(Cheers)—in which the Hon.
Member for Canterbury had alluded to him.—(Re-
newed cheers.) The expressions used by the Ho-
nourable Member conveyed an imputation of
a grave character upon him (Mr. Roebuck).
The• Hon. Member said that he had deceived his party—
that he disguised servility by severity, and (as we un-
derstood) that he was seeking the favour of the present
Government, under the appearance of a foe.—(Repeated
cries of " Speak up," the Hon. Member speaking in an
unusually low tone, although with a very emphatic man-
ner.) He bad been called a rebel to the Queen, and the
friend of Papineau. To that attack he had answered as
he would answer over and over again, but he
answered only in fair Parliamentary retort. He would
now read to the House the letter he had received from
.the Hon. Member for Canterbury. The Hon. Member
then read the following letter, but in the same indistinct
tone :

"Travellers' Club, April, 1844.

" Sir,—l cannot determine from the newspaper re-
port of your speech in the House of Commons last
night, nor from what I understood when I heard it,
whether to me personally you meant to apply the words
dishonourable motives.' If so, I beg to refer
you to a letter which I addressed to my
constituents, dated July, 1843, in which
was this passage—' That as I never asked a
favour of Sir Robert Peel or of his Government,
I could not have been actuated by any disappointment
or obligation in voting against them. Now I call upon
you to state that you did not mean to apply these words
to me ; and if you did so, either to retract them orAto
refer to a friend with whom my friend, Captain Garrett,
may communicate.
(Signed) " G, SMYTHE."
He (Mr. Roebuck) did give answer that Mr. Smythe
should hear from him, but not not by letter; but in the
House of Commons. But he said to Captain Garrett,
" As far as you are concerned you need not be alarmed."
Mr. SMYTHE—That was not the answer.
The SPEAKER—Order.
Mr. ROEBUCK—Sir, I am now here to answer for
what I have said.

The SPEAKER said the letter just read by the Hon.
and Learned Member for Bath, having been sent to him
as a Member of that House by another Hon. Member of
that House, and the subject-matter of that letter having
had its origin in same proceedings in that House, it
would be the proper course for the Von. and Learned
Member for Bath to hand it over to the clerk of the
House, to be read by him at the table.—(hear, hear.)
Mr. ROEBUCK' was understood to say he should not
give up the letter, unless by express command of the
House. He had considered it his duty to advise the
House of a fact, but he declined to give up a letter.—
(Loud laughter.)
Mr. CURTEIS said he felt it his duty to move that
the letter refer.red to be read by the clerk at the table of
the House.

The SPEAKER said he bad before stated the course
that it would be the duty of the House to pursue. He
must now positively require of the Hon. and Learned
Member for Bath to, bring the letter up in order to its
being read, as it must be the foundation of any such
further proceedings as the House might think due to its
own dignity to adopt.
Mr. llounueu brought up the letter, which was then
read by the clerk to the House.
After a pause of a moment or two,
Mr. SMYTHE said the Hon. and Learned Member
for Bath, true to his practice, as to his right, had taken
one Hon. Member by surprise, because the answer given
to him (Mr. S.) by the gentleman he had sent to the
Hon. and Learned Member for Bath was not that which
the lion. and Learned Member for Bath had just reported
to the House. The answer given by the Hon. and
Learned Member for Bath to the gentleman sent to him
was this—" He shall hear of this." His (Mr. Smythe's)
Friend had replied that he must have " a definite an-
swer,". to which the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath
had rejoined, " He would send an answer." From that
hour he (Mr. Smythe) had been expecting an answer.—
(Roars of laughter.) Ile (Mr. Smythe) could give his
sacred word of honour that, except to the friend
he had sent to the Honourable and Learned
Member fer Bath, he bad never opened his lips
to any person, or made the slightest intimation of the
course he was about to pursue. But this afternoon, he
(Mr. Smythe) by accident met the Noble Lord, the
Member for Newark (Lord J. Manners), who informed
him that he had been given to understand by an Hon.
Member of that House, that the Honourable
and Learned Member for Bath was about to
bring this matter before the House.—(Hear, hear.)
Inasmuch as he had taken but one gentleman into his
confidence, while the Hon. and Learned Member for
Bath had chosen to take somewhere about five hundred
into his—(oh, oh)—he (Mr. Smythe) was well content
that that confidence should be full, unreserved, and ex-
plicit.—(Hear, hear.) And he must say this—that
when the Hon- and Learned Gentlemen who had just
spoken about having only made use of a fair parliamen-
tary retort—he should have perfectly agreed with the
lion, and Learned Gentleman, that his remarks bad
onlypartaken of the nature of a fair parliamentary re-
tort if he had madc use of it for the first time.—(Hear,
hear.) But it must be in the recollection of
the House that that Honourable and Learned Gentleman,
upon an Irish debate, during the last session
of Parliament; when he (Mr. Smythe) had already
tsiacmsee vienrsiitnyu,
awtiiothn
preferredrtehgaatrdhetohalaiimse
spoken, made a speech characterised by severe and caus-
usedneoefsdtahye
lf'
makingo n w
evening. He (Ur. Smythe) was at
the time utterly un-
able to
give
any reply to the insinuation, because the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman afterwards loft town
to attend the circuit. But on that occasion he consulted
a friend, who told him he could take no notice of what
had been said, but that he must contradict the insinua-
tion. And that insinuation he did now contradict, in the
most immediate, direct, and public manner, because he
must be permitted to say that it was a grave
reflection on a public man, that he should be supposed
to act from venal, low, and sordid motives.—(Cheers.)
Anti now the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had
brought the matter before the House, he must say that
he had dono it in a different spirit from what he (Mr.
Smythe) expected he would have done. When he under-
stood that the Hon. and Learned Member had undertaken
to bring the matter belfore the House, he expected that he
would have done it in a speech somewhat similar to those
he was in the habit of making—a speech full of those
aspersions he was in the habit of throwing out. But as
the Hon. and Learned Member had not done so, it only

remained for him (Mr. Smythe) most humbly and
respectfully to apologise to the House, if he
had done anything which involved a breach of its order
and privileges.—(Loud cheers.)
Sir R. PEEL said, according to the course usually
taken in such cases, it would be necessary that both
Hun. Gentlemen should give an assurance, which they
would have no difficulty in giving, that this matter should
not go further.
Mr. ROEBUCK objected to comply with this, because
this would pre-suppose that he intended to pursue that
course.—(Laughter.)
Sir R. PEEL said that assurance clearly exempted the '
Hon. and Learned Gentleman from any suspicion of in-
;ending to do so.—(Hear, hear.)
The SPEAKER—It now only remains for me to dis-
charge my duty by calling on Mr. Smythe to give the
House his assurance that he will riot take any hostile
proceedings.
Mr. SMYTHE—The thing is perfectly absurd.—
(Laughter.) If the Hon. and Learned Member chooses
to bring the matter before the House, and then says I am
not one to bring matters to extremities, thereby insi-
nuating that I am the person—(Laughter)—and throw-
ing the whole odium of the position on me—it is per-
fectly absurd, because you must remember the position
in which the Hon. Gentleman places me. If the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman is willing to state, that he has taken
the initiative in this matter, because he is the most diffi
cult man in the world to deal with—(Laughter, and
(tries of Order, order)— because he has engaged in some
half dozen affairs of this kind.—(Loud cries of Order,
order—Chair, chair.)
The SPEAKER—The Hon. Gentleman must see that
his conduct was not respectful to the House. (He had
been asked not to engage in hostile proceedings ; and he
(the Speaker) now requested that he would answer that
call.
Mr. SMYTHE—Then I will do so in one word. As
it is impossible to determine whether the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman is only here in this House as a
Member of Parliament, I beg in the most full and
unreserved manner to apologise, for any breach of
formulas or forms of the House of which I may
have been guilty. I have no more to say,
excepting that this matter will not go further.
MR. FERRAND'S ACCUSATION.
On the motion of Sir R. PEEL, the Order of the Day
for proceeding with the matter of the complaintiof the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Member for Beverley,
and the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State
for the Home Department, was read.
The SPEAKER—Is William Busfeild Ferrand, Esq.,
in his place ?
Mr. 'errand rose and bowed.
The Clerk at the table then read the report of Mr.
Ferrand's speech.
Mr. FERRAND then rose and said, Sir, I owe, in
the first place, an apology to this House for having been
the unintentional means of taking up so much of its
valuable time. Had the Hon. and Learned Member for
Bath not taken me unawares the other evening—(Hear,
hear)—l should, on reflection, have given him
the answer which the Honourable Member for
Finsbury said he would have given. But,
Sir, having in the hurry of the moment been
induced to reply to the question of the Hon. and Learned
Member, I as sorry that I should have been the cause
of thus taking up the time of the House. I owe
another apology, Sir, to the working-classes in the fac-
tory districts, that I should have been the means this
evening of depriving them of one moment of that sacred
time which they were expecting would be em-
ployed this evening in debating a question of
vital importance—a question to them of life or death.
I hope the House will do me the justice to believe that, if
any remarks of mine, either of a public or of a private
nature, should have wounded the feelings of any indi-
vidual, I shall ever be prepared to give that explanation
to that individual which one man of honour has a right to
expect from another. It appears to me, Sir, that there
have been unfounded conclusions arrived at as to what I
said in reference to the subject now brought before the
House. On Monday evening, as far as my recollection goes,
I said to this House, that I believed that every word of
mine, as reported in the Times newspaper, which related
to the Right Hon. the Secretary of State for the Home
Department and to the Hon. and Learned Member for
Beverley was strictly true; but that I would not vouch
for them until I had again referred to that paper, and if they
were correct, I would come down the following day and
fearlessly and boldly, before this House, either avow or
disavow them. I redeemed my pledge to this House.
I came down with the full intention of doing so, and so
I did. Sir, the House labours under an incorrect
impression, when it supposes that I was driven from the
House by the rude and unmanly interruption
which was offered me by the Hon. Members
opposite—(Cries of " No, no," from the Opposition
benches)— or that I fled from the charge.
Si-, the charge which was made against me was that I used
language at Leeds affecting those two Hon. Gentlemen,
and I admitted I had done so. I admit so, for every
word in that paper is what I uttered at the Leeds meet-
ing. When I left this House I adopted a precedent
which has been pursued by Hon. Members placed under
the peculiar circumstances of myself. I retired from
the House, considering it would be Improper in me, and
impertinent towards the House, if I remained one
moment longer. Having redeemed my pledge, I left,
lest I might be an impediment to the free discussion of
the subject. I have been ordered by the House of Com-
mons to appear in my seat to-day, and I respectfully
obeyed the summons, as I will obey every summons or
order this House may give me if it is justified in so do-
ing.—(Laughter.) I am given to understand that if I
was prepared in my place this evening to plead guilty
to the charge, which the Honourable and Learned
Gentleman has made against me, that I shall
receive a free pardon at his hands—that if I do not plead
guilty the House will then proceed to pass sentence on
me, without even examining ant evidence—(Cries of
" No, no")—that it will proceed to piss sentence on
me without producing any evidence as to the
construction to be put upon my words. I hope
I shall be allowed to say cue word as to
the conduct hitherto pursued by this self-constituted
Court of Honour. Mr. Speaker—No man, Sir, ever sat
in that chair, who conducted himself with more strict
impartiality, more gentlemanly demeanour, or more
graceful bearing than yourself.—(Cheers.) But, Sir, in
this new office as judge of this self-constituted Court of
Honour, you yourself have found the greatest
difficulty in acting as an impartial judge.
Sir, the other evening, when that common in-
!ormer applied to me—(Loud cries of " Order,
order.") I retract the words, but I will
never retract the sentiment. (Partial cheering.)
Sir, when that public accuser—(lnterruption)—it is a
Parliamentary phrase, and it is ungenerous to attempt
to interrupt me. Sir, when that public accuser applied
to me the epithet of falsehood the other evening, I declared
that the language was ungentlemanly. You called me
to order. Sir, when one of the witnesses in this prose-
cution read his evidence against me he supported it by
engrafting on that evidence a leading article in the
Times newspaper.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, the leading men
of both political parties in this House attacked me in
violent language, Nay, one of them, in language un-
justifiable, charged me with a crime, Sir, of
which he himself was guilty. Is he a fit judge to sit
here? I admit that a more noble or generous-hearted man
never trod the soil of Britain; but under the excitement
of the moment he uttered expressions which were quite
unjustifiable.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, the shouts of revenge
which issued from the jury were also within your hear-
ing ; and let the House recollect that the Prime Mi-
nister of England, when I bad scarcely left
these walls, declared in this House, that by having done
so I had deprived it of gratifying itself with a great
deal of amusement. (Hear, hear, and cheers.)
Sir, as a Member of this House, I protest
against these proceedings. In the name of the people of
England—(lronical cheers)—l deny your right to try
me on this charge—in the name of the people of England
I pronounce this self-constituted Court of Honour to be
an illegal and an unconstitutional Court ; and, Sir, in
the name of the people of England, I refuse to plead at
its bar.—(Cries of " Hear, hear," and partial cheering.)
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said he by no means rose to
address the House in answer to the speech of the
Honourable Gentleman who had just sat down.
But his Honourable Friend the Member for Bever-
ley had, in distinct terms, denied the accuracy
of the charge preferred against him by the
Hon. Member for Knaresborough. He (Sir J. Graham)
had not given to the House any statement or assurance
in reference to the facts relating to the charge, which
was then under the consideration of the House,
and it was only for that purpose, before he re-
tired from the House, that he rose to address them.
Now, before the House proceeded further with the consi-
deration of this subject, they should hear his (Sir J.
Graham's statement. The Honourable Gentleman
had referred to the authority of this tribunal,
and said that he did not come to ask the
opinion of the House as to the accusation. But
he (Sir J. Graham), as the accused, was entitled to ask
them for their acquittal and justification.—(Hear, hear.)
He was in a condition to ask for that decision, and he had
a right to state what the answer was, both
as to what concerned himself personally or what
concerned the Hon. Member for Beverley. The first
charge, in which he alone was concerned, was couched
in these few words—that he was a person who had
taken steps to procure a false report for the
purpose of crushing the Hon. Member for Knaresbo-
rough, and that he afterwards dismissed the poor wretch
whom he had used as his degraded and ignominious in-
strument. He had with the utmost diligence endeavoured
to ascertain whether he had had any communication,
direct or indirect, with Mr. Mott in reference to the
report. • He was unable to find any trace
of any correspondence with the Assistant-Com-
missioner. (Loud cheers.) He had endeavoured
to find any trace of communication with the Commis-
sioners,
the central authority, under whose directions the
Assistant-Commissioners acted. He could find no trace
of any such communication.—(Hear, hear.) With re-
ference to the report which he had used in that House—
(Cheers)—he was most anxious to ascertain whether,
although there had been no written communication with
the Commissioners, there had been any verbal commu-
nication between them in reference to the report. He
himself could not recollect that there had been any ;
but he had the positive assurance of the Commissioners
that there had been no such communication, and there-
fore he was in a condition to state in his place in the
House, as far as any assurance from him could be given,
that no direction whatever had issued from him in re-
ference to the report. He repeated, therefore, that it
was an erroneous statement—deliberately adhered to
anmadnnwo Hmthonoownh. Member, retracted—that he " had used his official
power whuees ruron
rntoionwatogabtavieen,ath. false report for the purpose of crush-
ing the
ehad
:u_(sehe
doHuafenloa
instrument."—(gear,
that
y et
adr li,
degraded
a g
rddi dismissed ls
andsedgn the 0
rpooro .
n
that andany lsanunghh ttehri.n)g
as
anything like argument were necessary in such a denial
the dismissal by him of a person in Mr. Mott's
situation was almost en the face of it absurd.
He (Sir J. Graham) said most positively that the die.

missal of Mr. Mott- was not his dismissal—such dis-
missal did not rest With him. It was in the power of
the Poor. law Commissioners ; and he again most dis-
tinctly assured the House that it was not with reference
to this transaction that the dismissal of that gentleman
took place.—(Sir Robert Peel here whispered to Sir
James Graham.) The House would recollect that there
had been a reduction of the Assistant Poor-law Com-
missioners from ten to five, and it was in consequence
of this new arrangement that a selection had taken
place, and Mr. Mott was amongst those not retained in
his place.—(Cheers.) Now the second charge which
had been brought against him (Sir James Graham) was
with reference to the decision of the Nottingham Elec-
tion Committee, and it asserted that he had used his
efforts to cause Mr. Walter to be ejected from his seat—
that he had felt the necessity of getting rid of that gen-
tleman, and did not hesitate as to the means of doing
so. Now he (Sir J. Graham) must deny that he ever
felt the necessity of getting rid of that gentleman at
all.—(Laughter and cheers.) Whether that gentleman
remained in the House, was to him (Sir J. Graham) a
matter of the most perfect indifference. But the allega-
tion that he had ever, directly or indirectly—in any way
or degree whatever, assisted, or wished to assist, in get-
ing rid of that gentleman—or that he ever commie
nicated with the Chairman of the Committee—
(Mr. Hogg) in reference to the subject of that Commit-
tee's deliberations—he could give the House the most
solemn assurance in the power of any man to do, that
such charge, such allegation was altogether and utterly
unfounded.—(Loud cheers from both sides of the
House.) Now he (Sir James Graham) held the privi-
leges of that House in high regard and respect, and he
held freedom of debate—perfect unfettered freedom of
debate—in like respect. He knew not what course the
House proposed to pursue, but before he withdrew he
wished to say, as he before said, that he held the cha-
racter of a Member of that House as part of the charac-
ter of the House. And when any one chose to assail
thecharacter of a Member of that House as such, and
more especially when -one of the Ministers of the Crown
—he must say that he held their highest privilege to
be that of perfect freedom of speech—(Hear)—and he
could conceive hardly any language could be too free
when a serious imputation had to be made—on reason-
able and fair grounds—upon a public officer ; .and he
could also concede great freedom of speech when an
inference from certain known circumstances had to
be drawn. But-in this instance the Hon. Member for
Knaresborongh had not indulged in an inference from
facts, but had made allegation of a fact itself—(Hear)
that he (Sir J. Graham) had, in his public and official
capacity, procured a false return for the pur-
pose of getting rid of an objectionable person.
The question more or less submitted to the House was,
that such a report was made to this House. Now if any
further doubt existed on this matter that doubt might,
he thought, be removed upon further inquiry. For the
purpose of clearing his own recollection he had referred
to the Poor-law Commissioners. A reference might also
have been made to Mr. Mott himself, who was a witness
perfectly satisfactory since he had been dismissed by the
Commissioners. But he (Sir J. Graham) did not think
it would have been proper in his own case to refer to
Mr. Mott, and he had told the Poor-law Commissioners
that it would be a breach of duty on their part to make
that reference. Still, he was a witness whose testimony
would be beyond all doubt, and he might be called by the
House itself. The Hon. Gentleman talked about the
rights of Englishmen ; the right of free discussion was
an invaluable privilege, but there was also another right
which Englishmen enjoyed as direct as that—the right
of a fair defence when accused. He said that he was an
accused party ; he was there to ask for a trial and for
an acquittal, and he was quite satisfied that the House
would give it to him.—(Loud cheers from both sides of
the House.) He was much obliged to the House for the
attention they had paid to this question.
Mr. J. S. WORTLEY said, from the general turn of
the speech of the Hen. Member for Knaresborough, com-
bined with his knowledge of the noble and generous
nature he possessed, he was induced to think that they
were not at that moment without a prospect of some re-
lief from this unpleasant affair. The Hon. Member
seemed to think that the House would not deliberately
consider what was the true construction of the expres-
sions he had used. He apprehended that he was mis-
taken in that, and that on the contrary, it was on that
subject which the majority of the House wished to be
satisfied. If he had had an opportunity earlier, he would
have stated that he did not believe then as he did not
believe now, and as he would not believe till he heard
the Hon. Member state so in his place, that in those ex-
pressions he intended to convey that most offensive
meaning which had been attributed to hits.—(Hear,
hear.) lie could not blame the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber for Bath to the extent that some appeared to blame
him; at the same time, he did sympathise with the Hon.
Member for Knaresborough for the surprise to which he
had been subjected. He could well understand that a
noble mind, being taken by surprise, was unwilling to
retract a word in the heat of the moment, and would then
adhere to what, on reflection, he would be willing to with-
draw. That was the feeling of the Hon. Member for Knares-
borough at the moment. He trusted the House would
pardon him, if he recalled its attention to the expres-
sions used. Ile confessed when he heard the expres•
sions read—and he was not the only person who felt
similarly—he thought they were not so strong as had
been represented.—(Hear, hear.) There were two-
charges supposed to be made by the Hon. Member. The
first charged the Right lion. 13aronet (Sir J. Graham)
with haring procured a false report ; and the second in-
volved not only the Right Hon. Gentleman, but also the
Hon. and Learned Member for Beverley, whom that
Right Hon. Gentleman had, it was said, influenced to
make an improper decision. If they looked to the pas-
sage from which this was inferred, it would be found'
that this conclusion was by no means a necessary one.
(Hear, hear.) He appealed to the Hon. Gentleman, the;
Member for Knaresborough, on the subject, because till:
he heard from him that he meant to charge the Right
lion. 'Gentleman in the sense of suborning a man know-
ingly to put on paper that which he knew to be false, he
would not believe it.—(Hear, hear.) His words were
that he obtained a " report which was false."—(Hear,
hear.) He did not say that there were not circum-
stances which would induce a person to suppose that the
charge was not to be taken to its full" extent.
What he wanted now was to ask the Hon. Member what
he meant, for the words taken by themselves were not so
very serious. The passage did not state that the Right
lion. Gentleman had used his influence to procure a false
report, and that the Hon. and Learned Member for
hear.) He believed
tilhteahate Hon. Member for
rt,he meaning put upon
Behverley
va
words s
oalresb;sri abu h
not
misrepresentingd y
hew ledheedn Hon.thoe i ts.ai
d(Member' for Montrose was not
correct. When the accusation was brought forward, the
Hon. Member for Knaresborough said he never meant
any such thing. This was, no doubt, 4 very serious
matter in two points of view; first, the Hon. Member had
brought a charge against a Minister of the Crown that
he had made a corrupt use of his office and procured a
acquitted the Hon. and
LfaelsaernreedpobritembHeer for
rr
oßnaethfuolflybringing the subject before
the House, because he thought there would be just
grounds for a Parliamentary inquiry if that charge could
be made out. Again, there was a charge against an
officer of the House for corruption in his duty as
Chairman. Two more serious matters could not be
imagined. Then, on the other hand, there was the
danger of fettering the freedom of discussion, which he
looked on as a very serious consideration. He rose for
the purpose of ascertaining from the Hon. Member
for Knaresborough whether he had used the
words with the meaning attributed to them,
for until he had so he would' not believe it.
If he slid, at all events the House was bound to-acquit
and the Right Hon.
state that there was no
gtlhri eeomußnbi
ground
Member
for
forr H t
ho
Beverley,
. S
charges
cr et a ray
whichn oft So
State,
been made against
them ; and as to any ulterior measures which it might
Pt, he would not give any
opinion.
—ed(Cheers.)
e to ado
A pause followed, and there were loud cries for Mr.
,Ferrand. The Hon. Member, however, did not rise in
answer to the call.

Sir R. PEEL would, as the Hon. Member for Knares-
borough had not made any answer to the application
which had just been made to him, assume that he did
not mean to address the House. He could, if he thought
fit, give an explanation ; but he inferred that it was not
the Ihn. Gentleman's intention to make any other ob-
servations in addition to those which he had already ad-
dressed to the House.—(The Right Honourable Baronet
paused fer a moment and then proceeded.) It then be-
came his (Sir R. Peel's) duty to state to the House his
impression as to the course which it would be advisable
for the House to pursue. He begged the House to re-
collect that the office of adviser which he had now
assumed was not a voluntary office. In offering his ad-
vice to the House, he was acting as he had stated the
other night, in conformity with established usage. It
was necessary, in order to enable the House to come to a
decision, that some distinct proposition should be laid
before it.
The SPEAKER here interrupted the Right Hon.
Gentleman, and stated that in conformity with the
usages of the House the Hon. Member for Knares-
borough ought to withdraw.
Mr. Ferrand then rose and left the House, and was
followed by Sir James Graham and Mr. Hogg. Mr. P.
Borthwick rose and also left the House, amidst shouts
of laughter.
Sir R. PEEL resumed—When he had been inter-
rupted by the Speaker he was stating that he had not
assumed to himself the office of adviser voluntarily, but
was acting in conformity with the general rule, which
was, that the first Minister of the Crown in that House
should submit to the House a distinct proposition as to
the course which it might be deemed advisable to adopt.
--(Hear, hear.) He trusted that he had taken no
course with regard to this matter which incapacitated
him from expressing an opinion as to the affair which
had been brought before the notice of the House.
He had thought that it would have been better not to
have noticed the observations which had been made by
the Hon. Gentleman.—(Hear, hear.) When the subject
had been first brought forward he had counselled the
House net to come to any resolution, but to take an op-
portunity of considering the matter. The House had
acceded to his counsel, and had abstained from further
considering the subject until the next day. After that
lapse of time he had recommended to the House not to •
consider the address which had been made by the Hon.
Gentleman in the course of his speech, which he had
not concluded, as a finial conclusion against him, but to
give him an opportunity, after mature consideration, of
stating to the House whether he adopted those expres-
sions—whether he adhered to those charges, or whether
he was prepared to substantiate them. The complaint
had been brought under the notice of the House by his
Hon. Friend the Member for Beverley, and his Right
Hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home lie•
partment. They had complained that a charge had been
preferred against them of improper conduct, in the one
place with respect to official duty, in the other with re-
spect to judicial duties imposed by the House. Whatever
course they took, he trusted they should not try to es-
cape from the difficulty by any equivocation as to the

' nature of those charges. He trusted they should apply
to those charges the principles of common sense, and
ask themselves this question—what is the imputation
which the expressions meant to convey ? It was im-
puted to his Right Hon. Friend, in express terms, that
' he, being Secretary of State, and standing in an official
relation to the Poor-law Commissioners, who were in
communication with him, that he took steps to procure
a report which was false, merely for the purpose of
crushing a Member of the House of Commons. He
could not put the construction of the Hon. and Learned
Member who spoke last on those words. Could those
expressions mean anything but that the Secretary of
State took steps to procure a false' report af-
fecting the character of a Member of the House
Commons ? Could there be any doubt what-
ever upon the plain meaning of his expressions ?
If there were, let them look to the expressions
which followed in a subsequent part of the statement.
It was there said that the Secretary of State dismissed
the poor tool who had been his degraded and ignomi--
nious instrument in fabricating the injurious report.
Surely, the charge was not that his Right Hon. Friend
had quoted a report which had turned out to be erro-
neous, but the charge was, that he had made use of his
official authority for the purpose of fabricating, or pro-
curing the fabrication of, a false report, and that the
man who had made that report was a degraded and ig
nominious instrument. How could he be degraded and
ignominious if there were merely unintentional errors in
the report ? What was the charge with respect to the
Hon. Member for Beverley ? It was said that his Right
Hon. Friend "having an interest in procuring the ex-
clusion of Mr. Walter from the House of Commons, this
Tory Chairman united with Sir James Graham and the
Government in unseating Mr. Walter." Surely the
meaning of that was, that Mr. Hogg acted a corrupt
part. Again, it was said, " How happened it that when
Mr. Hogg tried to explain away his conduct upon that
occasion the whole Government side of the House
listened with feelings of disgust while he Nig-
gled and haggled in his explanation. If it were
merely an erroneous construction of the law,
why should there have been disgust ? Could disgust be
applied to anything but improper, notorious, and cor-
rupt conduct ?—(Hear, hear.) That was the construe.
tion which, applying the principles of common sense, he
affixed to the charges which were contained in these
expressions. But if there were no imputation of cor-
rupt motives, what could have been easier than for the
Hon. Member for Knaresborough to have got up in his
place, and said—" Although the expressions are
correct, yet the constructions you place upon
them are erroneous ; I declare that I entirely ac-
quit Mr. Hogg of corrupt conduct in his judi-
cial capacity ; I think his judgment, which had the
effect of unseating Mr. Walter, was erroneous,
but I never meant to impute to him any deviation from
his duty." Now, was any such explanation offered by the
Hon. Member ? He said, " I adhere to the expressions ;
I protest against the tribunal ; I will not disclaim the
intention of imputing corrupt motives ; the expressions
are correct, and I will maintain entire silence as to the
construction put upon them." Sir, I don't feel that I
am at liberty to explain away the expressions, when all
explanation is refused by the Hon. Member who used
them.—(Hear, hear.) The charge, against the Secre-
tary of State was a definite one. It was not like charges
which had been preferred against the House of Commons
generally—the charges of being influenced by corrupt
motives, or of being guilty of perjury.—(Hear, hear.)
The charge against the Secretary of State was a definite
one : it was that he used the influence of his office for
the purpose of procuring a false report. The Hon. Gentle-
man, in the course of the speech which he had made that
night, said, the House of Commons wished to visit him
at once with condemnation on account of these expres-
sions. He (Sir R. reel) had looked upon the Hon. Gen-
tleman as the accused in that case.—(Hear, hear.) He
had thought that the Hon. Gentleman had preferred a
charge ; and what he had advised was that the House of
Commons should, if the Hon. Gentleman were prepared
to substantiate his charge, immediately appoint a tri-
bunal by which the charges might be established if they
were correct. The House had heard the' statement
made by the Honourable Gentleman, and he presumed
they would then wish to come to some conclusion. He
(Sir R. Peel) considered that the impressions conveyed
or implied a charge of corrupt conduct against two
Members of that House. Tho complaint had now been
formally made, and they were now called upon to come
to some decision upon it. If the Hon. Gentleman had
said that he was prepared to substantiate his charge, ho
(Sir R. Peel) would have proposed that a Committee
should be appointed to examine into the facts, and re-
port them to the House ; but as the Hon. Gentleman
had pursued no such course, he thought they were called
upon to pronounce their opinion on this matter.—(Hear.)
He thought the House would have inferred, frond what
he said on the first occasion when he addressed them,
that he was unwilling to take any step in establishing a
precedent for interference with the expression of opinion
in the House, and especially it was the right of Mem-
bers to question the official acts of a Minister. But
where the imputation implied corruption, and where the
Member declined to substantiate the charge, the Minis-
ter had a right to appeal to the House for its opinion.
He would now read the resolutions which he proposed
to move.—(Hear, hear.) The first resolution referred
to the paragraphs of the speech which had been read by
the Clerk, and resolved, " That in certain expressions in
that speech, it was imputed to the Right Hon. Sir James
Graham, Bart., that he had taken steps to procure a re-
port merely for the purpose of crushing a Member of
that House, and had dismissed the poor tool whom
he had used, as the degraded and ignominious
instrument in fabricating the report. That in another
I pa,sage, in reference to the Committee appointed to try
the petition against the return for the borough of Not-
tingham in 1842, Sir James Graham bad found it neces-
sary to procure the unseating of John Walter, Esq., the
Member petitioned against; and that James Weir Hogg,
Esq., a Member of the House and of the Committee,
aided Sir James Graham in unseating Mr. Walter."—
(Hear, hear.) That was his first resolution, and, in
justice to the gentleman upon whom such grave
imputations had been cast, he would move, secondly—
"That these having been the imputations, and William
Busfeild Ferrand, Esq., having avowed that he used them,
and declined to substantiate the truth of them, this
House is of opinion that the imputations are wholly un-
founded and calumnious, and have no effect, in the
slighest degree, upon the honour and character of the
Members to whom they refer."—(Loud cheers.) He
thought that these resolutions would do justice, and
no more, to the two Honourable Gentlemen who had
been assailed. He believed the resolutions to be pre-
cisely in conformity with the Act—(Cheers)—and he
thought that as this matter had been mooted, it was the
duty of the House to express its opinion.—(Hear, hear.)
He would perhaps now be asked what further proceed-
ing he would recommend the House to take.—(Hear,
hear.) He had looked back to the course which the
House had, on former occasions, pursued in matters of
this kind, and he found that in some of them the House
had proceeded to vote that the charges complained of in-
volved a breach of privilege. He (Sir R. Peel) was un-
willing to follow such a precedent.—(Cheers.) One of
the present charges was against a Minister of the Crown
for acts asserted to be done in his official capacity ; end,
in his opinion, they should not go further than declaring
them to be unfounded and calumnious, for he foresaw
difficulty on future occasions in proceeding to make it a
breach of privilege.—(Hear. hear.) He recollected the
case where he was himself charged by the late
Mr. Cobbett with a serious offence. He was
not a Minister of the Crown, but he was a
Member of that' House, and Mr. Cobbett called upon the
House to address the Crown to dismiss him (Sir Robert
inTgheguHilotyuseofhecaornd-
appear to make a
dtli'uteacettl )eahlflareroggmeed: bhwyehPliieirhmi v yht ooCablvdne iresi gl
d'r
jafdco ernfoubc
svoelruytidoenesp
put impressionhylinupon Cobbettit,
uponfori t hadoorrddcerredßtohoek re-
solutionso-
be expunged from the records of the House, and that by
a majority of two or three hundred to four I—(Hear.)
The House had thought that an ample vindication of his
(Sir Robert Peel's) honour, and a sufficient consolation
to him under his misfortunes—(A laugh)—and he was,
therefore,-perfectly content, That however was the whole
of the proceeding in his case. Another case was when
Mr. Tierney brought charges of partiality against Mr.
Abbott, then Speaker of the House; when a resolution,
moved by Mr. Canning, was passed, that the House ap-
proved of the conduct of the Speaker, and gave no cre-
dit to the charges brought against him. They rested
satisfied with that resolution, and adopted no other af-
terwards. He (Sir R. Peel) believed it was infinitely
better in matters of this kind to abide by an honourable
acquittal of the parties charged, and not to enter into
unnecessary contests with individuals.—(Cheers.) Jus-
tice would be perfectly satisfied by this course—a course
which he had suggested on his own judgment, and with-
out consultation or co-operation with any one. If any
other Hon. Gentleman had another course to suggest, of
course he was at perfect liberty to do so, and to take the
opinion of the House upon it.—(Hear, hear.) It was of
great importance that they should be unanimous.—
(Hear.) He hoped that after the dechfrat.ons which
they had heard from individual Members, the almost
unanimous support of the House would be conceded to
the course proposed.
The SPEAKER was about to put the resolutions, when
Mr. T. I)UNCOMBE rose, and said lie wished to say
a few words before the question was put. He did not
understand the Hon. Member for Knaresborough to say
that he could not substantiate the charges, and he
thought it would be only fair to call the Hon. Gentleman
in again, and give him an opportunity of stating whe-
ther he could or not.—(Cries of "No, no.") What he
had understood the Hon. Member to say was, that he
had no further statement to make to the House.
Sir ROBERT PEEL thought it was sufficiently ob-
vious that the Hon. Gentleman was not prepared to sub-
stantiate the charges before that House, which was the
proper tribunal. His concluding words were that he
would offer no explanation except out of that House, a
phrase which he (Sir R. Peel) did not understand ; but
the Hon. Member said he protested altogether against
that tribunal.

The question was then put.
Mr. FITZSTEPHEN FRENCH said it appeared to
him that the Right Hon. Baronet had not completely
stated the case. He omitted to state that the Hon.
Member for Knaresborough had denied that he meant
to impute any corrupt tampering. He distinctly denied
that he made any such imputation. He deprecated the
course pursued by the Hon. Member, but, as he thought
the House would be acting most inconsistently if they
pursued the course suggested, he would, in accordance
with that opinion, move the following resolution:—
" That, inasmuch as the Noble Lord the Secretary for
the Colonies did on a former occasion in his place in Par-
liament, accuse his former colleagues.'— (Cries of
" Oh, oh," from the Opposition side of the House.)
He should not be deterred from proceeding by these
signs of dislike or impatience; it would only give him
the trouble of reading the resolution a second time. The
Hon. Member proceeded—" of introducing measures for
the consideration of Parliament which involved in-
famous tricks and low thimble-rigging, and as that
Noble Lord had offered no apology or explanation, and

inasmueh- as the. Right Hon. Baronet the First Lord of
the Treasury had, in the course of the debate on a
former occasion, accused Mr. Cobden of exciting to the
horrible crime of assassination, and made no satisfactory
explanation or apology, it is not, therefore, expedient or
fitting for this House to discuss any further the lan-
guage used by the Hon. Member for Knaresborough,
which was supposed to reflect upon the Right Hon. the
Secretary of state for the Home Department and the
Hon. Member for Beverley, particularly as the words
complained of were not used in that House."
The resolution, having no seconder, fell to the ground.
The SPEAKER then put the original motion, which
was carried unanimously.
Lord JOHN MANNERS wished to say a few words
on the resolutions ; bat was told by the Speaker that it
was then too late, as the resolutions had been assented to
by the House.

THE FACTORY BILL.
On the motion that the House go into Committee on
the Factory Bill,
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE rose to move that the
order for committing the Factories Bill (No. 2) to a
Committee of the whole House be discharged, for the
purpose of committing the Bill to a Select Committee.
The first few sentences of the Hon. Member were
scarcely audible on account of the rush of Members from
the House. He asked the House to commit the Bill to
a Select Committee, because a very general misunder-
standing prevailed among all classes as to the effect
which " the Ten Hours' Bill" would have on the wages
of the operatives. Hon. Members in that House enter-
tained the most opposite and conflicting opinions on the
subject, and the working classes in Manchester and other
great manufacturing towns were of opinion that, so far
from depressing, the Ten Hours' Bill would have the
effect of raising, their wages to a very considerable de-
eree. The Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State
for the Home Department presented a petition, signed by
62 firms in Minehester, in which 30,000 workmen were
employed. The petition set forth that the measure, if car-
ried, would cause a reduction of 15 to 25 per cent. in the
wages of workmen. The Right Hon, Baronet himself
was of opinion that the Ten Hours' Bill would reduce the
wages of the operatives 18 per cent. The Hon. Member
for Liskeard thought about 9 per cent. ; and Colonel
Torrens, in a pamphlet lately published, considered that
the Bill, if passed into a law, would reduce the wages of
those to whom it referred 25 per cent. In Sheffield,
sixteen of the trades had voluntarily reduced the hours
of labour. In some trades the reduction had been from
sixteen hours to eleven, in others to ten, and in some to
eight hours, accompanied by an increase of wages
amounting to 15 per cent., and an increase in the number
of hands employed to the amount of one in seven.—
(Hear. hear.) Now he did not think that what bad
taken place in Sheffield might not be expected also to
take place at Manchester. They might in Sheffield
work twelve hours if they liked, but by combining
among themselves, they had carried their deter-
' mination into effect, and the consequence had
been to raise their wages, and not to de-
press them. Trade was not so brisk now in Shef-
field as it was a year ago, and yet by working fewer
hours employment was more general and wages were
better. That was not the only evidence he could ad-
duce. Similar evidence was given before Mr. Sadler's
Committee in 1832, which Committee made no report.
Now, he wanted to have a report on this point. It the
working men were deluded, they should be disabused.
The Hon. Member then read from the evidence taken
before the Committee of 1832 an extract from the exami-
nation of a Mr. Whiting, a manufacturer, who said that
a Ten Hours' Bill would be of the greatest advantage,
and that it would not lower wages. When the people
worked the longest hours wages were lowest. Another
witness stated his opinion that wages would not remain
as they were with a Ten Hours' Bill, that they would
rather rise than fall. Mr. David Brook, of Leeds, was
of opinion that the masters would gain by regulating the
hours of labour, as it would destroy undue competition.
The Hon. Gentleman read other extracts to the same
effect, and the statement ofMr. Samuel Smith, of Leeds,
surgeon, who was of opinion that the reduction of the
hours of labour was necessary to the health of the opera-
tives, and would not lower their wages, but
the contrary. Mr. Oastler was examined before
that Committee, and gave s'inilar evidence, which he
was willing to repeat, as his opinions were
unaltered. Mr. Oastler was of opinion that in the first
instance the effect would be to depress wages a little,
but that the masters would be obliged ultimately to
raise them. In 1841 there was another Committee ob-
tained by Lord Ashley, but that Committee blinked
this question altogether, and made no report as to the
effect of short hours upon labour.—(Hear, hear.) Now,
if the House would consent to a Committee, he should
purpose to confine the inquiry to that question alone.—
(Hear, hear.) He was told that the Committee would
have the effect of hanging up the Bill for a year, but he
thought it better for the credit of the House, and for the
interest of the operatives, that the Bill should be hung
up for a year than that it should pass with a twelve
hours' clause.—(Hear, hear.) The operatives, who
wished him not to press for the Committee, did so be-
cause they were led to believe that Lord Ashley would
carry his ten hours' clause. But every one in the House
know that there was no chance whatever of that.—(Hear,
hear.) He begged the House to have this question of
wages decided before it passed the Bill. If the Com-
mittee was an impartial one he would bow to its deci-
sion, and he was sure, that if it decided against the opi-
nions of the operatives, the latter, however disappointed
they might be, would submit with more satisfaction than
at present. The Committee would put an end to the
unprofitable controversy that was going upon the sub-
ject and bring it to a conclusion satisfactory to the coun-
try, and beneficial both to capital and labour.—(Hear.)
Mr. WARD said that in giving his support to
the motion, it would be expected that he, who
had given the strongest opposition to the principle which
his lion. Friend supported, should state at the earliest
opportunity the reasons for his concurrence. It would
not be supposed that he wished to retract the opinions
he had expressed, or by a side-wind to get rid of this
Bill. As to the Noble Lord (Ashley) he gave him full
credit for the sincerity of his motives, and it was not too
much to ask the same credit for himself.—(Hear, hear.)
He approved of limiting the inquiry to this particular
point of evidence, which had never been fully examined,
and respecting which there was great difference of opi-
nion both in the House and in the country.—(Hear,
hear.) There were reasons both in the House itself,
and out of it, which rendered it desirable that a Com-
mittee should be appointed. Two decisions had taken
place in the House opposed to each other, and it would
be difficult for the House to retrace its steps without
new ground—(Hear, hear)—and out of the House any
retracing of its steps would be attributed to the worst
of motives, to the influence of the Government, and a
disposition in the House to sacrifice the working classes
to party purposes. (Hear, hear.) No decision
would set the question at rest. He had been
himself very severely handled by the Chartist portion
of his constituents—(Laughter)—according to the pre-
diction of his Hon. Friend (Mr. Duncombe) who was in
such matters a good prophet.— (Laughter.) He had
told them that one-third of the people of Sheffield
thought the ten hours' theory could not be applied
to any trade which had to compete with foreigners.
They replied that they regarded the regulations of trade
as the only way of preventing monthly gushes and fluctua-
tions, and to equalise labour, and that in some trades
they were working ten hours, in others eight hours, and
in some six hours; that wages had risen ; that the
middle classes had been benefited, and paupers taken
into employment.—(" Hear, hear," from air. Dun-
combe.) He had now confirmed his Hon. Friend's state-
ment—let him give the answer.—(Hear, hear, and a
laugh.) The system had been in operation only six
months, and he would show what had been the effect in
foreign trade. He met this morning Mr. Muntz, who
asked him, had his constituents all gone mad ?
(Laughter.) He answered, not al', but there were some
for whose sanity he would not answer.—(Laughter.)
Mr. Muntz then told him that lie was in the habit of
sending to Sheffield very good orders for the United
States. The other day he wrote to them to say that he had
a very large order, but he received for answer, that, in
consequence of the combination of the workmen, it could
not be executed, and the order was accordingly sent to
the Continent; and that important trade was most likely
lost to Sheffield for ever.—(Hear, hear.) He had re-
ceived a letter from Sheffield this day (as we under-
stood) describing the injurious effects which the combi-
nation had had on foreign trade. A foreigner came over
recently, to buy for the Turkish market, but he could
not give the prices, and he went to Berlin. Certainly
the articles were of an inferior kind, bus the same heads
and hands which could make these articles would not
require a seven years' apprenticeship to rival us also in
the best. In his opinion, generally speaking, it was not
for that House to interfere in such matters, but rather to
leave things to find their own level. But in the present
instance he thought it would be productive of the greatest
good if the two parties were brought fairly together, and
if they allowed every single suggestion, however im-
practicable, to be brought before a Committee ; for then
they would have such a mass of evidence as must carry
conviction to every mind, however much it might have
been previously warped or prejudiced. With that view
it was that he should vote for a Committee ; with that
view he should go into Committee ; not that he (Mr.
Wird) had altered any one of his opinions already
expressed by him upon this subject in that
House. If he might use the term a Committee would
afford the means of comparing notes to classes between
whom there had been far too much standing aloof. He
believed the working classes were too honest and too
just when truths were fairly brought before them not
at once to &clink: them, and he was satisfied that in a
Committee it wohld be readily proved that when capital
was fettered_workmen's wages must suffer. Capital had
too long beenifagnint in the country. When he saw
two of th'elargeat *establishments in the world deriving
no profit from their enormous outlay, he was satisfied
that intense suffering must find its way among the ope-
rative classes. There was the establishment of Messrs.
Fielden—the largest in cotton, and that of Messrs.
AckroYd—the largest in woollen, which in three years
time had paid no less a sum in wages than 460,000 L, and
they had simultaneously sent in returns to the income-
tax Commissioners,. declaring that during that period
they had realised no profit. He must say he had too
high an opinion of the working classes to think they
would entertain the hope of any higher wages being
obtained by Legislative enactment, when facts and
figures were fairly brought before them. And for these
reasons it was that, without abandoning one opinion he
had advanced, he now felt it his duty to support the
motion for the Committee now sought for.
Sir J. GRAHAM (who was almost inaudible) was
understood to say, that he must oppose the motion for a
Committee on this subject more especially as he believed
such a step to be inimical to the real interest of the
working classes at the present time. In his opinion all
Committees of that House ought to be limited to the
discharge of certain functions, which could hardly be the
case in this instance, for the Committee would not be
gathering facts' but eliciting opinions—aduty he humbly '
believed much better assigned to the House itself. Be-
sidee, he know no iustruwent, of delay ;to curtain as a

Select Committee of that House, and in this instance he
(Sir James Graham) was most anxious that delay, which ,
would answer no useful purpose, should be particularly
avoided.—(hear, hear.) It should be recollected that
upon this subject there were antagonistic views strongly
entertained and vigorously acted up to, and even the
very Hon. Members who proposed and seconded the we'
tion for a Committee (Mr. Duncombe and Mr. ward),
differed as widely as men could do in their opinions upon
it—(Hear, heart)—and seeing that this Committee would
be the medium, not of gathering facts—for of them they
had already all that could possibly be obtained—but 01
eliciting opinions, which it was the province of the House' '
itself to arrive at, he could see no good whatever, but
rather much of evil, were the motion agreed to. Of ill'
formation they had a vast quantity, and that of the mod.'
elaborate character. Since 1832 they had had Comm'
tees that had taken the fullest evidence that could be
brought to bear upon the subject ; and the Committee
now moved for was not for the particular question es
which parties differed—it was not for the effect of *
reduction of wages coincident on the reduction of the '
hours of labour. The motion was to refer the Bill itself:
to a Committee.
Mr. DUNCOMBE said that was preliminary only te,'
the consideration of the question of the reduction a
wages consequent on the reduction of the hours Of
labour.

it J. GRAHAM resumed—That might be a very
important point, taken as a substantive measure, for
consideration, but it was not so brought forward now'.
The motion now was to refer the to a Select Cone
mittee, and to that he (Sir J. Graham) had the strongest
possible objection. Why, in the Committee of 1840, of
which Lord Ashley was the Chairman, the subject o',.
factories arid factory labour had been gone into at very
great length—all the leading points had been gone
with the exception of the limitation of wages (as Wl.'
understood the Right Hon. Baronet), and this question
had been excluded, and wisely excluded, by that-Noble
Lord himself. It was very well known --slot as matter
of opinion, but as matter of fact—that a limitation of the''
hours of labour must lead to a reduction of wages equi'
valent to the saving of the raw material consequent On
the reduction of time. The loss must be compensated
either by a reduction of profit or by a loss on wages' '
But that was not a question to be raised before a Coins
mittee, for the facts were not disputed. For the third •
time they had arrived at the Committee on a Bill con-
taining provisions which had been much sought for hi
the operatives themselves, which had been much desired',
by them, which were founded on moat excellent sutler
rity ; and seeing that the measure was ripe for discussion
by the House, seeing that the operatives themselves ae
not petitions for a Committee,- he earnestly entrea7,,.
the House not to entertain the proposition of the ~
Member for Finsbury (Mr. Duncombe), but to allow 1°1"
Speaker to leave the chair.—(Hear.)
Sir G. STRICKLAND said he must oppose the meti°7
for a Committee, as it appeared to him that the result 0.,
sending the Bill up stairs would be to get rid of it for,
the present session. He, for one, was most anxious ths!
this should not be the result of their proceedings on this
question, as he looked upon the provisions of the Bill si".'
extremely important—even without a Ten or Eleven'
Hour Bill—for either of which he was most anxious,'
He thought no further delay whatever should take place'
He had been a member of Committees upon this sue, ,‘
jest, and he could truly say the subject bad been mos'
fully discussed, and there was no neoessity whatever for.
further information. The particular question now mooted
rested upon opiniou, and if they were to set about asking
opinions, their labours would be no further advanced a;
the end of six months than they were now. He had
listened very attentively to the Hon. Gentleman wil;
had brought forward the motion (Mr. Duncombe),
he could only come to the conclusion that not one of tbs,
subjects brought forward by him had any reference
whatever to the matter. What it was for them in that
House to do, was to consider the means of bettering the.',,
condition of persons employed in factories, and to ester's
suitable protection to women and children. This Ws'
what they had to set about ; and with this view of the
case, he trusted the House would not concede to the'
Hon. Gentlenlan the Committee he had asked for. e,
Mr. HUME said that no man in that House or out o
it regretted more than he did that any person, male or
female, should be compelled, by circumstances, to work
more than ten hours a day. But the country was 13°1'
now in a condition to select what should be the ofte
number of hours an individual should work, for we were
placed in direct and absolute competition with the labour,
market of the world. The only correct principle for
them to try to act upon, in order to better the condition
of the people, to lighten their labour, and add to thee
wages, was to extend the market, to widen the field for
_
employ. The question was, whether their interferenet:
would not add to the existing evil—want of employ
He knew of no question affecting the working Cl
more important than some which had already heel
settled in Committee, and he could not at all admit OSA.
this was not a fair case for such an inquiry.'
rCommittee had formerly been appointed to exittnis,
into the rate of labour and the hours of employrasn;
and so satisfactorily did the evidence bear out his sie'v.o:
that the Committee came to a unanimous dee'ssasi"
against interference. At that time the working
laboured under the greatest delusion, and attempts wbeigi
now being made to mislead them. The Noble Lord
worked on the passions of that House, and had ther,p,
hur;ied the House into a hasty decision. A Cortiasibat
would come to a different result ; and it was felted.
reason that he wished to ace a Committee appw" it
If England were the only manufacturing country' vri
might be all very well to limit competition ; but a Ye'i
different state of things in reality existed. 11);
stead of being checked or injured, all possible *lsis'.
ance should be given to our manufacturing intrests;
If the House interfered with labour, let them apply the
principle of interference to all classes. The cotton ma;
nufacture formed but a small branch of the industry
Of
s: the country. The delusion of the poor people was th
they would receive twelve hours' wages for ten hour
labour. In order to correct that mistake, a Commit ,
should he appointed to investigate the matter, an
then he had no fear for the result. He thought it -'
ts
duty to support the proposal of his Hon. Friend, in or
der that no delusion might induce them hastily to pas"
measure which would have an injurious effect on ,
public interests.
Mr. ESCOTT was surprised that the Hon. Mensbel!
should imagine that the working classes expected t 0
paid the same amount of wages for a less amount
1,0
.
work.—(Hear, hear.) He did not believe that &slab
son was under that delusion ; the fallacy was one W
did not need the appointment of a Committee in ore*
to correct it. He should vote against the motion, bc„
cause he believed it to be grounded on an entire fs'
lacy .—(Hear.)
Mr. G. PALMER had not supported the precOlirli,
of the Noble Lord to establish the period of ten 110°
as the legal period of labour. If interference was as
cessary at all, and he thought the Noble Lord had ms_s
out that it was, he could see no reason for the propos;
delay. The sense of the country was now, howeiii;
so fully ascertained in reference to this matter, that
thought it might safely be left to the manufacturers
themselves. He would vote with her Majesty's Govern,
went for going into Committee.
Mr. VILLIERS said, that if any proof were necesssol
to show that caution ought to be used in legislating
this subject, it would be found in the speech of the to
Gentleman who had just sat down. The Hon. GePtw
fo
man saidthey attached too much importance to thes
reign trade, for, said he, only 400,000 persons are !0
.
„
gaged in it. That showed the extent of the informat;;
possessed on the subject by not the youngest Mel* $0
of the House.—(Hear, hear.) Now, he undertook 4
say, that 1,500,000 persons were employed in thieotl
trade alone.—(Hear, bear.) He would venture tea
that four millions were dependent on the foreign
0.. r
of the country.(Hear, hear.) Ho knew the is
Gentleman belonged to a school which thought that 0
ought to be limited. Did the Honourable Gentles' le
calculate what the effects of that would be. The pelt(
who left the agricultural districts for the manufacturites
localities would be thrown back, and the posers ,t
would be greatly augmented. The question was, onto
there to be a Committee of Inquiry. He thought &if(
was a reasonable request. It was said that the wor";
classes and the master manufacturers were in favour
the Bill. Had the working classes:—had the master 01,4
nufacturers sought this Bill ? The Hon. Member 0
Finsbury said that the Bill as it stood, without
.„,„11e7ti
hours' clause, the working classes did not want. —(%01
hear.) He was well aware that a Ten Hours' Bill ne
not be carried.—(Hear, hear.) He did not see the des
cessity for pressing forward the measure. If thesiti
layed it to satisfy themselves of the truth there 'Tr
not be much mischief in that. He said they wante°_,fts
quiry. It was said that a Committee was of no
ance except to ascertain matter of fact. That was stkos
the stock argument brought forward when inquirYe.
to be refused. He had no great opinion of Constu..,"eteiirlt
of that House, but he thought they might be of as dyer
use in collecting opinions as facts. The Hon. Melsol
for Finsbury, who was a staunch supporter of say
Hours' Bill, said he did not think this measure Woulthers
nefit the working classes. Could anybody then sal id, at
was not a doubt upon the subject? It had beau s'-loor
meetings held on the subject, that wages Wel sir
enough; but one of the necessary consequences otSer,
ing this measure would be to reduce wages.--,(gose
hear.) Their only object in passing a ten hour' woes'
would be to raise the condition of the working ek toiOt
r Would it not be wise to inquire whether it would ust
them if their wages were reduced?—(Hear, hear.)., that
been said during this debate by gentlemen oppesrolea
they lived in times when they must interfere, as'Asyer
there must beconstant intervention between the es'to fse'
and employed. They would not confine theniselvesooter
tories, but would interfere with the relations of •!,
,1
and servant in every department.—(Hear, r.)
they only wanted the truth, why should they be re
of inquiry. Seme of the master manufacturer/ ",ht
it
favour of the Ten Hours' Bill, because they thos_tioes
would destroy the competition of the small pros itt
turers.—(Hear, hear.) The working classes,: iner.
favour of it, because they thought that one- six"....tliP
mills would be erected throughout the counselthe
was, that the competition would be increitseTeclaUse
large master manufacturers were in favour of rase
for one reason, the working classes for the v?e....,4'111. et!:
site.—(Hear, hear.) Couli both be righ.e_Autsysclo.'s,
hear.) Some of them must be wrong. Theron vial:
ing men thought that if females and ell" That
withdrawn their wages would be increased..., l„hour,
a delusion, and for this reason, that unskiftl(ffear
would not obtain the wages of skilled labeer
Oryipg
hear.) They had no reason to suppose that Ile:1121d apt!
men, if they did not labour under a delusi_ollqvenefi!!
for that which would injure them instead °' t orals
was no edep
them. The Hon. Member for Finsbury noted the
meddling with the capital of the country. e "
a reduction of wages would not follow • did no 00.•
the working classes could not establisfrhirlocathesirdolealia
of the hours of labour. He (Mr. Villiers) _sble _
they could make out that. He knew the 111...lee'rhereffrorers:
dition of millions of the people, and he :vr
'for inquiry.—(Hear, hear.) He would r!,_„ sorp4.ll,
Hours' Bill if he thought the conditionof yleir vt!,ge.
classes would be improved thereby, end

_..+~

istance he
lay, whichl
articularly
ected that
s strongly
even the
ed the Ivo'
Er. Ward),
nions upon '
tree would '
them LW. ;
,d—but of
the House.
Itever, but
o. Of
f the moell
I Commit—'_
could he
-Jommittse
aestiun on
effect of
ion of the '
Bill itself,.

ry only to
Lluctiou or':
hours

be a yery
?asure, for
ward now.,
,lect Cone 1,
strongest
f 1840, of
subject of
to at very
gone into, ;
es (as we,
3 question
hat Noble_,.
as matter
ion of the'
ges equi"
,t
equent on
npenssted
m wages.
re a Cow '
the third
Bill con
ht for bf
:h desired'
,nt autho*
discussion
elves e!ri '
entreor:
the
allow tP'

he motion
resulty of
I of it for.
dons IhIS
zs on this
he Bill *iv'
)r Eleven'
anxioullef
ike place'
this sub-
)een most
atever for
w mooted
,ut asking
vanced at
He had
man who'
mbe), soldd
)ne of thy:
reference
a in that
tering the
to extend'
This Wag
ew of the
4e to the

en hours
poraniittea
:ter, and
ght it his
nd, in or'
to pot.
.ct on 1.0.

Member
to b°,
'mount 0'
any ?ef.
e W
orcer
)tion,
ntire

prOPOti
enivallsiotit;-;
d Mad
.„
propo"a
however,
r, that
tfactUrer.
Goer°

1

- -
Would notbe diminished ; but he could never bring his mind
to soen 1.
a conclusion. The greatest activity had been
esed to confirm the working classes in their delusion.—
(Rear, hear.) Some trouble ought to be taken by them
° remove it.—(Hear, hear.) There was no immediate
necessity for the Bill. Nobody was anxious for the Bill
9ua the Bill. If an inquiry were granted, he would be
guided by the evidence. They could not interfere with-
Out diminishing capital; they could not diminish capi-
tal without diminishing competition ; and they could
'lot do that by Act of Parliament. If they wanted to
t,°--dinainish competition, they must do so by increasing
be demand for the labour, that was the only way they
could do so ; and they would only aggravate the present
t7il bi passing an Act of Parliament which would have
e'fleet of diminishing capital.—(Hear, hear.)
'Sir J. GRAHAM explained.
Lord ASHLEY said he should not have risen were it
'Lot for what had fallen from his Hon. Friend, the Mem-
rr for Wolverhampton, who said that nobody cared for
that Bill qua the Bill. He begged to contradict
statement, for he was quite sure the
Working-classes were anxious for the larger
Portion of the Bill. They regarded the Bill, as now
ntroduced, ai a very great improvement, and many of
its provisions had an admirable tendency. They were
Fateful to the Government for having introduced such
Uill• It was grounded on the report of the Committee
°f which he had the honour to be Chairman, before
which three or four very eminent manufacturers
were examined. Now he had to assure the House and
Li% Hon. Member for Finsbury, that the delay which
"Dul be caused by sending this Bill to a Committee
would be a
source of great disappointment.—
(Cries of " Hear, hear.") Those who represented
the operatives of Yorkshire and Lancashire were
laxious about the Bill. Did not the Hon. Member for
Finsbury know this ? Had he not received informa-
!a on the subject ? They begged of him not to inter-
neany delay, or to use his influence in getting the Bill
t up stairs to a Committee. He (Lord Ashley)
made it his business to inquire on the subject, and he
knew the working men would be most bitterly disap-
!)lotnted if the Bill were delayed one hour longer than was
qe:e"arY• They felt that no good would come from in-
trY• The Bill would be thrown back to the end of
auveoisdession, or, perhaps, till next session. He wished to
wouldentarin
g upon the main question of wages, but he
concludedraw bl°
by implaing the Hon. Gentleman to
beesttse-if IT," motion, and not to divide the House ;
eons
in
suledounilndgituaeepin,carrying it, he would not
ovrofc the working classes.—(es or calming the expecte-
oshfortn t°6-I:IDEN said that if by a measure which would
hours of labour they could obtain one-tenth
serge good promised by the advocates of such a measure,
fo Person of ordinary humanity would refuse to vote
the
8i11,.50 simple as it was in its character, and so
little Calculated to do injury to anybody else.—(Hear,
benefit
But the question was, would a Ten Hours' Bill
them, if wages were to be reduced in proportion
,`l3 the hours of Work ? He observed that amongst the
''"•
oeates of the measure there was a shrinking from
this question—(Hear, hear)—but it was the main ques-
Z",--(Hear.) He was unwilling to adopt the phrase
working classes." It implied a distinction ; he thought
that there should be no distinction of interests, but he
Wished to say that if they passed a Ten Hours' Bill,
with the prospect of benefiting the' working classes, and
tklit wages were to be reduced in proportion to the time,
ge.Y laboured under a delusion that it would be accept-
Sle to them. The real question was raised by the Hon.
Member for Finsbury, and it was a most important
question to raise in the preliminary step of the Bill—
nit question was, Would the reduction of the hours of
;7%11r reduce the rate of wages ?—(Hear, hear.) Now,
Zilw were the working classes paid in the cotton dis-
h etsj They were paid by the piece.—(Hear,
wear.) He had met with but two arguments
belch tended to show that the same rate of wages would
retid, though the time of working was diminished.
first was, that the manufacturers would increase
speed of their machinery, and by this means they
• produce in ten hours what was now produced in
e. He had taken pains to inquire into that fact,
• the answer he got was this, that the machinery was
6' i
en by the steam-engine, and that it was driven as
t as t was profitable to work it—(Hear, hear)—and
tillo was rather a tendency in some places to diminish
oki.7l2lolty of machinery rather than accelerate it, be-
the'e by increasing the rapidity of the movements
ineY lost more in waste than they pined by the
patir.eage of production.—(Hear, hear.) f he next pro-
d' It°n he had heard put forward was this—that by
titttninishing the hours of labour from twelve to ten,
th„,,e would be a dimmished produce in the market, and
there would be no more to be sold ; and, consequently,
woere
~ would be one-sixth more mills erected, which
13 employ the sanie number of hands as at present.
tx/this argument proceeded on the supposition_ that a
the'u inantity of cotton goods would be sold, whatever
deg Price was, forgetting that the present price of cotton
ate!ided on its cheapness, and that the manufacturers.
entitled
eht,„ great sales of cotton in consequence of its
the7ruesa--(Hear, hear.) It was in consequence of
ii,cirtrk,facilities in obtaining iron and coals, and the long
pen tng hours of the labouripg men,' that they had
the Country,
ad the power-loom and spinning-jenny, not only in
Ulu "untrY, but had even superseded the distaff and
the aPindle . in other countries. Now if they increased
ep: cost to the manufacturers, the price would be in-
to "etl, and they would perhaps force other countries
th roestore their spindle and distaff, where they were now
th_r wn aside. Now these two arguments, if arguments
„ could be called, were put forward and impressed
tothe working men with great earnestness. He
.001.. I
t for granted that they would see the unsoundness
lb their views, and that their wages Would be reduced if
YreduCed the time. That was admitted by the Hon.
, Learned Member for Winchester. That seemed so
generally admitted. If it were admitted, and put
2rward honestly and fairly before the labouring men,
Fftwould they then be anxious for a Ten Hours' Bill?
."' hear.) 'Let them recollect that they had short-
liZe work before in the cotton districts. Did the men
o,s,4:;.xii7gefeaurr,
dhoeord They worked eight hours a
t) Did the workingwamgeens fifoordthtbeeirwleagboesurr.--(aisedflefaorr,
hilad f°,_ur days' work?—(Hear, hear.) No. He
wathiPerhesentsPelt*ing to an eminent manufacturer, who was
in town, upon the subject, He had mills
formed'r driven by two steam•engines, and he in-
iloar hi that if one of them worked even half tin
slower: than the other, there was a perceptible
on inj the wages of the men.—(Hear, hear.)
ths„ wing ltdin4ted those—they were indisputable—would
labi; proceed to pass. a law to diminish the wages of
operar for the working classes? Did they think the
themitti,ves of Lancashire would thank them and bless
wejd,u-ir Passing such an Act? for that was what it
red— cultic tn. They were going to pass an Act to
the wages of the working classes. Did they
fie'', whatever basis they could put it on, they could
ape from the obloquy of passing such an Act? A
rtit deal had been said in this discussion with regard
bee", conduct of free traders. The free traders had
lute charged with being friendly to long hours of labour,
thti the Hon. Member for Finsbury had undertaken to
114;Y parties on this subject, and he divided them into
ke mg classes and free traders. But he told the Hon.
14!cher for Finsbury, who represented himself as the
Yceate of the working classes, that the working classes
bel-
me the friends of free trade. Indeed, lie (Mr. Cobden)
`stb•eber upbraided with having, at several meetings
hit " no called in various parts of the country, none
she lower orders as his hearers—that he was
opus, na only in his free trade doctrines by the
free-".VPS. But with regard to the accusation of
the traders being the friends of long hours for
asn,working classes, he (Mr. Cobden) stood there
el,k;:e advocate of the only means by which the working
tva,: lejs could have any mitigation of their labour. He
elor ,g, tell them how they could shorten what he must
taps the unreasonably long hours of work in manufac-
fop e•fill Ile did not say, as the Noble Lord the Member
lise„'"'"ndon had said, that a reduction of the price of
th,;-L, meat, and other necessaries, would compensate
it°Peratives for any reduction in wages consequent
dean a lessening of the hours of labour. He (Mr. Cob-
-044', did not look to any reduction in the price of bread,
casting
or coffee, or any other thing, as a means of com-
tlating the labourer for any reduction of wages. But
rti'vY would enlarge the market of the manufacturer-
-1.116. eY Would allow a free exchange of the productions of
to "a" entry for, the corn, sugar, and coffee of other
11j-fie; without any restriction whatever—they would,
(14,„!llet means, so raise the value of the pro-
-114;13ns of the operative, and, in consequence,
al value of his labour—(Hear, hear)—and they
piZtld also at the same time so enhance the value of ca-
ii,r employed in manufactures, that it was his firm be-
lost 'eat the labourer with ten hours' work might have
much wages as he now had, and capitalists as
ft Profit. Profit. That was not his own opinion merely.
htsiatt the opinion of a most intelligent capitalist, and
go Lllieht, in conversation with him, he said, " You may
to 1„,.." ,the House of Commons, and state that I am ready
laon-'4ao this bargain with them: that if they remove all
give °Polies that obstruct commerce, I will immediately
tires the same wages for ten hours work to my opera-
tion as I now give them. He thought the investiga-
W which would be had before the Select Committee
at-,tt tend
‘-‘ the ve much to clear up the disputed points
the, redifferences of view on the subject, and he would
;for joorsbeivi4! fur the amendment of the Hon. Member
.Ilebrangers were then ordered to withdraw, and, the
''sc divided. The numbers were—
' For going into Committee
For the amendment 42
Majority —lo3
the Uouse then went into Committee, Mr. GREENE
6. chair.
o:4*. 1 and 2 were agreed to without discussion.
k clause 3 being read,
in 1,,r. MARK PHILIPS took occasion to explain that
'llie,"ine remarks which he had made on a former occa-
ktf;hrl:Veeting sub-inspectors of factories he had never
ters'n any personal attack on the present sub-inspec-
tba*, The manufacturers were desirous that the officers
oto be all of the same class, for though they had no
Plaint against the present, they looked to the contin-
tos_•Y of persons being appointed to the situation of sub-
afcctors who were not so respectable as the present
'147., He would suggest that for the future there
4464; be no such distinction as that of inspectors and
si,7,Petcrs.
too• GRAHAM begged leave to observe, with re-
t'est . the powers given by this clause, that it was a
hae.:eti°n of the powers of the inspectors. They had
trans "'fled with the power of making rules and regula-
Rein:
to That was now taken from them, and all rules
Va
be
„made by Parliament.—(Hear, hear.)
ltd,ithntiespect to the character of the sub-inspectors, he
eeDtio to mention that they were, with one single ex-
iatt,
_2! selected by his predecessors, and, since he came
thos:niee, there had not been a single complaint against
kr °ffieers.
tuialaRIGHT said that unless there was some good
kh on, for giving inspectors the power of entering any
Inallufactory any time they pleased, it was 11

power that ought not to be granted to them. lie
thought if the Right Hon. Baronet wished to consult the
public good and the opinion of the manufacturers, he
would alter this clause.

After a few observations from Mr. BLAKEIVIORE,

Sir J. GRAHAM said he quite agreed with the Hon.
Member for Durham as to the necessity of the Govern-
ment not asking for powers that should be needlessly
exercised. The powers given by this clause would not
be called into effect as a_ general rule ; they would only
be exercised in cases where the inspectors, or sub-inspec-
tors, had reason to believe that the law was violated,
and apprehended that the legal power of the master to
exclude the sub-inspector would be used to conceal a
violation of it.

Mi. M. PHILIPS thought there might be a more
minute division of the manufacturing districts, and that
an inspector might be made resident in each district.
He should wish to ask whether some such classigcation
could not be, made?

Sir J. GRAHAM said that at present the whole of
the manufacturing districts of the country were divided
into four parts, over each of which was an inspector,
with sub-inspectors through all the subdivisions of these
districts. Thus the Secretary of State had, by means of
these four inspectors, through the sub-inspectors, a con-
trol over all the manufacturing districts of the kingdom.
He had formerly entertained an opinion similar to that
expressed by the Hon. Member, but he had subsequently
seen reason to prefer the present arrangement.
Mr. HUME said that at the time they were removing
all restrictions from every trade it was melancholy to
hear a declaration from the Secretary of State, that he
must have under his control the whole of the manufac-
turing districts; that was, that he must control all the
cotton manufactures of the kingdom.—(Hear, hear.)
In attempting it, he was undertaking what no one could
possibly perform. It appeared to him an inteference
totally uncalled for, and, he felt that the House ought to
be ashamed to sanction it. He could only enter his pro-
test against it; the whole Bill would not only be a nul-
lity, but would be a discredit to the country; the Go-
vernment seemed to think that it could manage the
capital of the kingdom better than the manufacturers
themselves.

Mr. TATTON EGERTON objected to the power
given to the sub-inspectors to ♦isit mills without the
presence of witnesses.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that the inspectors
could not, in any case, adjudicate. That power was
taken away from them. They could now only state facts,
in the way of reporting to the Government.
After a few words from Mr. BROTHERTON, the
clause was agreed to.
Clause 4 was agreed to without discussion.
On clause 5, which proposes the establishment of a
central office of inspection, to be situated in the metro •
polis, being put,
Mr. MARK PHILIPS said he had the greatest ob-
jection to the clause. London was the very worst place
in which such an office could be established. He knew
nothing of the nature of the documents which formed
the records of the business of the inspectors, but he was
convinced that, if they created this office, it would only
be the commencement of a more extensive system of the
same kind. He thought such records might, with great
propriety, be transmitted to the Board" of Trade. The
Home .office was not the best place for them. All that
the Secretary of State had to do, was to see that the
duty of the inspectors was performed according to law.
He viewed the creation of this office with great jealousy,
and he should oppose the insertion of the clause.
Sir J. GRAHAM defended the formation of the office,
on the ground that it would, at a very small cost, fur-
nish the means of organising a mass of most valuable
information.

Lord HOWICK thought that the objection of the Hon.
Member for Manchester to the clause, was a good one.
It tended to take the attention of the inspectors from
their districts, and to fix it on London. If an establish-
ment of this kind was created, the inspectors would be
apt to be making work for themselves. He thought that
twenty resident inspectors with one intelligent senior
clerk at the Home-office to receive their reports, would
be a more satisfactory. organization in that department.

Sir J. GRAHAM 'had— formerly entertained a some-
what similar opinion, but he had seen reason to change
it since he had become more acquainted with the system.
He said that the arrangement would be most conducive
to th• convenience of the public service.
Mr. BROTHERTON suggested that Manchester
should be substituted for London, as the place for de-
positing the records.
Mr. HUME thought there was no necessity for the
creation of a special office. A clerk in the Secretary of
State's office could receive and collate the reports. The
principle of the Bill was to compel the inspectors to re-
side in their districts, and this establishment of an office
in London was in direct contravention of the principle
of the Bill.

Mr. F. MAULE was glad to find that the experience
of the Right Hon. Gentlemen had induced him to come
to the opinion that the system of the inspectors and the
sub-inspectors was the best. He recollected the time
when the Right Hon. Gentleman had endeavoured to
force opposite views upon him (Mr. F. Maule). He was
glad to find that the Right Hon. Gentleman had now
come round to his views. He should support the clause.
Mr. C. WOOD could not understand the necessity for
the constitution of this new office in London. All the
changes which had been proposed did away with the
necessity for it. While the inspectors possessed the
power of making regulations, there might be some ,ne-
cessity for their having an office in London, in which to
meet and deliberate, but that power was now taken from
them, and there was no necessity for the creation of a
new office.

Sir J. GRAHAM said that the inspectors were now
obliged to come to London twice every year. The
clause, in fact, only established an additional clerk or
two to assist the inspectors when they came to London.
Mr. STRUTT asked who was the head of the new
office ? If the office was to consist of only one or two
additional clerks, why could not they be attached to the
Home Secretary's-office ?
Sir J. GRIHAM did not attach any particular im-
portance to the clause—(Hear, hear)—but he had pro-
posed the appointment on the grotind of economy. The
Salaries and allowances of the clerks in the Home Se-
cretary's-office were on a high scale. The clerks in this
office would be appointed at a lower salary, and the ac-
commodation in the Home Secretary's-office was so very
limited, that if additional clerks were appointed for this
purpose it would be necessary to procure for them addi-
tional accommodation.
. Mr. BRIGHT hoped the Right non. Baronet would
give up the clause. If the office was to have no head
there was no necessity for the clause ; but if they ap-
pointed a new office, it would not be long before a head
was appointed to it. If the clause passed, within two
years an Inspector-General would be appointed. This
office had been shadowed forth in a Factory Bill some
two or three years ago, on which occasion some allusion
had been made to the appointment of an Inspector-Ge-
neral. He was astonished that the Right Hon. 'Baronet
should give encouragement to the Factory Inspectors to
come about the Home-office. He was sure the expe-
rience of the last two years must have convinced the
Right Hon. Baronet of the great harm which was oc •
casioned by these incessant meddlings with trade. There
were but two Factory Inspectors residing in the districts,
one in Kent and the other at Stroud, but neither Mr.
Horner nor Mr. Saunders, the Inspectors of Lancashire
and the West Riding of Yorkshire, resided in their dis-
tricts. There were already jobs enough in the country,
and no good would arise from this. office. He thought
the Right Hon. Baronet must have' had as much of fac-
tory legislation within the last two years as was agree-
able to him. The great body of the manufacturing inte-
rest were against this clause, and he hoped the Right
Hon. Baronet would withdraw it.

Mr. STUART WORTLEY supported the clause.
He thought that the apprehensions of the Hon. Member
for Durham, that the constitution of this office would
lead to the appointment of an Inspector-General, were
unfounded.

Mr. IL PHILIPS hoped the Right Hon. Baronet
would withdraw the cause. There was no necessity for
the creation of the office, and nothing could be worse
than the appointment of clerks without a head. If that
office were created returns would be constantly moved
for from it, the printing of which would entail a great
expense to the country.
1)r. BOWRING entreated the Right Hon. Baronet to
withdraw the clause, which was feebly supported and
strongly opposed. It was unpalatable in the manufac-
turing districts, and there was something objectionable
in the creation of a new office.
After a few words from Sir J. GRAHAM, the Com-
mittee divided— _

For the clause
Against it 53
Majority in favour of the clause
Clanses 6 and 7 were agreed to.
On clause 8 being proposed, which provides that no
manufacturer shall take a child into his employment
without first obtaining a surgeon's certificate,
Mr. BROTHERTON objected, on account of the
burden it threw on the manufacturers. This burden
was not less than 20,0001. a year. Re should move, on
bringing up the report, the insertion of a clause to re-
medy this._____

Mr. .M. GIBSON would support the views of the Hon.
Member for Salford.
After a few words from Sir J. GRAHAM and Mr.
BRIGHT, the clause was agreed to.
Clauses 9 and 10 were, after some discussion, also
agreed to.
Clauses from 11 to 18, inclusive, with verbal amend-
ments, were agreed to.
Clause 19 was agreed to, after a few words from Mr.
Ward, Sir J. Graham, and Mr:M. Philips.
On clause 20 there was some discussion, several
Members having objections to offer. In the midst of
the discussion,

Mr. GREENE put the question, and the clause was
passed nearly unnoticed.
Mr. BRIGHT was objecting to the clause, when
Mr. GREENE informed him that it had passed.
Mr. BRIGHT said he had not observed it.—(Hear.).
Clause 21 was then proposed ; it provides that Ina--
chinery shall be guarded.
Mr. BLAKEMORE said the clause would be of no
effect, and suggested that
.clauses to the following effect
be substituted :
"Two magistrates to be empowered to award damages
not exceeding, say ten pounds, together with a right of
action in cases of injury to the person, from defective or
ill secured machinery.
"The party injured to be allowed, say five days, to elect
whether to accept the damages or proceed with the action.
"In case of proceeding with the action, the damages
awarded by the magistrates to be applied, as far as ne-
cessary, in paying the expenses of the action, and for
that purpose to be deposited with the clerk of the peace.
"The magistrates' warrant of conviction and award to
be received in the courts as the declaration on which the
action is tried.
"The: depositions taken by the magistrates to be the
instructions to counsel.
"Factory counsel to be appointed by the judges, the
same Si ranging barristers new are.

"Damages awarded by the jury to be secured for the
benefit of the injured pers•an.
After a few words from Sir J. GRAHAM, the elausa
was agreed to.

On clause 22 being put,
Mr. BRIGHT said that this clause was likely to
occupy some time, and as it was now near twelve o'clock
he hoped the Right lion, Gentleman would have no ob-
jection to postpone the discussion.
Sir J. GRAHAM having assented.
The House resumed, the CHAIRMAN reported progress,
and obtained leave to sit again.
POOR-LAWS.

The Committee on the poor-laws was postponed till
Friday, the 10th of May.
On the motion of Mr. AGLIONBY a Select Com-
mittee was agreed to, to inquire into the state of the co-
lony of New Zealand, and the proceedings of the New
Zealand Commissioners, and to report the evidence and
their opinion to the House.
The House then adjourned at Twelve o'clock.

FRIDAY NIGHT'S GAZETTE.
WHITEHALL, APRIL 25, 1844.
The Queen has been pleased to direct letters patent to be
passed under the Great Seal, granting the dignity of a Knight
of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland unto
Thomas Herbert Maddock, Esq., of the Bengal Service.
DOWNING-STREET, Aram 26.
The Queen has been pleased to appoint Charles Bennett,'
Esq.; to be ProcvoßstodmilN OFFlCE,arshalGenera APRlLforth 2
elsl4n.a d of St. Lucia.
MEMBERS RETURNED TO SERVE IN THIS PRESENT
PARLIAMENT.
BOROUGH OF HUNTINGDON.—Thomas Baring, Of No, 40,
Charles-street, Berkeley-square, in the county of Middlesex,
Esq., in the room of Sir Frederick Pollock, Knt., who has
accepted the office of Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer.
BOROUGH or WOODSTOCE.—The Right Honourable John
Winston Spencer Churchill, commonly. called Marquis of
illandford, in the room of Frederic Thesiger, Esq., who has
accepted the office of her Majesty's Solicitor-General.
CITY OF EXETER.—Sir William Welk Follett, Knt., her
Majesty's Attorney-General.
WAR-OFFICE, APRIL 26.
Ist Dragoon Guards—W. H. de Rhodes, Gent., to be Cor-
net, by purchase, vice Sutton, appointed to the 12th Light
Dragoons, April 26.
12th Light Dragoons—Lieutenant T. Barnard to be Captain,
by purchase, vice Philips, who retires ; Cornet J. Williams to
be Lieutenant, by 'purchase. vice Barnard ; Cornet H. G.
Sutton' from Ist Dragoon Guards, to be Cornet, vice Wil-
liams, April 26.
9t.h Regiment of Foot—Captain J. Harvey, from 44th Foot,
to be Captain, vice Ballard, who exchanges, April 26.
11th Foot—Lieut. S. S. Cox, to be Captain, by purchase,
vice Forbes, who retires; Ensign J. Pattisou, to be Lieutenant,
by purchase, vice Cox ; W. Goode, Gent., to be Ensign, by
purchase, vice Pattison, April 26.
23d Foot—Assistant-Surgeon W. G. Watt, front the Staff,
to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice Loinsworth,who resigns,April 26.
25th Foot—Lieut. E. G. Whitty, from 26th Foot, to be
Lieutenant, vice Rudyerd, who exchanges, April 26.
26th Foot—Lieut. H. E. S. Rudyerd, from 25th Foot, to
be Lieutenant, vice Whitty, who exchanges, April 26.
44th Foot—Captain V. V. Ballard, from 9th Foot, to be
Captain, vice Harvey, who exchanges, April 26.
46th Foot—Lieut. W. H. O'Toole to be Adjutant, vice
Sharpe, deceased ; Ensign J. E. Spilling to be Lieutenant,
without purchase, vice O'Toole, appointed Adjutant; J. G.
Clarke, Gent., to be Ensign, vice Spilling; April 26.
47th Foot—Lieut. F. Estwick, from the 94th Foot, to be
Lieutenant, vice Clarke, who exchanges, April 2
51st Foot—Lieutenant W. Birch, from the 25th Foot, to be
Lieutenant, vice Stansfield, who retires; Lieutenant W. Birch
to be Adjutant, vice Carey, promoted, April 26.
71st Foot—Brevet-Major W. Guard, from half-pay. Sub-
Inspector of Militia in the lonian Islands, to be Captain, vice
H. -E..,Austen, who exchanges ; Lieutenant T. H. Colvill to
be Captain, by purchase, vice Guard, who retires; Ensign W.
Hutchinson to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Colvill ; J. I.
Macdonnell, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Hutchin-
son, April 26.
74th Foot—Serjeant-Major F. Dunbar to be Quartermaster,
vice D. M'Curdy, who retires upon half-pay, April 26.
87th Foot—Lieutenant W. Boyd to be Captain,by purchase,
vice W. Boyd, who retires, April 26; Second Lieutenant W.
E. Adams to be First Lieutenant, vice Vigors, deceased,
April 11 ; Second Lieutenant F, Colegrave to be First Lieute-
nant, by purchase, vice Boyd, April 26; Ensign A. Dewar,
from the Royal Canadian Rifle Regiment, to be Second
Lieutenant, vice Adams,"April '25 ; J. Doherty, Gent., to be
Second Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Colegrave, April 26.
94th Foot—Lieut. R. N. Clarke, from 47th Foot, to be
Lieutenant, vice Estwick, who exchanges, April 26.
Ist West India Regiment—T. Clark, Gent., *to be Ensign,
without purchase, vice Thompson, deceased, April 26.
Royal Canadian Ride Regiment—J. G. Stewart, Gent., to
be Ensign, without purchase, vice Dewar, appointed to the
87th Foot, April 26.
Unattached—Lieut. G. R. Langley, from the 19th Foot, to '
be Captain, without purchase, April 26.
Commissions by the Lord Lieutenant of Middlesex.
C. S. Hawkins, Esq., to be Deputy Lieutenant ; W. F.
Vernon, Esq., to be ditto, April 22.
Royal Eastern Regiment of Middlesex Militia—T. M.
Carvich, Esq., to be Captain. A pril22.
Commissions by the Lord-Lieutenant of Rutlandshire.
The Hon. C. Q. Noel. commonly called Viscount Campden,
to be Deputy Lieutenant ; the Hon. W. H. Downey to be
ditto ; H. B. Pierrepont, Esq., to be ditto, April 20.
Commissions by the Lord-Lieutenant of Sussex.
G. Basevi, Esq., to be Deputy-Lieutenant ; J. H. Borrer,
jun., Esq., to be ditto ; Lieut.-Col. C W. Elwood, to be ditto ;
C. Goring, Esq., to be ditto • M. Pringle, Esq., to be ditto ;
J. S. D. Scott, Esq., to be ditto, April 19.
Commission by the Lord-Lieutenant of Warwick.
Warwickshire Yeomanry Cavalry.—The Hon. W. H.
Leigh. to be Cornet, vice G. P. B. C. Noel, resigned,
April 12.
Commissions by the Lord-Lieutenant of Shropshire.
North Salopian Yeomanry Cavalry.—R. P. Jones, Gent.,
to-be Lieutenant, vice Clay, resigned; W. H. Austin, Gent.,
to be Cornet, vice Jones.

BANKRUPTS.
GEORGE PARK, cowkeeper, Charles-street, Commer-
cial-road, Stepney, to surrender May 2, at eleven, and June 7,
at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official
assignee, Basinghall-street • Turner • Chancery-lane.
SHARRINGTON BACHE, builder, Commercial-road,
Peckham, May 3, at half-past two, and June 7, at twelve, at
the Court of Bankruptcy. Pennell, official assignee, Basing-
hall-street • Buchanan and Grainger, 13asinghall-street.
BENJAMIN WILLIAM BLAKE, merchant, City-road,
May 7, at one, and June 7, at eleven, at the Court of Bank-
ruptcy. Turquand, official assignee, Old Jewry-chambers;
Hill and Matthews, Bury-court, St. Mary-axe.
HENRYHRt atthcali ffco- hailth wo
of
yB,
Bankruptcy.
Graham, yat
eleven,
engineer, twelve, at
official assignee, Coleman-street, City; Watts, Ber-
mondsey-street.
JOHN WALTON ROBEY, builder,. Upper John-street,
Fitzroy-square, May 7 and June 12, at twelve, at the Court of
Bankruptcy. Johnson, official assignee, Basinghall-street;
Walton and Forbes, Warnford-court, Throgmorton-street.
WATKIN ROGERS, draper, Newport, Monmouthshire,
May 10 and June 7, at eleven, at the Bristol District Court.
Hutton, official assignee, Bristol ; W. and C. Bevan, Bristol ;
Edward and R. W. Bennett, Manchester.
THOMAS BAKE, brewer, Manchester' May 17, and
June 4, at eleven, at'the Manchester District Court. Fraser,
official assignee, Manchester; Dearden, Manchester; Johnson,
Son, and Weatherall, Temple, London.
ILLIAM ASHWIN, steel pen maker, Birmingham, May
15, and June 7, at eleven, at the Birmingham District!. Court.
Christie, official assignee, Birmingham ; Rawlins, Birmingham.
ROBERT HARRIS, eating-house keeper, Liverpool,
May 9, at half-past eleven, and June 7, at eleven, at the Liver-
pool District Court. Morgan, official assignee, Liverpool ;
Norris, Allen, and Simpson, Bartlett's-buildings, Holborn ;
Norris, Liverpool.
ROBERT DAWSON NEWMAN, corn-factor, Leeds,
at the Leeds District Court. Young,
official assignee, Leeds ; Dunning and Co., Leeds;
May 8 and 31, at eleven, Smiths on
and Co., Southampton-buildings, Campton-buildings, London.
JOHN SIMPSON, jun.
Wakefield, Y and WILLIAM TOFT. alkali-
manufacturers,orkshire, May 11, and June 1, at
eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Hope, official assignee,
Leeds ; Gregory and Co.' Bedford-row, London ; Taylor and
Westmoreland, Wakefield.

•
NOTICES OF INSOLVENCY.
R. Hilder, Bradwell, Suffolk.
G. Warburton, joiner, Manchester.
P. Unsworth, butcher, Liverpool. •
G. Chambers, clerk, Rosoman-buildings, Islington.
W. Pennington, draper, Bedlington, Durham.
G. Sheppard, cook, Upper Stamford-street, Waterloo-road.
G. Taylor, jeweller, Meredith-street, Clerkenwell.
W. Fothergill, licensed victualler, Basley, Yorkshire.
T. L. Rogers, farmer, Knockin, Shropshire.
J. Town, wheelwright, Halifax, Yorkshire.
F. Cooderham, nurseryman, Vassal-road, North Brixton.
H. Phillips, Temple-street, St. George's-road.
T. H. Atkey, grocer, Brighton.
J. J. Limebeer, boot maker, Great Queen-street.
E. Wilkinson, innkeeper, Blyth, Yorkshire.
H. Fearnside, carver and gilder, Leeds.
R. H. Thurston, baker, Norwich.
H. Nicholson, butcher, Leeds.
H. Seholefield, wood dealer, Huddersfield, Yorkshire:
G. Whitworth, farmer, Olney, Buckinghamshire.
J. Craven, cora miller, Leeds.
S. Baxter, fisherman, Barking, Essex.
B. I. Deane, lucifer manufacturer, Sidney-street.
R. Everett, clerk, Great Ormond-street, Queen-square.
J. Way, baker, Southsea, Hampshire.
T. James, labourer, Wymondham, Leicestershire.
J. Duce, cloth maker, Leeds.
0. R. Windsor, solicitor, St. Ann's-terrace, St. John's-wood.
G. Smith, slate quarry agent, Carnarvon.
T. S. Robinson' publican, Great Neston, Cheshire.
E. M. Shaw, Manchester.
W. H. Bagnall, watch maker, Bishopsgate-street Without.
F. N. Bracher, schoolmaster, New Sarum, Wiltshire.
M. Fothergill, attorney-at-law, Pontefract, Yorkshire.
W. Dennis, joiner, Nottingham.
J. Standen, block pitcher to a calico printer, Salford.
J. Pagden, Landon-road, Southwark.
A. Benjamin, dairyman, Gravel-lane, Houndsditch.
G. Carreer, edge tool grinder, Sheffield. .
J. Saffihill, farmer, Hillingdon.
M. Prebble, tallow chandler, Strood, Kent.
the F .0
2poHenry,llleaaerri:ttry i Perry, saddler;
wf;
C. Hederstedt, Lambeth-road.
W. Swann, fish merchant, Great Yarmouth.
W. Barthram, livery-stable keeper, Raven-row, Mile-end.
J. Luckett, coffee-house keeper, Adam-st. West, Marylebone.
J. Thompson, veterinary surgeon, Aldborough, Yorkshire.
J. Gerrett, licensed victualler, Cock-lane, Shoreditch.
W. Curran, stevedore, Liverpool.
G. P. Trounsell, Lieutenant, R.N., King's Kerswell, Devon,.
R. A. Jefferiss, butcher, Newington.
J. Bonny, tailor, Liverpool.
W. Cornhill, coffee-house keeper, Coleman:street. •
It: Hamm, carpenter, Bedford-street, Tottenham-court-road.
W. Ellerson, horse dealer, Eynesford, Kent.
E, Baker, publican, Lawrence-lane, City.
SECOND NOTICES.
S. Pegrun, butcher, Notting-hill, Kensington, May 2, at
one, at the Court-of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official assignee.
J. Whipps, sen:, coal merchant, Nicholl-street, nagger-
atone, May 2, at two, at the Court of Bankruptcy: Whitmore,
official assignee.
R. H. Morgan; coach builder, New Church-street, Port-
man-market, May 2, at half-past one, at the Court of Bank-
ruptcy. Whitmore, official assignee. '
M. Edwards, tailor, Mitre-street, Lambeth, May 2, at two,
at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official assignee.
J. Bone, farmer, .Rottendon, Essex, May 2, at half-past one,
at the Court of Bankruptcy. Alsager, official assignee.
C. Cunningham
°attorney, IsTutford-place Marylebone, May
2, at one, at the 'Court of Bankruptcy. 'Whitmore, official
assignee. . . .
e Dumont,
oC;
Ci Bankruptcy.fi :n
aor
te
uonl rti
thn eoeß f -
draper,Coi
Bankruptcy.s
aijt
cr
upek
remt Caroline-street,
Aoor irßfhei.
Btie,
et gaanhkeEaoner:rots
Essex,
Bankruptcy.t
op r
dr Alsager,e
lea emrackti
Baker-street,
lyll2pßol:)ffiesyr:
tcet
assignee.2mi
:ta two, at
~
assool
ai
Portman
-square,
tearihaeaes
et.:
twelve,i‘ijaAGy.
..
assignee.
Court of Benl9'uptey. Pennell, offfeiel assignee.