FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1657   1658   1659   1660   1661   1662   1663   1664   1665   1666   1667   1668   1669   1670   1671   1672   1673   1674   1675   1676   1677   1678   1679   1680   1681  
1682   1683   1684   1685   1686   1687   1688   1689   1690   1691   1692   1693   1694   1695   1696   1697   1698   1699   1700   1701   1702   1703   1704   1705   1706   >>   >|  
so. FACTORY BILL. During the former session, Mr. Sadleir had introduced a bill for shortening and regulating the employment of children of certain ages in cotton and other factories, and protecting them against maltreatment, to which it was alleged they had long been exposed. Evidence had been taken regarding the subject matter of the bill before a committee of the house of commons, and in this session a similar measure to that of Mr. Sadleir's was introduced by Lord Ashley. The bill was opposed by the great body of the manufacturing capitalists, many of whom had been sent into the house by the reform act, and who possessed powerful interest out of it. Mr. Patten moved an address to the king to name a royal commission, for the purpose of collecting evidence anew, founding his motion on the ground that the evidence taken before the committee was partial, defective, and untrue. Lord Ashley, and others, contended that this motion was not only uncalled for, but would be detrimental: fresh inquiry was needless, inasmuch as the house was in a condition to legislate on the subject, not only in consequence of the information obtained from the committee of last year, but also of that furnished by the other house of parliament. Mr. Patten's motion was negatived, and the bill was read a second time; and then ministers, alarmed at the probable success of a measure which, as it stood, would seriously interfere with the manufacturers of the country, arrayed themselves more openly against it. Lord Althorp opposed the motion for going into committee, and moved, "That the bill be referred to a select committee, with this instruction--that the committee should make provision in said bill, that no children who had not entered into their fourteenth year should be allowed to work for more than eight hours a-day; and that in the intervals of their labour, care should be taken for their education, and that inspection of the mills should take place, in order to secure the operation of the above provisions." This motion was rejected, and Lord Ashley's bill was carried into committee, by one hundred and sixty-four to one hundred and forty-one. Government, however, did not give up its opposition. The bill had adopted ten hours as the maximum of labour daily, which extended to all persons under eighteen years of age; and when the second clause, which involved the principle, was moved in committee, Lord Althorp opposed it. He proposed as a
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1657   1658   1659   1660   1661   1662   1663   1664   1665   1666   1667   1668   1669   1670   1671   1672   1673   1674   1675   1676   1677   1678   1679   1680   1681  
1682   1683   1684   1685   1686   1687   1688   1689   1690   1691   1692   1693   1694   1695   1696   1697   1698   1699   1700   1701   1702   1703   1704   1705   1706   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

committee

 

motion

 
opposed
 

Ashley

 

Sadleir

 

hundred

 

session

 

evidence

 

Althorp

 

labour


measure

 
Patten
 
subject
 

children

 
introduced
 
entered
 

provision

 

allowed

 

instruction

 

fourteenth


clause

 

proposed

 

manufacturers

 

country

 

interfere

 

success

 

arrayed

 

referred

 

involved

 
openly

principle

 

select

 
extended
 

carried

 

Government

 
maximum
 

adopted

 
rejected
 

inspection

 
education

opposition

 

eighteen

 

provisions

 
persons
 

probable

 

operation

 
secure
 

intervals

 

reform

 
manufacturing