The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-05-28 00:00:00

"CHARLES BURNS, AGE 13.

" 1. What were your hours of working at Mr. Hives's, of
,eeds ?—From half-past five in the morning till eight at

2. Had you any time allowed you for your breakfast,

en ?—No

3. Nor for your drinking ?—No.
4. How much time had you allowed you for your dinner ?
7orty minutes.

"5. Had you sometimes to clean the machinery at your
inner hour ?-17es ; and had to wipe all the machines.
"G. How long did that take you generally ?—About a
luarter of an hour, and sometimes twenty minutes.

" 7. Pray how often were you allowed to make water ?
Three times a day.
" 8. And were you allowed to make water at any time that
you wanted?—No ; only when a boy came to tell you it was
your turn ; and, whether we wanted or pot, that was the only
time allowed us : if we did not go when he came round, we
could not go at all.
"9. Could you hold your water all that time ?—No : we
were forced to let it go.
" 10. Did you, then, spoil or wet your clothes constantly ?
Every noon and every night.
" 11. Did you ever hear of that hurting any body ; Yea
there was a boy died.

" 12. Did he go home ill with attempting to suppress his
urine ?—Yes, and after he had been at home a bit, he died.
" 13.—Were you beaten at your work ?—lf we looked off
our work, or spoke to one another, we were beaten.
" 14. If you had not gone so fast as the machine, should
you have been beaten ?—lf we let the machine stop halt a
minute, we should have been beaten.
" 15. When you retired for the purposes of nature, how

.
long would they allow you to stop ?—lf we were longer than
five minutes, we got beaten ; and if we stopped longer, they
would not let us go out another time, when it was our turn.
" 16. Was the mill very dusty ?—Yes.
" 17. What effect had it upon your health ?—The dust got
down our throats, and when we went home at night, and
went to bed, we spit up blood.
" 18. Is it not, likewise, in what is_called hot-water spin-

ning, extremely hot in these mills ?—Yes, very hot.
" 19. Is not the place full of steam?—Yes, and the ma-
chinery throws off water perpetually ; so that we are wet to
the skin by the hot water. And, in winter, as soon as we
get home, our clothes are quite stiff with the frost.
" 20. What did you get for your breakfast and drinking ?
—1 had tea, sometimes coffee, and butter and bread ; and
my tea, for fear of wanting to snake water, I used to throw
out of the window.
" 21. In either of the mills that you were in, Mr. Mar-
shall's or Mr. Hive's, were you allowed to sit down ?—No.
" 22. Were you not allowed to sit down during the whole
of the day ?—lf we did we should get beaten Lwe had nothing
to sit on, unless we sat upon the frame by getting upon it.
" 23. Is it a common sort of thing for you children to be
beaten in this sort of way ?—Yes ; there used to be a scream-
ing among the boys and the girls every time of the day, and
they made black and blue marks on the shoulders.
" 24. Where was this ?—At Mr. Hives's.
" 25. Are accidents often occurring at these mills ?—Yes.
" 26, State any that occurred within your own knowledge ?
—I had a sister who worked at Mr. Marshall's, and she got
killed there by accident.
"27. Were you able to attend the night-school?—No.
" 28. Were you able to attend the Sunday-school ?—I was
not able to go : I should have been too late : I had to rest on
the Sunday morning."i'
This, Mr. Heyworth, is a sample of what is going on in
the premises of pour friends of the corn law league : judge,
therefore, whether they are the philanthropists they repre-

sent themselves to be : judge whether they ought to be con-
sidered the friends of the working-classes. " Cruel," did
you say ? Show a single instance of cruelty, traceable to the
corn laws, that can be compared to this.
Were further proof necessary that the corn law repealers
aro not the friends of the people, I could add it. But the
fact, that government has been obliged, by act of parliament,
to secure a holiday to the factory children on Good Friday
and Christmas day, shows their philanthropy in its true
colours. As the repeal agitation originated, as already
stated, with the manufacturers, we have a right to examine
who and what they are, and whether their views have any
claim to confidence. I think they will be found wanting;
and, Although the manufacturers should not all be. involved
in indiscriminate condemnation, yet there are facts which
bespeak them any thing rather than the friends of the
people. They are grossly inconsistent. " Thus a man may
work his factory till half-past eleven on Saturday night and
begin again at half-past midnight on Sunday night, mani-
festly depriving his workpeople of the holy rest, and yet he
may be a stanch supporter of Sunday-schools, and be even
trudging, at no ordinary pace, to his post as a Sunday-school
teacher. Yet he sees uo harm in all this : trade requires it,
and religion has nothing to do with trade ! so say the world,
at least. He swallows a camel on Saturday night, and strains
at a gnat on Sunday morning, taking care to distribute, by
the way, some very convincing tracts against infidelity and
Sabbath-breaking! Or, a man may be held up as a pillar of
a religious society who gives a little child, eight years of age,
one shilling per week for working in a factory, telling her
mother, who applied, after she had been some time em-
ployed, for ' little more wages,' that he can get plenty at
ninepence ! and this same person shall give, in the same
year, one thousand pounds towards building a sanctuary for
the worship of God !" But this is one of your friends of the
people ! A philanthropist ! A Reformer ! An advocate for
the repeal of the corn laws ! Bah !
I will conclude this letter by a brief quotation relative to
the over-working and tyranny of the mill-owners from a
speech by the late Mr. Sadler :—" Can any man." says he,
" be fool enough to suppose, that, were the corn laws abo-
lished to-morrow, and every grain we consume grown and
ground in foreign parts, that such individuals would cease
to grind the faces of the poor ?' "
I am, sir, with the utmost respect, yours, &c.
May 12, 1841. JAMES B—N.
* The manner in which the Rev. Mr. Giles treated a case
of destitution at the late corn law meeting proves this asser-
tion. What he said on this case had no bearing whatever on
the corn laws.
t Parliamentary Report.

THE CORN LAWS

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD

----
Sirt,—You were good enough to insert in your paper of
the 11th inst., a letter I addressed to you on the subject of
the corn laws, in connection with some strictures, which a
correspondent of the Livenpool Courier, under the signature
of W. S. L., had made on a letter from Mr. Gladstone, on
the same subject. To-day I observe, in the same journal, a
further. communication from W. S. L., purporting to be in
reply.
So far as I am able to comprehend the gist of W. S
arguments, they amount to this—and in so much coincide
apparently with Mr. Gladstone's views : namely, that in
good seasons, our home production of corn is sufficient for
all. our consumption ; but that in bad seasons, it is not.
What, then, is the remedy proposed to meet this exigency is
bad seasons ? To admit foreign corn, at a reduced duty, on
condition that Germany, Prussia, Russia, and other coun-
tries should at a sufficiently diminished rate of duty, admit
our manufactures, for their consumption. But here I would
would ask, what is to prevent these countries, after we have
admitted their corn, still requiring a money payment, taking
advantage of a relaxation in the law, in favour of their corn,
and telling us—which they may de in a few years—that they
do not wane our manufactures, and that they can make theijt,
cheaper and better for themselves ? Hence, the error, as 1,t
appears to me, that the great " corn cricks " of the day fall

SO: itoy ow, Omit foolp Afill thnu estintpio will
top yolir If Nap voiloiquontikal," You
may 4lipit tilt* corn, I grants but clan you." compel" them
to take your manufactures, and will they do so ?
My desire is, to see these laws securely determined, which,
as W. S. L. very clearly states, cannot be looked for from
the present government.. But, I confess, I hold it to be
little better than a delusion to suppose that a mere reciprocal
reduction of duties on corn, here, and on manufactures,
abroad, can, in any way, meet the purpose of corn laws, as
regards a security of supply in times of scarcity. In saying
this, I do not advocate, to the full extent, the rate leviable,
under the existing laws, or on the other hand, that steps
should not be taken to get foreign countries to reduce their
duties on our manufactures, but what I contend for, is, that
the anti corn-law party deceive themselves and others too,
and can offer no Security for the foreigner taking our manu-
factures, though much against my own personal interest,
recollecting the immense export going on, to the continent,
of machinery, the intelligence of the people, the cheapness
of labour, a.climate favouring the artizan, with every other
advantage, I consider that the foreigner, with such means of
his own, will not consult his own interest, by taking our
manufactures, when he can make them for himself equally as
well at home. I am, Mr. Editor, obliged by your giving to
this subject, a clear stage, and, to your humble servant,
FAIR PLAY.
Liverpool, Wednesday, May 26, 1841.

e

ROMISII CONTROVERSY

A perusal of the following letters, and those written by
Mr. M'Crea, which appeared in the Albion of Monday, will
show at once the reason why we declined the insertion of
the letter. The columns of the Standard are, and always
shall be, at the service of those who can put forth their
sentiments in language which is borne out by facts; but we
will never suffer such a journal to become the vehicle of
slander and abuse against the Church of England, or any
other institution in the country. Let Mr. M'Crea adopt
the spirit and tone of a Christian minister and he will find
no disinclination on our part to receive his communications ;
but we will never suffer any person to bring, with impunity,
a railing and false accusation against our glorious church, or
any of her devoted and zealous ministers.