The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-25 00:00:00

Mr. BLACKIIURST from Sheffield said, that not one-
fifth of all the . trades in combination had sent dele-
gates to the conference ; and lie should object, there-
fore, to any detailed account of the delegates present
being given as if the representation were a fair and com-
plete one. He suggested that the reports of the various
delegates be dfferred till to morrow; and that the time of
meeting that afternoon should be occupied in discussing
other preliminries necessary to this great movement.
Mr. RATTRAY, calico block printer, of Crayford, in
Kent, said it must be recollected that many delegates
represented several trades, and. were fully acquainted
with all their views. Many per Sons would be asto-
nished, perhaps, to learn .the numbers actually repre-
sented.at the Conference.—(Hear, hear.)
After some further conversation, the motion for the
--Sppointment of a Committee, to consider how far it
would be desirable to carry out the suggestions contained
in the Chairman's speech was agreed to unanimously.
The CHAIRMAN then prcceeded to read over the list
of delegates, and, as the names were called over, the
parties severally stated what body they represented in
the Conference.
Mr. JAMES stated that he represented six hundred
shoemakers of the City of London ; Mr. Smith, of the
west end of Lond-n, 700 ; Mr. Robson, ladies' shoe •
makers, of the City of London, 200 ; Mr. S. Smith,
shoemakers of the. borough Of Southwark, 50 ; Mr. John
Skelton, ladies' shoemakers at the west-end, 400 ;
Messrs. Dunning and Robertson, bookbinders of London,
600 ; Messrs. Lockett and Fox, bricklayers, 450 ; Mr.
Wartnaby, Carpenter's Society, King's Arms, Maryle-
bone, 120 ; Mr. Evans, the Carpenters' Society, No.
2. 120 ; Mr. Lambert, carpenters meeting at the Dun
Horse, Borough, 72 ; Mr. Whlte, carpenters meeting
at the Sun Inn, London Wall. 4:5 ; Messrs. Atkinson
and Bury, Artillery Arms, Carpenter's Society,. 150 ;
Mr. Cookwell, Carpenter's Tee-total Society, Great
Suffolk-street,44 ; Mr. Cave, carpenters meeting at the
Barley-mow, Dorset-street, Bedford-square, 150; Messrs.
Gimlett and Boxall, carpenters, of King's Arms, Pim-
lico, 150 ; Mr. Toop, the second Society of Carpenters,
320 ; Mr. Williams, carvers and gliders, Green Man,
Berwick-street, Soho, London. 40; Mr. Read, engineers,
120 ; Mr. Booth, Steam-engine Makers' Society, 120 ;
Mr. Farebrother, steam-engine makers of Greenwich,
90 ; Mr. Wood, from Paviours' Arms Society of West-
minster Masons, stated that the Society in London con-
sisted of about 200, and the whole number of 3,000 or
4,000, and their object in sending n delegate was to
watch and report the proceedings with a view to future
operations ; Mr. R. Crichton, silk hatters, 200 ; Mr.
Roberts, the same, 180 ; Messrs. Arch and Jones,
the Protective Society of Silk. Hatters, 176 ;
Mr. Hill, sawyers of Surrey, 40 ; Mr. Gard-
ner, morocco leather finishers, 156 ; Mr. Cor-
nish, woolstapler, distributed over the whole country,
500 ; Mr. Hatfield, cordwainer, of Clapham, 100 ; Mr.
Allen, tin-plate workers, 300 ; Messrs. Mooney and
Prior, tailors, of London. 1,600 ; Messrs. Thompson and
Edwards, the National Typographical Association, com-
posed entirely of letter-press printers, 5,000 ; Mr. Bush,
Carpenter's Union, London Lodge, 150 ; Mr. Taylor,
Manchester-buildings, society of plumbers, 1,933 ; Mr.
Riley, plasterers, 100 ; Mr. G. Wayne, block printers,
of Lancashire 'and Yorkshire, 7,000 ; Mr. Huckley, hy-
draulic-press packers, 290 ; Mr. James Wilson, joiners
of Manchester, 400.

Mr. LLOYD ,Jo,Ns, fustian cutter, said he represented
about 2,000 of the trade in Manchester, but they were
not in union. The instructions he had received were,
that the Parliament should be moved to abridge the
labour of children, to support the surplus labour out of
the surplus funds of the state, and that they will assist
each other to,prevent oppression by the capitalists.
Bakers of Manchester,—Mr. lleane said he represented
150 working men, who complened- that, while other
working men went home to their wives, they were
obliged to work.—(Laughter.)
Grinders, Shetßeld,--John. Drury said he repre-
sented about 1,000, but that was only a portion of the
trade.

Spring-knife cutlers,—Mr. Wm. Hawksvrorth, re-
presented about 600 or 700 ; but there were over 2,000
m the trade.

Saw Makers,—James Stone, reported about 500, in-
cluding the different branches of his trade.
Britannia Metal Spoon Makers,—Robert Booth re-
presented 216.
Table-blade Forgers, Sheffield,—Mr. Blackhurst re-
presented 600.
File Smiths,—Sr. Sikes represented about 1,200
men.

Edge-tool Grinders,—John Taylor represented 140
men ; had been in union about 24 years.
Bui'ders, from Bury, in Lancashire—Mr. Fleetwood,
about 200.

Iron trade—Robert Gibson represented five branches
f the trade; had received no instructions.

Block printers—John Dale, 125.
Paper-makers, Maidstone, Kent—William Pulling-
ham, about 1,000.
_

Shoemaker's, Northampton—Richard Hawton repre-
sented about 200, but there were about 2,500 in the town.
Boot-closers, Huddersfield—William Spurr, 335.
Iron trade, Bradford—Robert Sedgewick represented
about 1,000, including the different branches.
Ma,,ons—James Hirst, 35.
Wool combers, Bradford—Robert Mullen, 3,000.
Staffordshire Potteries—William Hanley, 2,000 in
union, but there are 7,000 working men. They had
subscribed 1,0001. towards a fund for the purchase of
land for the employment of the surplus labour.
Miners of Lancashire—Mr. Berry represented 10,000,
but this did not include the miners of the different other
counties.

Linen trade, Barnsley Mr. My field represented
3,000, but only 1,800 in the union.
William Webster represented the trades of Hull
generally.
Cotton Spinners, Bolton—Mr. Brindle, 5.000.
Hatters, Denton—Mr. George Fleming., 1,600.
Plasterers, London—Wm. Frith, 200, out of about
2,000.

Makers-up of Manchester—Mr. Wilson, 300.
Boiler-makers, Manchester—John M'Namara. 1,000.
This having ccmpleted the list, the following Com-
mittee was appointed :
Waiue, block-print,r, Manchester ; Whartnaby, car-
penter, London ; Thompson, compositor, England ;
Fleming, hatter, Denton ; Drury, cutler, Sheffield ;
Dunning, book-binder, London ; James, boot-maker,
London ; Sedgwick, iron-trades, Bradford ; Webster,
various trades, Hull ; Evans, potters, Hanley ; Skelton.
ladies' shoe-maker, London ; Huckley, hydraulic-press
packer, Manchester ; Pasqua!, miner, Manchester ;
Booth, iron trades, Sheffield; Rattray, fabric-printer,
Merton.

The meeting adjourned till Wednesday, at ten o'clock,

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.

FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDA/.

GLOBE.—The increased grant to Maynooth will be
proposed by Sir Robert Peel on the 3d of April (to-
morrow week), and not on the 3d of May, as stated in
our article of Friday—a blunder into which we were be-
trayed by adopting the erroneous date given by a
morning journal, which we assumed to be correct.
The motion of which Mr. Ward has given notice,
" that all further money grants for the purpose of re-
ligion
.be made out of the funds appropriated for the
maintenance of the Protestant Episcopal Church," is
well framed and well timed. It raises the whole ques-
tion in issue. It is the " appropriation clause" contro-
versy revived. It revives that controversy under cir-
cumstances which dtprive the party who formerly
strenuously resisted the application of any portion of
the revenues of the Protestant Established Church
of Ireland to . the use and ben(:fit of the Roman
Catholic majority in that country, of the power of con-
sistently voting with the Minister in his attempt to
endow Popery out of, the .national revenue. It is not
the first time that this question, in the same hands,
.has
produced commotion in a Cabinet, and disruption of
party ties. In May,. 1834, Mr. Ward's motion on the
Irish Church produced the resignation of Lord
Stanley, Sir Jamei Graham, the Duke of Rich-
mond, and Lord Ripon ; and six weeks after-
wards, Lord Grey's retirement from office, and
the formation of the Meliourne Ministry. Though
not precisely similar, there is sufficient resemblance in
the leading principles and tendencies of the two mea-
sures to produce similar results. No act of the present
Administration has excited so much surprise—certainly
none will be met with more detmanined opposition from
different points of the religious zodiac, nor be followed
with more damaging effects on the influence and stability
of the Government, than will be provoked by this coup
d'et it. From the most accurate estimate, it appears that
the population of Ireland comprehends, in round num-
bers, eight millions, which are distributed among the re-
ligious sects in the following manner :
Roman Catholics
Protestants (Estabishtd Church) 850,000
Presbyterians

8,000,000
The annual revenues of the Irish Church Establish-
ment have been estimated at not less than 860,0001,
the whole of which is appropriated to the support of
'that institution; constituting it, beyond all question,
taking the smal amount of its members into account,
the richest endowed Church Establishment in Europe.
The proposed largely-increased grant to Maynooth
out of the general taxation of the country, oF a measure
of conciliation to the Irish Repealers, will fail of its
design. Mr. O'Connell, while he declares that he
will take the money, repudiates the notion of its being
regarded by him, or his followers, as anything ap-
proaching to a satisfactory t• ins:alment" of their johns.
" Were it 70,000/. he would tsk it ; but would offer
no thanks !" They must, indeed, be sanguine who sup-
pose that the Irish Roman Catholics will be reconciled
by such a measure as this. A large portion of the
English people, on the other hand, see in the Premier's
proposal that which shocks their religious principles,
and alarms them for their pecuniary interests. In the
largely-increased grant to May nooth they see the Ro-
man Catholics supplied with additional funds, placed
at their disposal by the Government, to educate their
clergy. A larger number of priests of that Church will
thus be provided, to propagate ita doctrines and in zease
the number of its converts. In this additional grant
they also see an additional burthen hid upon them for
the support of another Church Establishment. They
fear that the education of the Roman Catholic clergy by
the State will be speedily followed by a proposal for thO
support of the Roman Catholic clergy by the State. If
funds are to be provided for these purposes, what
fund so proper to furnish the requisite supplies as
that of the wealthy Established Church of Ire-
land ? The vast revenues of that Church were
derived fro% the property transferred from the Ro-
man Catholic Church to the Protestant Establishment
by Act of Parliament. If it be now found that the in-
terests of the country require that the Roman Catholic
Church be, either in whole or in part, endowed by the
State, is it not just and reasonable that a portion of the
funds which were originally Roman Catholic, and which
are ample for both purposes, should be made available
for the education and partial support of the clergy of the
large =ajority of the people ?