rience, when known to the House, might influence its judgment in discussing the general policy of maintaining those laws. They did not come there to detail a sad story of general distress, to excite pity for their losses, or to influence the passions of the people. They only came to the House to apprise honourable members, as reasonable men, having a sense of the obligation of the trust reposed in them, of the coming evil, which when it came would be shared by them as by millions of their fellow-countrymen. "They cannot," he continued, "be told that they are desirous of changing a law of which there has not been sufficient experience, or that they ever approved of. They come here to prove that all they predicted of its consequences nearly a quarter of a century since has been verified, and that they have suffered all they expected from it; and now, when they are hourly feeling its effects in a stronger degree, they ask you only to hear the evidence of facts which would show it. Upon what possible ground," he asked, in continuation, can you refuse them this request? This is really no trifling matter, and I trust it will not be lightly dismissed. It is the application of the great body of the middle classes, and the most reflecting portion of the working class who appeal to this House. They approach you in a manner the least objectionable that is possible. They offer you no intimidation; they come here with no menace, with no violence; but even with consideration for, and deference to, your supposed opinions. It is the same Parliament that refused to alter the law last year, and they do not come now to you at once and hastily, to ask you to repeal the law; but they request you to hear the grounds on which they made the demand, and on which they think that you ought to re-consider your decision."

Mr. Strutt, in seconding the motion, said that his constituents, the silk manufacturers of Derby, had stated in their petitions that they willingly relinquished protection for their own trade if the trade in corn were set free. Of the ministers, Sir J. Hobhouse, Lord Morpeth, and Mr. Poulett Thompson took advantage of the question being deemed an open one, to speak for the motion. The other ministers who voted, including Lord Palmerston and Lord John Russell, were against it. It was on this occasion that Lord Stanley offended the earnest men who had determined to overthrow these unjust laws, by a foolish joke on a subject so deeply affecting the interests of his constituents. He had heard the manufacturers, he said, compared by a gentleman of his acquaintance to a match-girl who solicited his charity in the street, and who, having obtained it, remarked, "Bless you, sir, I lose on every match I sell; but, God be praised, I sell a great many of them;" and so said the manufacturers, "We lose on every article we sell, but, God be praised, our manufactures have increased amazingly, and the only mischief is, that other nations are increasing theirs too;" an illustration which is reported to have 'occasioned much laughter. But the picture drawn by Lord Howick of the proposed examination of the petitioners at the bar, was the most effective joke of the occasion. He sketched the variety of

subjects bearing on the question, which would be touched on by thirty or forty cross-examiners, each anxious to draw forth views in support of his own opinions. "Let members," he said, "figure to themselves the picture which the House would present at half-past seven o'clock. There would be their unhappy Chairman in his seat-whether he would be listening to the evidence, or whether he would be writing verses, or whether he might occasionally indulge in a little repose, it was not for him to say. The great majority of members would be scattered in different places, and it would be a very good evening on which members might be able to form engagements to dine out, which it was not much in their power to do usually. The honourable member for Manchester had presented a petition, praying that this inquiry might take place. He should, therefore, feel it to be his duty to attend in his place on such occasions; but he would be occupying the bench, on which he usually sat, nearly alone, and he would be rather inclined to follow the example of the worthy Chairman, than to attend to the business which was going on."

manner

The motion was defeated, the Commons deciding by a majority of 361 to 172 that they would not even hear evidence on the subject. It was angrily remarked by the newspapers that the Lords, who had resolved that they had "no time to inquire" on Monday, did not sit at all on Wednesday; and that the Commons, who thought one night enough for the discussion of a question affecting the vital interests of the people, assembled at four o'clock on the following day, and adjourned at six. The association met on the following day, their numbers swelled by a numerous attendance of free traders of the metropolis. There were some who had hoped that they would, at least, have been granted a hearing, and these were loud in their expressions of indignation. Others, who had taken a less sanguine view, and had not been deceived into a belief that their battle was about to be an easy one, were excited by the contemptuous in which their petitions had been received. But there was no sign of a falling off in their determination to persevere to the end. At that meeting the newspapers favourable to the cause for the first time noticed a speaker whose name was afterwards to become so familiar to them in connection with this struggle. This was Mr. Cobden. He told his brother delegates that "there was no cause for despondency. They were the real representatives of three millions of people-a fir greater number of constituents than the House over the way could boast of. They well knew that no great principle was ever indebted to Parliament for successthe victory must be gained out of doors. The gra" towns of Britain had extended the right hand of fellowship to each other; and their alliance would be a Hanseatic league against their feudal corn law plaz derers. Let them remember the result of the union the Hanse Towns. He had sailed up the Rhine, the Danube, and the Elbe, and had exulted over the rus of the castles once inhabited by the feudal landlords, but which now only served to make a landscape picturesq Instead of those baronial residences, there were po

A.D. 1841.]

fertile vineyards, cultivated by a prosperous peasantry. Repeal the corn laws, and then, and not till then, England would have a contented, a prosperous, and a rich peasantry, such as there was in other countries." He then continued:-"Sir Robert Peel had said that this would be a labourer's question: he should find it so an agricultural labourer's question. They would go cach and lay before the agricultural labourers the information they had intended to lay before the House of Commons; and even if they were compelled to go into every village, those facts should be known. They had been told by Mr. Cayley that they had the power to regulate wages; why, they had no more the power of regulating the price of labour than they had the power of regulating the catch of mackerel. But Mr. Cayley had forgotten that that was an argument which acted two ways; if they had the power of regulating the wages of the operative spinners or weavers, surely the landlords had the power of regulating the wages of the agricultural labourers; and what were the wages the agricultural labourers got, in comparison with the manufacturing labourers? He and his partner had in their employment upwards of 1,000 men; they paid 400 of these men, upon an average of years, 22s. a-week, and they had no person in their manufactories so badly paid, in proportion to his work, as many labourers in the country."

A public dinner at one of the theatres had been offered to the chief members of the association, but was declined. They were going back to Manchester, to give an account of their proceedings, and to concert measures for a more extensive movement. They had seen the futility of petitions to a House of landowners, against the landlords' laws; and they resolved to set to work in earnest to create that full tide of public opinion in their favour without which the prime minister himself had told them that nothing could be done. "This expression of the predominant opinion in the House of Commons," says the "Annual Register" for 1839, "had the effect of putting the question to rest." And such was, no doubt, the opinion of the landlords themselves, who, secure in their Parliamentary majority, troubled themselves but little with the association, which continued to hold its meetings in the little room in Newall's Buildings, Manchester. Wheat had again fallen; and, with the increased employment for the people which the summer generally brings with it, the corn law agitation appeared to have subsided. The evil effects of the provision laws, however, were sure, ere long, to manifest themselves again; and, meanwhile, the Manchester men laboured with a zeal which made their success only a question of time.

CHAPTER LV.

543

tributed so materially to our national prosperity, occasioned the employment of a large number of persons at high rates of wages. Upwards of 118,000 people were working in coal mines. In the county of Durham there were more persons thus employed under ground than in cultivating the surface. It was a kind of work at which women and children could earn money, and in some of the collieries their labour was made available to a very large extent. It may be supposed that this practice entailed upon the boys and girls so employed the most serious evils, physical and moral. When this state of things began to attract public attention, an extensive inquiry was instituted by the "Children's Employment Commission," which prepared three reports, presented to Parliament in 1842. The commissioners collected a large mass of evidence at the collieries which brought to light facts of the most astounding nature as to the cruelty and demoralisation connected with the employment of women and children in coal mines. It seemed almost incredible that such practices could have existed in a civilised country, and showed the extent to which the thirst for gain will carry men, under circumstances where they can count upon impunity, and evade the censure of public opinion. Lord Ashley took up the subject with his usual earnestness in all questions affecting the welfare of the working classes, and in the session of 1842 he brought in a bill founded upon the reports of the commission. The statement of facts with which he introduced the measure excited the astonishment and indignation of the House, and greatly shocked the moral sense of the country.

If it had been only the large owners of mines that were concerned, he said, there would have been no necessity for legislative interference. The health of those employed under ground depends, of course, upon the ventilation and drainage of the pits, which differ according to the depth of the seams of coal, and these vary from ten inches in some places to ten or twenty feet in others. In South Staffordshire, for instance, says Dr. Mitchel, the coal beds are sufficiently thick to allow abundance of room; the mines are warm and dry, and there is a supply of fresh air. The case is pretty much the same in Northumberland, Cumberland, and South Durham, with some exceptions in the last place and in North Durham. In Warwickshire and Lancashire the mines are damp, and the water in them is sometimes deep. In Derbyshire it was found that black damp very much abounded, and the ventilation in general was exceedingly imperfect. Hence fatal explosions frequently took place; the work-people were distressed by the quantity of carbonic acid gas which they were compelled to inhale, and the pits were so hot as to add greatly to the fatigue of their labour. Some pits were dry and comfortable, but many were so wet that the people had to work all day over their shoes in water, at the same time that the water dropped or "rained" upon them from the roof, so that in a short time their clothes were

Riding of Yorkshire there were very few collieries in which the main road exceeded a yard in height; in some it did not exceed twenty-eight inches, and in some it was less than twenty-two inches; so that in such places the youngest child could not pass along without great pain and in the most constrained posture. In East Scotland, where the side roads did not exceed from twentytwo to twenty-eight inches in height, the working places were sometimes from 100 to 200 yards distant from the main road, and through those passages females had to crawl backwards and forwards with their carts. The whole of those places were in a deplorable state as to ventilation, and the drainage was quite as bad. The same was reported of the roads in North and South Wales, where in most cases the ventilation was altogether neglected.

In these places, far down under the surface of the earth, the great majority of those employed were children, many of them almost infants. The report stated that in South Staffordshire, Shropshire, Warwickshire, Leicestershire, and Cumberland, children began to work at seven years of age; about Halifax, Bradford, and Leeds, at six; in Derbyshire and South Durham, at five and six ; in Lancashire, at five; and near Oldham, as early as four. Five or six was a common age in the east of Scotland; in the west of Scotland, eight; and in South Wales four was a very usual age. The report added that in the south of Ireland no children at all were employed, and that all the underground work which in England, Scotland, and Wales was done by young children, was done in Ireland by young persons between the ages of thirteen and eighteen; and in none of the collieries of that country was a single instance known of a female of any age being employed under ground. Referring to this fact, Lord Ashley said, "I have often admired the generosity of the Irish people, and I must say that if this is to be taken as a specimen of their barbarism, I would not exchange it for all the refinement and polish of the most civilised nations of the globe."

sense.

The nature of the employment in which the children were engaged was calculated to brutalise them in every They were obliged to crawl along the low passages with barely room for their persons in that posture, each dragging a load of coals in a cart by means of a chain which was fastened to a girdle borne round the waist, the chain passing between the legs. This they dragged through a passage often not as good as a common sewer, in an atmosphere almost stifling. One of the witnesses, Robert North, said, "I went into the pit at seven years of age; when I drew by the girdle and chain, the skin was broken, and the blood ran down. If we said anything, they would beat us. I have seen many draw at six. They must do it or be beat. They cannot straighten their backs during the day. I have sometimes pulled till my hips hurt me so that I have not known what to do with myself." At this sort of work girls were employed as well as boys, and they commonly worked quite naked down to the waist, the rest of the dress being a pair of loose trowsers, and in this condi

tion they were obliged to serve adult colliers who worked without any clothing at all. A sub-commission remarked upon this practice: 'Any sight more disgusting, indecent, and revolting, can scarcely be imagined than these girls at work." The grossest immorality was the natural consequence. Lord Ashley remarked that "nothing could be more graphic and touching than the evidence of many of these poor girls, insulted, oppressed, and even corrupted as they were. There exists in them oftentimes, nevertheless, a simplicity and kindness which render tenfold more heartrending that system which forces away these young people from the holier and purer duties which Providence appoints for them, to put them to occupations so unsuited, so harsh, so degrading. It appears that they drag these heavy weights, some 12,000, some 14,000, and some 16,000 yards daily. In some cases they carried burdens on their backs, varying from three quarters of a cwt. to 3 cwt." In Scotland a sub-commission found one little girl, six years of age, carrying an eight stone weight, fourteen times a day, a journey equal in distance to the height of St. Paul's Cathedral. The commissioner adds, "And it not unfrequently happens that the tugs break, and the load falls upon those females who are following, who are, of course, struck off the ladders. However incredible it may be, yet I have taken the evidence of fathers, who have ruptured themselves by straining to lift coals on to their children's backs."

There was much more in the evidence too revolting to be quoted. It is a dark chapter in our industrial history. But without those dark shades, no historical portraiture of British society would be a faithful delineation of all its aspects, or would exhibit the hideous contrasts between the highest refinement, the brightest intelligence, and the purest Christianity, in conjunction with the most shocking inhumanity, barbarism, and moral debasement. The report of the commission was charged with exaggeration, but there was no denying the main facts. The bill of Lord Ashley was passed almost unanimously by the Commons. In the Lords it was subjected to considerable opposition, and some amendments were introduced. The amendments were adopted by the Commons, and on the 10th of August, 1842, the act was passed "to prohibit the employment of women and girls in mines and collieries, to regulate the emploșment of boys, and to make other provisions relating to persons working therein. The act prohibited the eployment of any boys under ground, in a colliery, who were under the age of ten years."

The example of Oxford, who made an attempt on the life of the Queen, was followed by another crazy youth, named Francis, excited by a similar morbid passion fo notoriety. On the 13th of May, 1842, the Queen and Prince Albert were returning to Buckingham Palace down Constitution Hill in a barouche and four, when a man who had been leaning against the wall of the palace garden went up to the carriage, drew a pistol from his pocket, and fired at the Queen. Her Majesty was untouched, and seemed unaware of the danger. The assassin was observed by Prince Albert, and pointed out

A.D. 1841.]

by him to one of the outriders, who dismounted to pursue him; but he had been at once arrested by other persons. The carriage, which was driving at a rapid pace, no sooner arrived at the palace, than a messenger was sent to the Duchess of Kent, to announce the Queen's danger and her safety. The duchess hastened to the palace, and embracing her daughter, burst into a flood of tears, the Queen endeavouring to re-assure her with affectionate anxiety. The prisoner, John Francis, the son of a machinist or stage carpenter at Covent Garden Theatre, having been twice examined by the Privy Council, was committed to Newgate for trial at the next session of the Central Criminal Court on a charge of shooting at the Queen with a loaded pistol. He was only twenty years of age, rather good-looking, with a dark complexion, middle stature, and respectably dressed. The Queen took her accustomed airing next day, taking the same route, in the same sort of carriage. A great multitude had assembled round the palace to express their congratulations, which they did by loud cheering, and the waving of hats and handkerchiefs, in acknowledgment of which the Queen and the Prince graciously bowed and smiled. Her carriage was followed by a number of gentlemen on horseback, and the drive was described as a triumphal progress. In the evening the Queen and Prince Albert went to the Italian Opera, when the audience broke forth into tumultuous applause, called for the National Anthem, and cheered at almost every line.

The trial of Francis took place on the 17th of June, before Chief Justice Tindal, Baron Gurney, and Justice Patteson. He looked dejected, and pleaded "Not Guilty" in a very feeble voice. The principal witness was Colonel Arbuthnot, one of the equerries who was riding close to the Queen when the shot was fired, and cried out to a policeman, "Secure him!" which was done. The report, he said, was sharp and loud; but he did not hear the whiz of a ball, in consequence of the noise made by the carriage. Colonel Wylde, another equerry, with several other witnesses, corroborated the testimony of Colonel Arbuthnot; and it appeared that Francis had on the previous day pointed a pistol at the Queen, though he did not fire. On the defence it was alleged that the attempt was the result of distress, and that the prisoner had no design to injure the Queen. The jury retired, and in about half an hour returned into court with a verdict of "Guilty," finding that the pistol was loaded with some destructive substance, besides the wadding and powder. Chief Justice Tyndal immediately pronounced sentence of death for high treason, that he should be hanged, beheaded, and divided into four quarters. At the conclusion of the sentence the prisoner fainted, and fell into the arms of the gaolers. The sentence was not executed. It was commuted to transportation for life.

545

King of the Belgians. In the Mall, about half way between the palace and the stable-yard gate, a deformed youth was seen to present a pistol at the Queen's carriage by a person named Bassett, who seized him and ‹ brought him to the police; but they refused to take him in charge, treating the matter as a hoax. Bassett himself was subsequently arrested, and examined by the Privy Council. When the facts of the case were ascertained, the police hastened to repair the error of the morning, and sent to all the police-stations a description of the real offender. He was sixteen years of age, five feet six inches high, with a humpback, short neck, light hair, a long, sickly, pale face, his nose marked with a scar, or black patch, and his appearance altogether dirty. This tallied exactly with the description which a working jeweller named Bean had given to the police of his son, who had absconded a week or a fortnight before. This led to the apprehension of the lad, who was identified, examined, and committed to prison. His trial took place on the 25th of August, at the Central Criminal Court. The Attorney-General briefly related the facts of the case, and Lord Abinger, the presiding judge, having summed up, the jury returned a verdict of "Guilty," convicting the prisoner of presenting a pistol, loaded with powder and wadding, "in contempt of the Queen, and to the terror of divers liege subjects." The sentence of the court was-"Imprisonment in Millbank Penitentiary for eighteen calendar months.”

The repetition of these infamous outrages excited great public indignation, and led to a general demand that something effectual should be done to put a stop to them by rendering the law more prompt and effective, and the punishment more disgraceful. In compliance with this demand, Sir Robert Peel brought in a bill upon the subject, which was unanimously accepted by both Houses, and which rapidly passed into law.

The state of the law relating to attacks upon the Sovereign in former times was calculated to stimulate the morbid vanity and love of notoriety which prompted persons of weak minds to the commission of such crimes. Trials for high treason, even where the object was not to take away the life of the Sovereign, or to change the form of Government, were surrounded with forms and solemnities that encumbered the proceedings and elevated the prisoner into a sort of hero, making him the centre of public interest, and the universal topic of conversation— just the thing he desired, while double the amount of evidence was required to secure a conviction than would be necessary in any other case. In the year 1800, after the attempt of Hatfield on the life of George III., an act was passed which, in cases of actual attacks upon the life of the Sovereign, abolished those encumbering forms and solemnities. Sir Robert Peel in his bill proposed to extend the provisions of that act to cases where the object was not compassing the life, but "compassing the wounding of the Sovereign." "I propose," he said, "that, after the passing of this act, if any person or persons shall wilfully discharge or attempt to discharge, or point, aim, or present at or near the person of the