Star.
London, England, 1818-04-28 00:00:00

Di
Df
le

ch
he
use

It.
4)
tit
.

s)
ith
he

xn
Cie

7 a

evil
aces
;plc
act,

41);,.1i, was the heated atmosphere in which the chil-
were obliged to work, and the degree of tem-
nercure in which they were kept for holding the
rd., „Is. in particular branches of the manufacture.
ow evil were a small one, then legislative interpo.
tieo may be unnecessay. on the maxim, de minimis
vograt la, but here the evil was confessedly Ft eat,
iv ill tiudiester alone no less than:11.800 children
0/employed in this trade. The Noble Lord had
eeted to any interposition, on the ground that it
mould alter the relations between the pare-at and the
chi,ci, the child and the master, and affect that ar-
izgement of free labour, or, as he afterwards quail-
E:‘ci it, by saying, " what was called free labour."
Lord STANLEY here explained, that it was call-
e2. free labour, though it was in fact at the command

or the parent.
Mr. PEEL continued. Every parent whose voice
had been at all heard, had said, that they could not
erjeise a free discussion, and wished them to legis-
dge for them as they thought proper. The Appren-
' Bill had been mentioned; but between children
11 a manufactory and apprentices there was a consi-
derable difference. There was a less interest for the
boy in the factory, than for the apprentice. Thee*
•vas no tie between the master and the child, what
I;te strength of the latter failed. It was easy to sup-
r'.y his place with another, and that was done. Mr.
bad stated, that in Manchester the nranufac-
nrers were near the market for labour. If the chil-
-zo were overworked, the manufacturer went into
.1e market for labour, and always could find a sub•
stitute for the labour of the child. It was proved by
tat fact, that in the interest of the master alone they
I not sufficient security against the overworking
the child. He should leave out of the question
the pamphlets and ex-parte statements that had
made and issued, and' should proceed to show
an from the evidence on the other side of the
question, the necessity for the Bill. In one manu-
factory 374 children were employed for 12, 13, 14,
15 hours. In all Manchester, the number of children
employed in cotton manufactories were, according
to Mr. Sandford, 11,600. He implored the House
to contemplate for a moment such a number of chil-
dren occupied at the uniform toil of cotton-spinning
for 15 hours out of every 24 hours of their existence
hear)—and to say, whether such a system
um to be longer endured ? Every natural instinct
,:oanteracted, every feeling and inclination na-
oral to a child was thwarted and suppressed—(hear,
ions. He was not romantic enough to maintain
• ?mons, even of their tender age, were not to
work; he did not deny the necessity of young chil-
dren earning their bread by the sweat of their brows.
LC was it therefore to be inferred that no limitation
or measure should be set to their weary toil—(Hear,
tear. hear)? There was a paper produced by Mr.
Sandford, which affected his mind more than any ,
speech or evideace upon this subject. It was the
return by the Master. of a Sunday School of the
children a:tending his school, who were employed in
manufactories. He stated that they were" cleanly,
orderly, and as healthy as other children, though
they did not look so well."—Hear, hear, hear.)—
This surely spoke to the heart of every Member who
dated upon the slow but wasting sickness that
Mu: affected the looks, and sapped the foundation of
pamanent health—Wear, hear.)—This paper also
stated, that the children employed in the manufac-
tories did not come so early as others to the writing-
mast?, on week-days, and especially in winter. This,
to his mind, was a picture of cruelty and.misery al-
most beyond example. A poor child, unnaturally
confined to coastant and cheerless toil for 13 holm
and a half, was, after all was over, obliged to go
and be confined still longer under the eye of the vrry
inganaster—(Hear,sear.)—Was he to be charged
with being against the education of poor children,
when he deprecated with horror the idea of a poor
1, whose every faculty was benumbed by the in..
. toil of the day, being obliged to exert her
ienumbed fingers afterwards with the writing-nu/A-
-il? Education was a great blessing; but,..so
in-
licted, it was a cruel curse—(Hear, hear.)—Beides
:11 this, it should be recollected, that some of those
erildren lived at a distance from the cotton-mills,
4 ,1 had thus the labour of travelling to their homes,
Isperadded to all their other labours. He again en-
treated that the House would reflect on the serious
hjury done to the best interests of the country by
rating 12,000 young children in this manner. These
considerations were amply supported and enforced
hr the evidence before them. To the Petition which
he had the honour of presenting on this subject, were
attached the names of 30 medical men and 20 cler-
nin Manchester. The Noble Lord (Stanley)
had professed the highest respect for the first name
attached to the Petition, brother to the Honourable
Member for Lancashire; but lie was so kind and so
guileless, that he had not inquired coolly into the
btti; he had given way to fanciful representations,
and stood at every door till he got the principal in-
nate of the house to give his signature to the Peti-
fonl—But was it really a man misled by excessive
badness, that could think it cruel and injurious to
employ 12,000. young children for 15 hours every
day--(hear, hear)? But the Noble Lord had taken

I...is7principal stand on the impolicy of interferes.
-ith labour. He admitted, indeed, that during this
-4.sion the House had in one instance interfered with
hbour. They had abolished the practice of employ-
iag children in chimney.sweeping—(Hear, hear
).—
!y that interference the House had, in fact, decided
tae principle of the Bill. It had declared, that neither
tile interests of trade, nor the humanity of masters,
were a sufficient security for the proper treatment of
riiiiren. Oh bat, says the Noble Lord, here is the
c:ference: the one BM abolished, the other only re—
Plates. But surely, if it were fit to abolish in one
!se what was insufferable and pernicious, it was fit.
la another to regulate what was excessive ar.d injun
:314--(hear, hear). But there was evidence brought
-cArard to prove, that long continued labour iii
czon-mills was most salutary : according to this
tiaence, cotton-mills were among the most favoured,
l'e•cs on the face of the globe—(a laugh). He should
' iect from the Hon. Member who gave this faseinate.l
description of the health of children employed in
"ton manufactories, ax amendment to establish
totton-mills for promoting health —( Hear, hear. )
rhere Was a cotton-mill in Glasgow, in which, ac-
rd''.* to this evidence, 878 children were employed
t_a,lSl, 671 in 1812, and 891 in 1813. Among the
"e were only three deaths: among the 871
691, two deaths- And, after this state-

im-

bcar

lode
, by
Y al'
ttim

Atrs

merit, he exclaims,. who is the man of practical ea-
perience that can say that a system so favourable to
health can require any alteration on that ground?
This was, indeed, so mech against the common eourse
of nature, that he must have doubted its correctness,
had it come from a less respectable authority—(hear,
bear). The average mortality in England and Wales
was one in .fifty. In the year 1801 it was one in 44.
When he should, on this account, express his surprise
at the very different propoitionof deaths in the cotton-
mills at Glasgow, he was told that one in fifty was
indeed the average mortality, but that there were
some favoured spots where the proportion was much
less. In Cardiganshire the mortality was only one
in seventy-four ; in several other counties it was less
than one in fifty ; in Gloucestershire it was one in
sixty- one ; but even in Cardiganshire, the most fa-
voured spot, in this respect, of Englipd and Wales,
the mortality was tone in 74, while in the Glasgow
cotton-mills it was only one in 445! (Laughter and
cheering.) Mr. Thomas Warton had addressed an ode
to Health, and anxiously inquires,
" In what retied and craggy cell
" Delights the Goddess HAALIX to dwell?" &c.
After asking ahem the abode cf this coy Goddess was
to be found—whether at Matlock, Bath, etc.—or
among woods and streams—or on the sea shore, it
would certainly have been an extraordinary solution
of the perplexity of the Poet, if, when he asked--
" In what dim and dark retreat
" The coy nymph fix'd her fav'rite seat?'
It had been answered, that " The dim retreat" was
the cotton-mills of Messrs. Finlay and Co. at Glai-
gow—(.3,bich laughter and cheering).—He begged to
press upon the House, in opposition to such delusive
statements, the evidence of persons to whom no sus-
picion of interest could attach, and of those whose
interest was entirely in opposition to the Bill. At a
general meeting of master-manufacturers in Ashton-
under-Line, it was resolved, that it was absolutely
necessary to limit the hours of labour. This was the
opinion, not of too kind and guileless men, not of
speculative physicians, but of practical experienced
men. Let the hour fixed be 12 hours, 13 hours, or
14 hours, they all agreed in the necessity of some,
fixed limitation, and thus admitted the principle of
the Bill. They said, if there should be no Act of
Parliament to iegulate the hours of labour, the hu-
mane and merciful man injured himself, since others
would not act on equal terms with him. If, then,
to the evidence of medical men, of clergymen, of
manufacturers, be added the feeling of every man,
it surely was not too much to expect the limitation
of labour to eleven hours per day—(Much cheering.)
Mr. PHILLIPS said that great pains had been used
out of doors to excite' prejudices on the subject under
' discussion. Great and unreasonable prejudices had
' been raised against the masters ; but the same might
be done against the managers of any trade or busi-
ness if the same arts were had recourse to. The fa-
vourers of the Bill said that regulations were neg-
lected in cotton factories, but no evidence to support
that had been adduced. They spoke also of the bad
state of morals ; but in his opinion, the natural ten-
dency of such establishments was to produce habits
of order, regularity, temperance, and general more-
lity. The statements regarding the health of the la-
bourers were equally unsupported. Here the Hon.
Gentleman referred to the written opinions and tes-
timony of Messrs. Harding, Turner, Bardsley, and
other medical Getilemen, all going to establish the
fact, that in Manchester, Preston, and all through
Lancashire, the number of patients of every class in
the hospitals of late years, was less in proportion
from cotton than any other factories, and that they
had in some instances contributed liberally from such
factories to the wants of the more distressed part of the
population. The Right Hon. Gentleman had also
referred to the opinion of Gentlemen of the faculty •
but there was this difference between the opinions of
the latter and those he had quoted, that the former
were derived from general reasoning, the latter from
fack—he held too in his hand a certificate from two
Gentlemen, who professed their sorrow for having
been induced to sign. a Petition in favour of the Bill,
having since, on accurate investigation, discovered
that there was no necessity for Legislative interference.
It was subscribed by Messrs. Henry Harding and
David Hamilton. He would himself assert most de-
liberately and conscientiously, that the poor employed
in cotton factories in Lancashire were in abetter condi-
tion than the poor labourers in any other manufacture
or occupation. In the farmer, the labour and wages
were regular and uniform—in the latter, both were
fluctuatir.g. Ti:e consequence was, that the workers
in cotton factories were best fed, • best clothed, and
most healthy. The condition of children was su-
perior to that of apprentices ; apprentices were to-
tally under the authority of their masters—children
under the authority of their parents--(hear, hear)—
He conceived it most dangerous to adopt any measure
tending to derange the system of the• free exchange
of
labour and taagest and deprecated the legislating in
compliance with the feelings of humanity alone, with-
lout a regard to the great principles of national policy.
Experience had invariably proved the attempt of
such interference most mischievous. The consequence
of generally reducing the hours would be, to cause
la•necessary increase of buildings and hands, and, till
the enlargement of the buildings, an advance in
wages. But the enlargement of buildings would pro-
Iduce an addition of population: in the mean time,
we must export less, and the deficiency of the mar-
kets would be supplied from the Continent, where no
restriction existed ; and when, in the end, the labour-
lug population was increased, the wages of the indi-
iridual must be diminished; so that the ultimate ten-
dency of the measure was to inflict the severest injury
On the poor man. He defended the conduct and
Imanagement of the factory in which he himself had
in interest. The population of Lancashire were not
inferior to that of any other part of England.--
Less parochial relief was there afforded, in proportion
to numbers, than in any county, except Cumberland.
No occupation was exempt from hardships and evils
—(hear.)—High temperature was not required in cot-
ton factories. Mr. Holdsworth declared. that 74 was
the highest degree ever .oLessary, and in the sort of
spinning to which that was adapted. not more than
600 or 700 men were employed ifi ill England. The
Bill had tended, and it carried into a law would tend
to encourage a practice most prejedicial to the best
interests of the country—the practice of combination
among workmen—a practice directly at valiance with
the morals, oanquillity, and happiness df themselves-
He could see no reason why the Legislature should
interfere mote in the cotton than in the wooilln ma-

nufsetures, except,- indeed, that cotton yarn was ex-
ported, while woollen yarn was not. He prayed the
House to pause before they sanctioned the principle
of interfering between masters and their labourers,
sad:eject the Hon. Baronets Bill.
Mr. WILBRAHAM BOOTLE expressed his un-
willingness t 6 trespass upon the House, but there
weir one or two points to which he should beg leave
tredieect their attention. The Hon. Gentleman (Mr.
Phillips) bad endeavoured to make an impression
upon the House, by seeming to insinuate that the
Petitions in favour of this Bill proceeded from some
discontented manufacturers, or from the rivalry of
the woollen manufacturers. This, however, could
not have been the case with respect to the Petition
from Manchester, for it was signed by the Clergy
and by the Medical Men of the town, all of whom
concurred in representing the length of time em-
ployed in labour as inconsistent with the health of
the children. The sincerity of the 1,500 Gentlemen
'be signed it could not be better proved than by the
circumstance that if. as had been stated, all persons
under siateen years should by this Bill be thrown
out of employment, these Gentlemen were, in fact,
promoting a measure which would throw a very
grsat additional burden upon the poor laws, to be
"!rayed by the petitioners. He remarked, that the
principle of legislative interference between labourers
land their employers, had already been sanctioned by
Ithe Chimney-sweepers Bill, which had passed the
House by acclamation ; and he entreated the House,
having adopted a principle in one case, wherein the
objects of it were under their immediate inspection,
not to abandon it in another case, merely because the
objects of it were at a distance of 2 or 300 miles.
Mr.W. SMITH agreed with his Honourable Friend
(Mr. Phillips), on the impropriety and danger of
giving the slightest countenance to combinations
among the labouring classes ; but the best and most
legislative way of preventing such combinations was
to remedy their just complaints. Ile also assented
generally to the danger of interfering between la-
bourers and their employers ; but he could not ex-
tend that principle to two points, which were per-
fectly tangible and distinct, namely, the age of the
workers and the time of employment, and he thought
the House could with safety and propriety prevent
children, under the age of ten years, from being
employed at work for more than eleven hours.—
He was willing to concur with his Honourable Friend
on the advantage of giving children, even of tender
rats, a certain occupation ; but he could not consent
to have them confined to labour for a greater time
than was assigned to adults in any trade, or even in
agriculture, the most healthful employment of any.
The evil now complained of, it had been said, might
be remedied by the parents of the children . • but to
disprove this assertion, he read an extract from the
evidence before the House, shewing that the masters
had in this respect combined so strongly against their
work-people, that it was impossible for them to cor-
rect the evil. He then alluded to the unhealthful-
ness of such extended occupation, and said, that the
theories entertained by physicians upon that point,
which had been exposed to so much ridicule, were
such as had been founded upon the experience of'
centuries, and held by all physicians, from Machaon
down to Doctor Solomon—(Match laughter.)--r
They were-formed cn the plain principle that air and
imercise were necessary for the enjoyment of health.
The manufacturers of Manchester had, however, to
' prove the healthfulness of their employment, stated
that out of a working population, amounting to nearly
12,000 people, the average annual deaths were not
more than twenty. But what credit could be attached
to such a statement, when it was known that in the
Pays de Vaud, reputed the most salubrious country
,n the world, the deaths are averaged at seven per
annum in every thousand ? He concluded by pray-
kg the House to sanction the measure.
Mr. FINLAY said, that if the Goddess of Health
alluded to by the Right Honourable Gentleman (Mr.
Peel) were to cast her eyes over the Report on the
table, he would make bold to say that the Divinity
ifrould make choice of no place for her residence in
reference to certain of the cotton manufactories.—
was indeed ready to admit that the number of
hours consumed by children in labour was too great
(hear, hear, hear)—and he would even acknowledge
I that it was fully competent for the Legislature to in-
terfere in correcting the evil ; but he feared that the
remedy proposed would not be attended with that
Isalutary effect. He was convinced that if the Bill
were passed into a law, it would have the effect of
driving children from a state of comparative ease
and happiness to one of severity and hardship.—
The measure had been supported by some Petitions,
and these were in favour of it—in particular from
the workpeople in Mr. Owen's manufactory. Mr.
Owen, it appears, had, probably with a good view
to his own interest, consented to reduce the hours of
labour to ten and a half. It was very natural that
the labourers in that manufactory should desire that
their brethren elsewhere should share an equal advan-
tage, and no less so. that Mr. Owen should desire to
have other manufacturers equally limited ; but if the
hours of labour were thus abridged, he could assure
the House, that this country could no longer enjoy
[ her present superiority in manufactures in the foreign
markets. He hoped they would not, by acting on a
Iprinciple of mistaken humanity, and without having
sufficiently investigated the subject, endanger the
national prosperity. On such a principle the Poor
Laws were originally founded, and the results have
been distress and confusion wholly unparalleled.--1
There was one consideration which appeared to him
as an inconsistency in the Hon. Baronet's conduct,
which was, that in limiting the time of labour for
free children, he made no provision for apprentices, I
whom he still left under the provisions of his own
former Act, to work twelve hours a day; so that.
while the present measure was endeavouring to limit
the time of work for free children to ele .en hours,
the masters or parents had only to bind them as ap-
prentices, and they could then, under the Apprentice
Act, compel them to work for twelve hours a day.
He could not conceive the motive of the present Bill,
unless, indeed, the Honourable Baronets own manu-
factories were all worked by Apprentices. After
having given the subject his fullest consideration,
and being convinced that the measure not only
would not produce any advantage, but would abso-
lutely create a great mischief, he should vote for the
Noble Lord's motion.
Mr. TOHN SMITH said, he had a right to doubt
the justice of the argu :rents adduced by the opponents

of this Bill, since precisely the same objections wt
made against one of the moss important measures
ever submitted to Parliament, the Abolition of the
Slave Trade—(hear, hear, heat.)—llis Hon. Friend
had alluded to a Petition presented by the only body
of manufacturers who appeared to have considered
this subject. He referred to the Petition from New
Lanark. That Petition was put into his hands by the
individuals who had drawn it u nd a more mo-
dest or respectable body of men lie never saw. With
respect to some of the allegations contained in it, he
should like, if it were possible, that these Gentlemen who
opposed the measure, should give an answer to them:
It was there stated, that the hours of labour had been
decreased by the
.kindness of their master—but that
they nevertheless did a greater-quantity of work in
the shorter, than they used to perform in the longer
period—( Hear, hear.)—He inquired iuto the cause
of this, and was informed, that the workmen, having
no more labour allotted to them than they could
conveniently execute, they went through it with
cheerfulness and spirit—(Hear, hear.)
The Honourable FREDERICK ROBINSON ob-
served, that every feeling of humanity was necessa-
rily enlisted in favour of this measure. The only
doubt he had on the subject was, that if they passed
the present Bill, they would be bliged to extend the
same principle to every branch of trade. But, how-
ever unwilling he might be to sanction legislative in-
terference -generally in matters of this kind, yet he
conceived such a case had been made out in this in-
stance as called for the interposition of the House.
Of course, that case depended more or less on the
correctness of the statements that had been made,
with respect to the effect of labour on the children.
But he conceived it could scarcely be supposed that
children could work for so many hours without ha-
zarding their health. What struck him as a most
pregnant fact was, that on looking at the list of those
who were employed in cotton factories, not one a--
peared above forty years of age. How could this
circumstance be accounted for except by supposing
that their strength was exhausted by their youthfal
labours?—(Hear, hear l) The Right Honourable
Gentleman concluded, by stating that he would vote
for the measure.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For going into the Committee - -
Against it Sc
Majority
The House then went into the Committee.
Mr. FINLAY, on account of the lateness of the hour,
hoped the Honourable Baronet (Sir R. Peel), would
not press the measure.
Mr. LAMB moved, " That the Chairman do report
progress, and ask leave to sit again."
Sir R. PEEL hoped the House would not dela.,
the progress of the Bill any longer, as it was a mea-
sure of the utmost importance.
Sir J. GRAHAM trusted the Honourable Baronet
would not press the Bill forward.to-night, as, in all
probability, amendments wouliibe offered to every
clause—(hear, hear.)
Mr. LAMBTON thought the opposition to lettir.g
the Bill go through the Committee came with a bad
grace from the enemies of the measure, who com-
plained of the lateness of the hour, and yet did not care
to- what unreasonable hours those unfortunate chi'
dren were worked in the cotton factories—(hear.)
Sir JOHN NEWPORT conceived that they might
consider one or two of the clauses to-night—and,
they found the hour growing inconveniently la;
they could postpone the consideration of the rest.
Sir CHARLES MONCK was anxious that tt
Committee should be put off, as the measure was '
finitely too important to be disposed of at that hc.
Sir FRANCIS BURIIF,TT conceived that the B;
should now proceed through the Committee, as
involved a most important regulation—and the 1'
nourable Baronet who brought it in had already
peatedly given way, even at the hazard of losing
measure altogether.
After some further observations from Mr. Per.
Lord STANLEY, Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH, Mr.
LAY, Mr. LAMB, and Mr. ItobissoN—
Sir ROBERT PEEL rose, and stated that
would not object to the motion—but he hoped -.she
the Committee ;net tkis day, no opposition would
given to the further progress of the Bill.
The House then resumed—and Mr. BROADEN
ported progress and obtaioed leave to sit this day.
LOAN BILL.
On the motion for the second reading of the Loan Bill,
GRENFELL observed, that by a clattie
this Bill it was provided, that the Bank should
ceive 8001. per million for their trouble-in receiv;
the deposits of the Loan to be raised by convert
S per Cents. into Sif per Cents. and 4oa per. me
on the funding of Exchequer Bills. This wa.,
unfair'a charge, that he should, when the Bill w
into the Committee,- move to have that clause omit
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
if the clause in question were struck out, it w,
destroy the Bill ahogether.
Mr. GRENFELL inquired, whether the Subseri-
bersto the Loan had the option cf depositing
whole of their subscription, or any part of it,• in
chequer Bills ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCIMQUER
they had the option of depositing to the amount
tke whole, or any part of their zabscription, in
chequer Bills.
The Bill was then read a second time, Tc be
witted to-morrow.

THE HAM
Mr. GRENFELL wished to ask a cy.estient
subject that had this day created great agitation
the City. It was understood that. the Bank of
land had thrown a difficulty in the way of the opera..
tion of the Right Hon. Gentleman's Plan of Fins
Those who had sul-,..cribed to the Lean, and to-i
row or Wednesday had 15 per cent. to deposit on
Loan now raisi.ig by converting the S per cents. i
Siper cents. were informed, he understood, that
transfer must be made in the identical name of
person who had subscribed. This was very incoir
went—for many persons had gone to the cour
leaving their deposits with their bankers, so that
was impossible they could conform to the regulation
of the Bank.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
it was true such a regulation had been made.
correct, in point of law and principle, though ,
venient, that the stock should only be accepted
the person who subscribed, or who had a power
attorney authorising the transfer, and nt.: by a
pC7.SOII. It WaS a matter of form. zr..l the incon,

that fact, tha
had not suffi
of the child.
all the paalPl
been made as
teen from I
question, the
factory 374 c
15 hours In
employed in
to Mr. Sandf
to cantempla
area occapie
for 15 hours
{tear, heal
•-•,
was to be sot
sras counters
cud to a chi
Sear). He
that persons,
work ; he di
drea ranting
But ras it t
a measure
Sear. hear)?
Sandford,
speech or e
return by
children ay..
ennufactor
orderly, as
they did nc
This surely
afklted
thus Auto
permanent
stated, elm
sprits did
mast r- on
to his min
most beyo
confined o
and a half
and be coy
:ben.'
then he d
girl, who:
cessant toi
ienambed
ter? Ed:
Sicced, it
all this, it
children I
and had
ruperadcli
treated
. .
tigury no
stating
considers
• kr the el
he had ti
attached
.gyrnen
had pro
attache(
Member
guileless
brs ; h
and sax
mate of
kindnes
iemploy
pnn
th lal
hbour.
Sag chi]
ny that
sae pit
the ino
were a
cafe
cieres
Plates
w
asrta
tc.au
. CZon
tidal
1•••CtS
pest
g de
our
tenor
There
%rd.,
11 19

„
1 i I 11 I'.
•
• ' ' 1
4t, , '
! I 0
• . ;
u 1,
! iI, ti'
1 . I ; It
, I, i ; 1 •1, 10
' ii 11 11
•
' t
' , !•1 I •
i f. 1 •
I
I
'
I
1 I
. •
i '
iiil 1,1 i j
e i
,
I
e
4 , i
_.. $
*i ' i
e •.,, ' It'i
/‘
e tOl
I ' tl.
It 'i 1 i 4 1,
a- '
-ik 'ln t ;
1
st
;e ,lii
il ' *
A '
-•..' . ' 4 1
i S II
1 I 1 Ili 1.
Le
to •
. i
IT, i
i
hi
! i.
yrt i
1 ' '
ta- 1
I
let . Ili ' •
all i
my -1,,
I i
, ,
r.g i
lad i ‘
m- li 1
are
ail-
gh .i ,
, :f . !
' t
ate, . .
the
la- t
LAW. ; i • '
Bill . J lc'
s it i A
Flo- - • I
Pi;
Te-
tl..e +
i 7 '
EFL,
41 "..
i'll.- -
I . J
t he
Id be
'i ry
,: re- 1 'I 4 d
Iy.
'Bill, i il i
le of , tt
4 '
al te-. 1 t I
, iving
rtiag 't a , if i
,
biota
al .!, , ,t, 1
went i
!iced. 4,,
. said,
4
co.dd • k 't'l
•
bscri- .
g the
:f
:a E- ; ,
id 1 ,
tsa , , k? ,
il.r. i
int of 11 i
in F,s,- , i
e COl3ll- N
,II
'
non a , 1 .11,
don in . ,` 1
F Eng-
opera- r t
I name.
D-MOT.
on the
[s. into into go
, ti
hat the •
of the 1
iconve- : i .
ountry.,
that it 4 1 ;
elation
'
,R salt:, •
It was ~
incon-
4d from
Nwer of
a .third
motive-
Alr
ti(