than "twelve" hours
daily, as in the abandoned measure: but Lord Ashley, according to his
notice, moved on this occasion a clause restricting the hours of labour
to eleven from October, 1844. On a division, however, this amendment
was negatived by a majority of two hundred and ninety-seven against one
hundred and fifty-nine, and the bill then passed the commons. In the
house of lords this controverted bill passed without much discussion.

THE CORN-LAWS AND FREE-TRADE QUESTION.

During this session, as Sir Robert Peel had proclaimed at its
commencement the intention of government to maintain the recent
settlement of the corn-laws, the exertions of the free-trade party
in parliament were confined to two or three desultory motions, rather
indicating their protest against the existing system than tending to
practical results. On the 12th of March Mr. Cobden brought the corn-law
question before the house of commons, in the shape of a motion for
a committee to inquire into the effects of protective duties on
agricultural labourers and tenants. This motion gave rise to a
considerable debate, but it was negatived by a majority of two hundred
and twenty-four against one hundred and thirty-three. About the same
time Mr. Ricardo moved, "That an humble address be presented to her
majesty, praying that her majesty will be graciously pleased to give
directions to her servants not to enter into any negociation with
foreign powers which would make any contemplated alterations of the
tariffs of other countries; and humbly expressing to her majesty the
opinion of this house that the great object of relieving the commercial
intercourse between this country and foreign nations from all injurious
restrictions will be best promoted by regulating our own customs'
duties, as may be most suitable to the financial and commercial
interests of this country, without reference to the amount of duties
which foreign powers may think it expedient for their own interests to
levy on British goods." In advocating this motion, Mr. Ricardo dwelt on
the inutility of all our recent commercial diplomacy; and contended that
our objects might be as effectually attained by judicious legislation
with respect to our imposts, as by intricate negociations with respect
to exports. The motion was seconded by Mr. Ewart, and supported by Sir
J. Hanmer and Mr. Hume; but there not being forty members present, the
house was counted out. Mr. Villiers brought forward