rupted by the dread of wanting capable persons to fulfil the duties of judges. He objected to enlarging the salaries. It was characteristic of human nature, that a man might be tempted from his honesty by 6,000l. a-year, whose integrity would not be shaken by 4,000l. He observed, that there were 850 barristers in practice, and no less than 500 places to divide among them. In one court there were 125 places, which upon some occasion he would name one after the other. In this court one person connected with the first office in the state held four situations. These were cases far more worthy of the labours of the right hon. gentleman, than the raising of the salaries of the judges. Mr. T. Wilson thought 6,000l. too much for the puisne judges. He would not object to 5,000l. The amendment was negatived. After which, the resolutions were agreed to. COTTON MILLS REGULATION BILL.] Mr. Hobhouse moved the order of the day for the second reading of this bill. Mr. Hornby objected to the bill on account of the interference it went to effect in the apportionment of labour. It was proposed by this bill to reduce the hours of working at present assigned to the children by one-twelfth. At present they laboured in the mills twelve hours on each of the six days of the working week; and this bill went to reduce the twelve to eleven hours. But it was to be observed, that if they reduced the labour of the children, they must reduce that of the adults too; so intimately were their labours connected with, and dependent on, each other. The consequence of this alteration and reduction of the hours of labour would be a diminution in the value of the total annual production of two millions and a half. He thought the House should pause before they took any such step. For his part he protested against the measure, and should move, by way of amendment, "that the bill be read a second time that day three months." Mr. Hobhouse contended, that the House had already recognised the principle upon which his bill was founded. They had legislated to protect those who could not protect themselves. A bill of the same tendency had been introduced in 1819, by sir Robert Peel; and on that occasion the right hon. Secretary for the Home Department had properly described it as being perfectly ridiculous to say that the object which it was to effect was an interference with the apportionment of labour by the masters. Now, his desire was, simply, to carry into effect that excellent statute which had long been most shamefully invaded; but he should introduce a clause, on this occasion, to compel the attendance of parties before the ma gistrates. His hon. friend the member for Preston, had told them, that there would be a diminution, if the bill now before them were to pass, of two millions and a half in the annual production; but, would they allow any consideration of this kind to interfere with a question that involved the health, the comfort, and the happiness of so many children? Those benevolent masters who, with a feeling superior to all considerations of their own peculiar interest, had petitioned parliament in favour of the same object as that contemplated by this bill, had candidly stated, that the increase of machinery furnished increased temptation to the masters of mills to employ children beyond the hours limited by the act. As to the interference complained of, there were already various acts of parliament in which a similar principle was recognized. There were acts, for example, to limit the hours of labour of shipwright's apprentices in Dublin; and yet Irish children, he believed, were quite as strong as those of Manchester. With regard to the medical evidence that had been furnished before a committee, and on which some gentlemen had relied as proving that seventy-two hours' labour during the week, or twelve hours per day, was not too much for a child; what weight could the House attach to the testimony of witnesses, one of whom, a medical gentleman, being asked, whether he thought a child could keep standing, without prejudice to her health, on her legs, for twenty-three hours successively, had answered "That the question was one of great doubt." Another said, that the inhaling of cotton fumes was not injurious to health; and upon being asked why it was not injurious, he answered that the effect was taken away by constant expectoration. Some person then inquired, if constant expectoration was not injurious. "That," replied the medical gentleman, "depends on a variety of facts." It was the dicta of these medical oracles upon which his hon. friend relied for his opposition to the present mea sure, which was only intended to make the bill of sir Robert Peel effectual, and of witnesses. He would, however, vote for the second reading of the bill. Mr. W. Smith observed, that sir Robert Peel's bill, as amended by the Lords, did not allow seventy-two hours in the week, but sixty-nine; the time for Satur day being nine instead of twelve hours. This act had been evaded in the most shameless, barefaced, and inhuman manner. Admitting the whole statement of the adversaries of the bill, there was abundant evidence to warrant the proposed reduction from twelve to eleven hours a day. He was glad that these poor children had found so active and eloquent an advocate, as his hon. friend the member for Westminster. reduce the hours appointed for labour to the time at which that bill fixed them. That bill had proved inoperative, because there was no clause in it compelling the attendance of witnesses, and only two convictions had ever taken place under it. In the best regulated mills the children were at present compelled to work twelve hours and a half a day, and for three or four days in the week were not allowed to go out of the mills to get their meals, which they were obliged to take off the floor of the mill, mingled with the dust and down of the cotton. In other mills they were forced to work fifteen or sixteen hours a day. Now, was it possible for children to live who were daily suffering under an atmosphere, the temperature of which was warmer than our warmest sum. mer days? They scarcely bore any resemblance to their fellow-creatures after being so long subjected to this torture. Their skins were literally the colour of parchment. His hon. friend said, that if the bill passed we should lose two millions and a half of productive revenue. But, ought we to allow a portion of our fellow-subjects to be rendered miserable, for such a consideration? No. It would be better to give up the cotton trade alto. gether, than to draw such a sum out of the blood, and bones, and sinews of these unfortunate children. The legislature was bound to protect them. He had not taken upon himself the task of bringing in the present measure, until he had no hope that any person of more weight than himself, and more closely connected with the manufacturing part of the country, would undertake the measure. His object was only, by adding a clause, to compel the attendance of witnesses, to make sir Robert Peel's bill operative, and reduce the hours of labour to the number originally settled in it. Mr. Secretary Peel said, he could not support either the original motion or the amendment. He doubted the policy of limiting the number of hours for labouring, as proposed by the hon. member for Westminster. He saw several objections to sending a bill to the Lords altering the number of hours, on the mere statement of the hon. gentleman, however unexceptionable. He concurred thus far; namely, that it was expedient to try the experiment, by rendering what was termed sir R. Peel's bill effectual, and he would give to magistrates a power to summon parties before them, and compel the attendance Mr. Tulk supported the bill. Mr. Philips said, that the whole course of his experience induced him to believe, that this bill would in no degree improve the condition of the labourers. He contended, that those persons who were acquainted with the management of cottonfactories were much better able to judge of what regulations were fit to be adopted, than those who knew nothing about the practical effect of the existing laws. The provisions of sir Robert Peel's act had been evaded in many respects: and it was now in the power of the workmen to ruin many individuals, by enforcing the penalties for children working beyond the hours limited by that act. He was satisfied that the condition of the people working in the factories was much better than that of persons who worked out of them. He had heard only that morning, that the weavers out of doors did not receive more than one-third of the wages paid to the persons in factories; and the latter were besides provided with more convenient and wholesome places to work in. It would be well to limit the hours of children's working, if it were possible; but that was not possible without limiting the labour of adults. The only effect of the measures now attempted would be to deprive the children of work altogether. He was satisfied that no such number of hours as had been asserted were ever used for the employment of children. The evasions of the acts which had already taken place had happened, it was true, in the least respectable mills, where the owners were wholly regardless of public opinion. It was a great mistake to suppose that the labourers of Lancashire were under the domination of their masters, or that they had no will of their own. If these re The effect of this and similar acts of legis- and resumed their labours. Fation would be to keep up a spirit of hos-presentations were true-and they retility between the masters and the men.mained as uncontradicted-it was imposThey had already produced this effect. sible to imagine any case which called The hon. gentleman concluded by saying, more loudly for the interference of the that he thought this interference extreme- legislature. Whatever the House might ly unadvisable. The sale and purchase resolve to do with respect to adult workof labour by the workmen and their em- men, the situation and the sufferings of ployers ought to be left wholly unre- the children required to be immediately stricted. The best thing that could be provided for. He would not, since it was done to effect this object would be to not intended to offer any opposition to repeal all that had been enacted on this the bill in its present stage, detain the subject. House any longer; but he could not resist the first opportunity of expressing the strong feeling he had on this subject, and his earnest desire that children should no longer be treated in this inhuman manner. Such employment of children was scandalous. It was shocking to humanity. He knew not a more crying evil, nor one that called more loudly for the interfe rence of parliament. Sir F. Burdett said, that he could not but feel the deepest commiseration for the situation of the poor children who were the chief objects of this measure. He agreed with his hon. friend who spoke last, that no legislative interference ought to take place in merely commercial transactions; and that the sale of labour by the workman, and the purchase of it by the master, should be left wholly to their own operation. But, this did not apply to the subject before the House. His hon. friend, and others, who like him were connected with the manufactories, did not like to be interfered with; and yet they could not deny, that before the passing of sir Robert Peel's act, the greatest abuses existed in the manufactories. The result of that act had been to better the condition of all who were employed in them. But, even allowing all that his hon. friend had said in its fullest extent, still there was an end to his principle altogether as applied to children. It could not upon any grounds be contended, that these helpless children should be sacrificed to the avarice and cupidity of their unfeeling parents, and of those by whom their labour was purchased. Those parents, whatever their right might be to receive the profits of their children's labour, had no right to sell them. We heard of slavery abroad; bút, good God! had we ever heard of any such instance of overworking, as bad been published with respect to the labour of the children in the cotton manufactories ? These wretched little beings were, in many instances, employed, day after day, for more than twelve hours at a time. Why, had any man a horse that he could think of putting to such toil? It was shocking to humanity; and it became still more odious, when it was considered that these children, if they chanced to be overpowered by sleep, were beaten by the spinners until they awoke Sir P. Musgrave said, that he would oppose the bill, as far as the four first clauses were concerned; but to the clause which had for its object to render the present law operative he should give his support. Dr. Lushington strongly supported the bill, which went to remove a most crying evil. No man, he was sure, who cherished the feelings of humanity, could oppose such a measure, or refuse to rescue the helpless beings, for whose protection it was intended, from the operation of the barbarous system of which they were the innocent victims. The hon. baronet had said, that he would oppose the four first clauses, but that he would give his support to that which went to render the present law operative. What, however, were those four clauses? The third clause, ran thus-"And be it enacted that from and after the passing of this act, no child under six years of age shall be compelled to work more than eleven hours a day." Now, he put it to any man, who had the least spark of humanity in his bosom, whether he could sincerely oppose such a clause as this. In 1819, a system of things was proved to the House revolting to humanity, and to every principle of British justice. He believed the same still continued. Adults might be permitted to do as they pleased; but he would never consent that children should be devoted to labours which unfitted them for the exercise of the duties of their more mature years, and in many instances brought on premature death. Mr. J. Smith agreed, that many of the manufacturers paid the utmost attention to the health and recreation of the children they employed; at the same time, legislation was necessary to prevent malpractices among those who were not restrained by the same feelings of humanity. Mr. Evans agreed that, the bill was loudly called for, and, as the proprietor of a large manufactory, admitted that there was much that required remedy. He doubted whether shortening the hours of work would be injurious even to the interests of the manufacturers; as the children would be able, while they were employed, to pursue their occupation with greater vigour and activity. At the same time, there was nothing to warrant a comparison with the condition of the negroes in the West Indies. The bill was then read a second time. HOUSE OF LORDS. Tuesday, May 17. street chapel, he hoped the noble lord would not be dissatisfied with his proceeding. The Earl of Carnarvon rose to express bis astonishment at the conduct of this minister, and to say, that if such a proceeding were to be adopted as a precedent-if clergymen were on all questions of political importance or of divided opinion-to mention them in the pulpit, and mingle them up with the ser vice of religion, all respect for the estab→ lished church would cease. He did expect, when the subject was alluded to, that the right reverend prelate would have expressed his disapprobation of the proceeding; but to his astonishment and dismay, the right reverend prelate had excused the clergyman, coupled his excuse with a panegyric on the man, and added reasons of his own in vindication of the proceeding. If political questions were to be mingled with the worship of God-if the clergy were to enter upon political disquisitions in the pulpit-they might expect that some individuals in their conNume-gregation should reply to them; brawling would ensue, and the place of worship would be turned into a debating society. If the bishops did not feel ashamed of such conduct, it was the more necessary for their lordships to take the regulation of the church into their own hands, and rescue it from that ruin which the neglect of its professed guardians seemed to threaten it with. The clergy had taken an active part in getting up the petitions against the measure. At first a few petitions came in from the archdeaconries; afterwards there came a few from the clergymen and some of their parishioners; and at length, growing more bold, they procured a few from the great cities of the empire. This capital, which had formerly been almost roused to sedition and rebellion by the mention of the subject, had been perfectly quiescent, or, as far as its opinion had been exposed, was in favour of the measure. He hoped the learned prelate would say one word deprecating such conduct. ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.] rous petitions, both for and against granting the claims of the Roman Catholics were presented to the House. The Lord Chancellor having presented a petition against the Catholic Claims from the congregation of Percy-street chapel, Lord King said, he could not forbear stating how this petition had been got up. He was informed, on respectable authority, that the minister of Percy-street chapel had addressed his congregation before the conclusion of the service, and told them that a petition was lying in the vestry for signature, and as the House of Peers was influenced by numbers, he recommended all the females to sign it. The clergy, it was said, had taken a religious view of this subject; but if this were true, they indeed took a religious view of it, and mixed it up with divine service, leaving to their congregation, along with other doctrines, to mark, learn, and inwardly digest it. The Bishop of London vindicated the minister of Percy-street chapel. The subject had been communicated to him, and he had not found any reason to cen sure the clergyman. All who knew him were persuaded that a more worthy and pious man did not exist. The Lord Chancellor said, that as the right reverend prelate was satisfied with the conduct of the minister of Percy The Bishop of London said, he was not called on by any thing which had happened, to censure the minister. He had not introduced any political discussion into the pulpit. As to the quiescence o. the capital, he could only say that he had presented several petitions from different parishes of it, against the measure. Had he used any influence, or taken an active part, he could have covered their lordships' table with petitions. Earl Spencer said, he had a high respect for the right reverend prelate, but he could not sit still, and hear him say that he was notcalled on to censure the minister for conduct so very disgraceful and shameful. He had heard yesterday of the proceedings of the minister, and had felt shocked at them; but he was still more shocked by what he had just heard. If the clergy of the established church were to be allowed to give notice from the pulpit, and in the body of their sermons-[cry of no, no!] He had understood in the body of the sermon. The minister gave the notice of the petition at the end of the sermon, but before pronouncing the blessing with which every sermon concluded. This aggravated the case; and he should be glad to hear that his information was incorrect. He was sure no sincere friend, to the church of England, could approve of such conduct. This was the first time he had heard of such a circumstance, and he hoped it would be the last. Lord Rolle said, the Catholic priests always addressed their flocks from the altar, and the greater part of them for the purpose of inflaming their flocks against the Protestants. Lord Clifden said, the noble lord was grossly misinformed. The Catholic priests did not urge their flocks against the Protestants. There never was a grosser calumny. The Protestant clergy, indeed, had not set them a very good example, for they had endeavoured to light up a flame; and they might have succeeded, but they found a flame already lighted up by the two shillings and ninepence, levied in London under a statute of that tyrant Henry 8th. An old friend of his late majesty, lord Barrington, used to say, that, whenever a parson talked politics in the pulpit he ought to have his ears fastened to the altar. The Archbishop of Canterbury said, he had before heard nothing of this. He mightly disapproved of the conduct of the minister, it was both irregular and improper. Lord Calthorpe presented a petition from Birmingham, in favour of the mea sure. He was sure the great majority of all the well-educated classes of the community, except the clergy, were in favour of the measure. The Marquis of Downshire presented a petition from the Protestant inhabitants of Belfast, in favour of the measure. He would take the liberty of saying that, unless the disqualifying statutes against the Catholics were repealed, it was scarcely possible that Ireland could remain an integral part of the empire; and certainly until then no capital from England could flow into Ireland. The Bishop of London presented a petition from the parish of Hornsey, in the county of Middlesex, against the bill. The Marquis of Londonderry presented a petition from Darlington against any further concessions to the Roman Catholics. His lordship said, he would avail himself of that opportunity to deliver his sentiments on the important subject which was soon to occupy their lordships' attention. He preferred delivering his sentiments then to waiting until those who were better qualified than himself to speak should be induced to come forward on the regular question. Having been bred up in the principles of that beloved relative whose estates in Ireland he now inherited, the House would probably forgive him for avowing those opinions at a moment when, in obedience to his parliamentary duty, he was presenting a petition that was contrary to those opinions. Their lordships would also forgive him for saying, that as he knew the sentiments of that statesman, who was one of the most efficient and honest that ever the country possessed-as he knew them better than almost any other individual-he was able to state, that of all questions, this was the one which he was most anxious to see brought to a happy termination. It was a matter of deep regret with him through the whole of his political life, that he had not been able to accomplish what he had so much desired, with respect to that question. When under the direction of that great man, Mr. Pitt, he undertook to propose the question of a union with Ireland, the confident impression on his mind was, that, without the concurrence of the Catholics, the success of such a measure was impossible. Having communicated that conviction to the government here, an understanding was entered into, which, if it did not amount to a positive pledge, was something so near it, that parliament was bound to redeem it. This he knew to be the opinion of his noble relation, and he hoped that his mind still so far actuated the cabinet of England, as to lead them to take the same view of the subject. |