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

creation who laboured twelve or fourteen hours a ?
—(Hear, hear.) What recreation could there be for
persons who went to their work at six in the morning,
and never left it until half-past seven at night?—(llear,
hear.) Where, and how was this recreation to be oh-
tained?—(Hear, hear.) Those who supported the
Noble Lord were charged with pandering to the passions
of the people. Were not those who made this charge
guilty of something like hypocrisy when they talked of
the necessity of administering to the healthy recreation
of the people?—(Hear, hear.) Throughout the who'e
of that discussion, there had been a contrariety
of statement, a variety of • allegatien which was
excessively amusing, and he might say mysterious. On
the one hand, it was stated that these factories were a
kind of earthly paradise ; on the other, that they were
the receptacles of reeking disease and oppression. He
• knew that the master manufacturers of this country
formed a body who were to be highly valued for their
general benevolence ; but, on the other hand, he could
not turn away from the statement made on the part of
the operatives. He supposed that most lion. Gentle-
man had seen the deputations of operatives which had
come from Manchester and Yorkshire. The very first
question which he (Mr. Bernal) had put to these depu-
tations was, "Are you prepar«l to take the chance of an
abatement of wages ?" They replied, "We are." Ile
asked there whether the probability of' a reduction of
wages had been fairly laid before the artisans, and
the reply was in the affirmative.—(hear, hear.)
When he had an interview with one of those deputy
tions, he asked them. were they prepared to give up a
portion of their earnings fur those shorter hours ? Their
answer was, " Yes, we will--the probable deduction of
wages could not be greater than what we lose by the in-
terruption of our domestic comforts. Besides, we have
to Pay for washing, ironing, and scouring, which our
wives are net able to do."—(Hear, hear.) Ile could not
admit that any person supporting the proposition of the
ITeble Lord was pandering to the passions of the people.
(Cheers.) It was impossible to deal with men and wo-
men upon the strict principles of political economy as
lid down in books.—(Hear, hear.) Men could not he
dealt with as the pieces upon a ehess-board.—(Cheers
and laughter.)- This question should be dealt with by
tee dictates of common sense.--(Laughter.) He would
4sk whether the operatives of Manchester and the rest
Of Lancashire were not able to judge of their own inte-
rtPts ?—(Hear.) Suppose you were to give a go-bye to
nis question, would there b not eere still a sore in the minds
of the people? If the go-bye beret given to the question,
17)4„ld not the feeling of the people be that the House
k.;nnimons did not represent the feelings nor the in-
terests of the working classes.—(Hear, hear.) The
Itight IfOn. Baronet opposite (Sir J. Graham) had
referred to Mr. Horner's statement respecting the state
of manufactures in Switzerland, where there were fac-
tories in which people worked fourteen or sixteen hours.
But why not refer to Massachusets ?—(Cheers.) Why
not to other places where there was no limitation to
hours oflabour?—(Cheers.) If the Right non. Baronet
Meant his-argument to be valid, he ought to abandon
his Bill altogether.—(Cheers.) With all the research of
the Right Hon. Baronet, he would ask whether he did
not find ehat the labour of twelve hours was more than
women were capable of enduring ? The surgeons
examined, before the Commission declared that they
thought ten hours more than the period during which
heir.)
Women could continue to labour in the factories.—(Hear,
He would not trouble the House by referring to
particular points of the evidence, such as the condition
of women who were on the point of parturition.—(Hear,
hear.) There had been reference, in the course of the
debate, to the hard labour which was suffered by
women in the agricultural districts. But it was
not to be denied that, in agricultural labour,
•
women were not employed, except upon extraordinary
occasions, more than eight hours.—(Hear, hear.) The
reports upon the subject of factories showed that life
was shortened by in-door employment.—(Hear, hear.)
It was rare to see an old man in a factory. It was rarely
• seen that a man lived long enough in factory employ-
!*tent to be able to use spectaeles.—(Cheers and a
Ugh.) This was a question of principle upon which
• bhe naustinsist that all personal and party feelings ought
e give way, and he hoped that the clause, having once
oeen introduced, would never be abandoned.
Mr. Ce.IiNIGHT considered the question so peculiar
A
nd so important, as to require the deepest consideration
, . of the House. He had carefully revolved in his mind
.!. the provisions of the Bill, with a sincere desire so to
fashion it that it should secure the true interests of the
Working classes. From all that he had been able to
N
learn on this subject—in despite of the arguments of the
thNoble Lord the Member for London—he had come to
econclusion that we should not be damaged in
foreign market by accepting the clause of
the, Noble Lord the Member for Dorsetshire.
His conviction was that the measure of the Noble Lord
Would not only lead to a reduction of wages, but would
strike at the root of employment, and lead to the
!destruction of the trade. They all recollected the dis-
Fess and destitution which had been produced within
the last three''or four years by the mills working short
tin'e• If the mills should work short time permanently,
how would it be possible for the people to live?—(Hear,
ear.) If the trade of the country should be permanently
lost, the depression would be permanent also. In a short'
after a Ten Hours' Bill should be passed they would
see those labourers who were now most anxious for the
Passing of such a measure tugging and tearing at each
er for the purpose of procuring employment. He had
received letters from persons who were residing in the
Manufacturing districts, and who were conversant with
the feelings of the workmen in those districts. The
writers of those letters stated, that in their opinion the
national prosperity would be seriously endangered by a
Ten Hours' Bill. All those who were best informed on
wathe subject dreaded the introduction of such a measure.
s Bill took care of the children, and that
Was all that was necessary. He thought the present
discussion would do much good, by attracting public
attention to the real merits of the question. It would
hlee been much more agreeable to him to have supported
the motion of the Noble Lord ; and it was with great
ir:egret that he felt himself bound to oppose it. But be-
'eying, as he did, that it would be most for the benefit
Of the country that the motion of the Noble Lord should
be rejected, he felt bound, to vote against it.—(lronical
cheering.)
tekr• C. BULLER said that. the Right Hon. Gentleman
I"eeMember for Nottingham, had exhibited a most asto-
:tilting instance offorgetfulness.—(Cheers and laughter.)
• te"ad forgotten the reasons which had induced him to
,i,;eve.,...130 less than three votes in support of the measure of
-Noble Lord.—(A laugh.)-: The Hon. Gentleman
'4 not found out any new argument or new fact. It
r"PPears that all that was required was that his mind re-
ured some time for the arguments to be absorbed.—(A
reason why he had. changed his mind was that he had
,71 time since he had given his last three votes to get
~11"13,ere--(Cheers and laughter.) Now he must say that
ues a case of habitual and continued. intoxication—
rs sghter)—lasting through three several votes, given
eenti
an interval of a week from each other—such
brnued and habitual intoxicatio'n he had never
lore heard confessed to the House—(Laughter)—
11 Considering how plain the arguments were which
th s convinced the Hon. Gentleman, and how completely
tee non. Gentleman's mind had been closed against
tae
until that evening, he could not but come to the
„,eonelusion that the Hon. Gentleman must have been
be:re' bad indeed.—(Roars of laughter.) But he id not
.!‘ 411 to divert the attention of the House to personal
ma to
His own speeches on former occasions had
gee betmuch commented on and much misrepresented,
se del not desire to draw the attention of the House
,-""a personal matter, is hen they were discussing a great.
phi
ional principle, the magnitude and importance of
,11.ich, it was impossible to overrate--(Cheers)—and to
-4ste their time by diverting their attention
tt!" petty and paltry personalities.—(Cheers.) This ques-
IPI had been greatly prejudiced by the introduction
Personal allusions and arguments. Since he had given
hi vote when they had last discussed this question, he
u. seen some of the largest master manufacturers of the
tltntry. There was a painful impression upon his mind
at the vehement opposition of that class arose not
Rauch from a dread or a dislike of the measure itself,
r it feeling of indignation at certain statements which
padg been made, and which were injurious to the cha-
' leter of the master manufacturers of the country.—
' (4`kear, hear.) He had never dwelt on those statements
aleea justification for his vote. He did not dispute the
erracy of the statements of the Noble Lord the
bentsfor Dorsetshire. He admitted that those state-
ei,7ltl might apply to partial and exceptional eases,. !
he denied that those partial and exceptional
th-ees would be considered as fair samples of !
iF general state of the manufacturing disthadricts.
been
In !
e 4 debate the eone of their
et,--puttionly low. They said nothing about principle.
• • - the Government had thrown principle overboard
e....,e`'heers)e-and had taken refuge in degree. His lion.
eee, Learned Friend the Member for Bath had, without
... reat degree of success, tried to test the House by •
ei"pitting to-- the principle of the question. The prin-
' .! ter,,,e for which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman con-
., to'4ed wive that it was unjustifiable for the Legislature
I,Mterfele.
ROEBUCK—I did not say unjustifiable.
f CeBULLER—That it was inexpedient to inter-
-elek:ewi-th adult labour. Now the House maintained that
lee;as justifiable to interfere with the contracts for
per ur in factories, and her Majesty's Government sup-
se tea it. He would venture to say that they were
teetrrted in that respect by the master manufac•
in-e'rs of the country. There were four instances
tterticular, in which the principle of interference with
th;4t labour had been acknowledged. The first was in
for-e+l'e of-the' Miners and Colliers Bill, which was be-
. e, 'e Rouse last year. In that Bill the Noble Lord
• the, be-
(Lord Ashley) was supported by the Right Hon. Baronet
the "beeretary for the Home Department, who defended
as a most us4ul measure. Then there was the
the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Glad-
e fere,ne(l) f—the - Coal-whippers Bill. That was an inter-
. tae-e"ee with adult labour.—(Hear, hear.) But he would
fere a much stronger case, and that was the inter-
looksce with the emigration of Hill Coolies. Could they
Thentll3oll that as a non-interference with adult labour?
eou there was another instance, and that was the
i;ites.ttirourick sy
e‘rse which the Government had taken with respect to
stem As had been said that night, the
before the. House was simply one of degree. He
heZetted that they had a case to make out.—(Hear,
ee gar.) It had been said that the Legislature
t not to interfere without good cause.—(Hear, hear.)
IWas true, but that principle would apply to all
6esietion t, Now as to the good cause for interference.
toejneet been admitted that the labourers in the manufac-
e towns were not so healthy as labourers of a similar
that ie. M. the manufacturing districts. He did not say
ant was was owing to manufacturing labour entirely,
:jet he did assume from that that there was something
el4ll,teh: labour in the manufacturing districts which re-
d interference on the part of the Legislature. The
I.lo.7rsad view he took of the case Ives that labour of twelve
ditia day was inconsistent with a proper moral con-
e°ls, and well-being, and proper recreation of the
r'Ple• The Right lion. Baronet had generously come