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

-~ :..

presented- two petitions in favour of a
.a-s. clause in the Factories Bill.
Mr: AINSWORTH presented a petition from a nu-
merous and respectable public meeting at Belton, in
favour of a Ten Hours' Bill.

Mr. WARBURTON presented a petition from Kendal,
praying that if the Ten Hours' Bill passed, there should
be a reduction of all duties on corn and provisions.
Lord J. RUSSELL presented a petition from the
journeymen coopers of London, complaining of the ope-
ration of the duty on the importation of staves.
Mt. S. WORTLEY presented a petition from the
neighbourhood of Halifax, in favour of the Ten Hours'
Bill

Lord MARCH presented petitions from Sussex and
Kent, praying for a repeal of the stamp duties on in-
surances against hail-storms; also four petitions against
the union of the dioceses of Bangor and St. Asaph.
Sir J. GRAHAM presented nine petitions—two from
Bradford, signed by seventy-four millowners; one from
Ashten-under-Lyne, signed by four millowners, em-
ploying 12,741 persons ; one from a town. in York-
shire, signed by twenty-eight millowners, employing
10,000 hands ; one from Oldham, signed by millowners,
employing 6,000 hands ; one from Staleybridge, signed
by millowners, employing 6,600 hands ; one from Brid-
port, one from Warrington, and one from Bolton. These
nine petititions, together with the one he presented
from Manchester, were signed by 326 millowners, em-
ploying 100,000 persons, paying 50,0002 a week in wages.
and 2,500,0001. a year, and they prayed the House that
no diminution to ten hours should be made in the time
of employment, as such a reduction would be fatal to the
manufactures of the country, and prove detrimental to
the manufacturing labourers themselves.

or enterprise of the mill-owners and master nianufac-
turers was in the least impaired by the change, but on
the contrary the number of mills had increased from
344 in 1819 to more than a thousand in 1826. It should
be also recollected that the Ten Hours' Bill was sup-
ported by a great number of master manufacturers both
in that House and out of it.—(Hear, hear.) In Parlia-
ment might he not comment upon the Hon. Members for
Oldham, for Ashton, for Blackburn, and for Salford, t
and oat of the House there were some of the most ex-
tensive manufacturers in England avowed supporters of
the Bill. (The Noble Lord then quoted the names of
several eminent master manufacturers supporters of the
Ten Hours' Bill, amongst whom he relied with especial
force on the support of Messrs. Kenworthy and Har-
greave, as being, from the extent of their trade, btisiness,
and their long and practical experience, eminently
well qualified to form a judgment.) lie did
not think a great deal of reliance could be
placed upon the calculations of Mr. Senior; many of
them he could prove to be inaccurate. A letter had
some time since appeared in the Bolton Free Press, from
a Mr. Thomas (as we understood), which disproved
many of Mr. Senior's statements. The writer was un-
doubtedly a man of great experience and information—
he stated that the last hour in the twelve hours of labour
in factories, was, from the exhaustion of the operatives,
particulary as regarded children, the most unproductive
in quantity, and the most unsatisfactory in quality of the
whole twelve. The twelfth hour he said produced more
spoiled work than any other two hours in the day, and
any man conversant with the business, could tell upon
the cloth that portion of its material that was manufac-
tured during the last hour of labour.—(Hear, hear.)
That restriction in the hours of labotir was injurious to
the operative, or to the trade generally, was contradicted
by the whole history of the cotton trade. Wai it pos-
sible—was it probable—that British industry, which had
reached such a height of excellence—that the energy
and enterprise of the British people, which was so re-
nowed—that all that perseverance and indefati-
gability which belonged to them were so dimi-
nished that the subtraction of two hours from the
twelve could be productive of the disastrous results anti •
cipated by some Hon. and Right Hon. Members. It
could not be denied that, irrespectively of the detriment
which the proposed alteration was said to inflict upon
trade, it would be in other respects most beneficial.
There was not the slightest doubt but that the social,
moral, and physical condition of the people would be
thereby greatly benefited.—(Hear, hear.) It was for
Ministers to solve whether it was preferable for the
manufacturing classes of England to have high wages,
or to increase their domestic comforts, to give them an
opportunity of acquiring moral and literary information,
and to benefit their health. Was it not desirable that
the humble female should be trained to the performance
of _those domestic duties which were so necessary in
after life to make her home and family comfortable?—
(Hear, hear.) Had they not had doctors and clergy-
men of all persuasions attesting the necessity of such a
change, and entreating the Legislature to adopt it? But,
notwithstanding all these things, the Minister not only
refused to accept of the remedy proposed, but to pro-
pose one himself.—(Hear.) The House was placed in
a curious position. It was summoned to rescind the re-
solution to which it had solemnly and deliberately agreed
—not because any new facts had been furnished—
(Hear, hear)—not because any additional arguments had
been adduced in favour of the present system—but
simply because the Minister had declared his hostility to
it.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") In fact they were
called upon to surrender their votes and their opinions,
in order to save the Government.—(Hear, hear.) Ile
did not think the Minister had any right to expose his
friends to such an alternative, that they must either re-
tract their formerly declared sentiments, or give up the
Government. It would give him very great pain to
vote against the Government, but he would not shrink,
for a moment, from avowing and maintaining those views
which he had formerly expressed. It had given him
great pain to hear an Hon. Friend of his, who had, on a
former occasion voted for the ten hours' clause, say he
would vote for the Government proposition. Was it
come to this, that great questions were no longer to be
tried upon their merits, but regulated by the will and
fancy of the Government ? He felt bound to say that
the conduct of Ministers was rather arbitrary—
he considered that a kind of despotism had
been exercised which might prove detrimental
to constitutional principles, and which would prove more
fatal to the liberty and independence of that House than
any other proceedings which had ever taken place._
(Hear, hear.) It was possible, nay he feared be might
say it was probable, that Ministers would carry the day,
but how long would that victory last?—(Hear, hear.) If
they wished their victory to be lasting they must put
into operation those sentiments which were founded
upon humanity and justice. They could not extinguish
the feeling of sympathy which was so universally pre-
valent for these suffering creatures. A victory opposed
to these feeling would be inglorious and short-lived—it
might answer present purposes, but would entail tur-
moil, anxiety, and woe upon their successors. But it
would not rest here ; those feelings which operated so
powerfully would heighten and extend, they would em-
bitter the present and the prospect of the future. But
he did not despair, he still hoped to see a better under-
standing established between the master and the
servant, between the labourer and the employer ; he
thought he could perceive a growing desire among the
wealthy to ameliorate thecondition of the poor, and a de-
termination to promote the public welfare by improving the
condition of the humbler classes. He had been subjected
to much obloquy, and even calumny, but he would still
persevere unremittingly and unceasingly, and he felt
convinced that the object for which he was contending
must eventually triumph, and that he had lit such a
candle in England as could never be put out.—(Cheers.)
' Sir J. GRAHAM could assure the House that after
the speech of the Noble Lord he felt great pain in rising
to address them. He trusted he would not let fall a
single expression which could be construed into unkind-
ness or censure, for he believed the Noble Lord was ac-
tuated by the best and the purest motives. So strong
had been the agitation upon this subject, that an address
had been presented to her Majesty praying that she
would be pleased to remove him, and he had the honour
of laying that address himself before her Majesty.—(A
laugh.) The address stated that a Minister of the
Crown was wilfully persevering in a course of
cruelty and injustice towards the poorer and less
protected classes. When the Noble Lord first brought
his proposition before the House, he urged that it would
be beneficial to the commercial interests of the country.
But surely if the Noble Lord considered the contrary
opinions so generally expressed by persons of the greatest
information and experience upon this subject, he would
not maintain that assertien. Those who thought that
by adopting the course proposed by the Noble Lord, the
working classes would be better paid, and the manufac-
turing interests improved, should vote with him ; but
those who thought that his proposition would have the
effect only of taking off six weeks from the year should
vote against him. He thought that it could not be
doubted but that a reduction of the amount of work
done must be attended with a concomitant reduction of
wages. He was sure that even the Noble Lord himself
must acknowledge that a loss of one-sixth of the work-
ing hours must besattended with loss to the operatives
themselves. The woollen manufacturers of this country
were exporters to a great extent, and every day they
were meeting with competition in foreign markets and
meeting with rivals. lie wished to point out to the
House that the price of the home market was materially
affected by the state of the foreign market, and
with respect to both the cotton and woollen manufac-
turers, the fact was not to be dissembled that'
the present rate of profits was reduced to
the minimum. This fact was amply proved by a re-
ference to the money market. With respect to the
great increase he could state that the United States,
a few years ago only consumed 160,000 bales of
cotton goods, whilst in the year 1843 the number of bales
were 325,000, being an increase of 220,000, or about
200 per cent. This went to show that there was a
great decrease in the price of manufactures, and also
proved the application of increased capital, and the great
consequent competition that the manufacturers of this
country had to meet. Mr. Horner, the inspector of
factories, from accurate data, stated that in the mills
upon several parts of the Continent, where the law did
not enforce any inspection, the persons em eyed
worked as many as fourteen hours a day, and invariably
took their meals in the factory. The same gentleman
stated, with respect to America, that it had become a
strong competitor with England, and in many instances
the American manufacturers were satisfied to sell
without reference to any profit, in order that they
might drive the English manufacturers from the market.
He should have no objection to this competition, he
said, if they did not keep one of their hands tied behind
their back.—(Hear, hear, from Lord Howick.) He
heard that cheer from the Noble Lord—lie supposed the
Noble Lord referred to the corn-laws.--(Hear, hear.)
At a proper time and occasion lie was quite ready to
enter into that argument. When the position of the
home and the foreign market should be considered, he
should be prepared to contend that a protection for
agriculture was indispensable. But he for the present
postponed that argument.—(A laugh.) It would be
enough if he said this, that supposing, for the sake of argu-
ment, that the corn-laws did unduly narrow their produc-
tive industry, was there common sense, was there common
justice, the corn-laws being continued, that they should
proceed to impose a penalty on that productive indus-
try, by taking one-sixth from the number of hours of
labour ?—(Hear, hear.) But he_ was proceeding to show
that a rise in the price of produce was not possible as a
mode of recovering the, loss the dimipution of the time
of productive industry would create. Everything must
remain as it was in this respect, and it necessarily fol-
lowed that there must be a reduction of wages. If there
was no reduction of wages, the loss must fall upon capi-
tal, and, the loss falling upon capital, one of two
things must happen—either that capital, would
be withdrawn from the country and embarked in
industry of the same kind in foreign countries,
not subject to the same disadvantages, or, if not abso-
lutely withdrawn from the country, parties would retire
from this particular branch of industry, and that kind of
manufacture would fall into decay; in either case, by
the withdrawal of this -capital, a fearful fall of wages
must ensue. Supposing that reduction to be only par-
tial, then the question came, to what amount would
wages be reduced? The Noble Lord said what was
morally wrong could not be politically right. lie did
not demur to that; but then on the Noble Lord rested
the onus -of proof that the system of regulation of labour
in this country was morally wrong.—(Hear, hear.)
But he (Sir James Graham) had yet to leant that
it would be possible greatly to diminish, or even
at all to reduce the general rate of wages in
the manufacturing districts, without producing such
general poverty, such physical degradation, such an
absence of all civilised manners and habits, as in
his judgment, would leave those districts in a state of
confusion that would tend to throw them back into a
state of primitive barbarism. Such would be the increase
in crimet sp widely wool i spread pvpt• the fape Of the
cpuntry, that it would be disgraceful to the Legislatare
that had pursued a polie7 that could lead to such coil-

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MA 1 , 1844.