HC Deb 19 May 1808 vol 11 cc425-8
Mr. Rose

rose to move for leave to bring in a bill, to limit the excessive depression of the Wages of persons employed in the weaving of Cotton. He was induced to this step, not from a conviction of the propriety of fixing the minimum of wages, but in compliance with the wishes of a numerous and respectable class of persons who were now suffering peculiar hardships, and who were at the same time supporting them with a patience and resolution which did them credit. The measure was proposed with the consent of the masters as well as of the journeymen, and he was sure that the house would be anxious to grant them every possible relief.

Mr. Patteson

asked, whether it was meant that the operation of the bill should be general, or that it should be confined to those places where the weavers had petitioned for relief?

Mr. Rose

replied, that it was intended that its operation should be limited to those places from whence the petitions had been received.

Mr. Davies Giddy

declared his opinion that the bill for which the right hon. gent. had moved, would, if carried into a law, have the most mischievous tendency, not only to the Cotton manufacturers, but to the persons for whose relief it was intended. Much of the distress that was at present felt by the Cotton Weavers, he conceived to arise, not from the wages being too low, but because at one time they were too high, a circumstance which induced more people to adopt this trade than there was a demand for, or than it could support; and were a minimum of wages now to be fixed, he was afraid that it would prove an inducement to ignorant persons to bring up their children in this line, and still further to overstock the market. He should be most happy could any other mode be devised of granting relief to the sufferers, but the one now proposed he considered so objectionable, that even in this early stage of the business, he was resolved to take the sense of the house upon it.

Mr. Horner

agreed with almost every thing which had been said by the hon. gent, who had just sat down. But, however strong his conviction was of the impropriety of the principle on which this measure was to be founded, he thought the application of such a numerous and deserving class of individuals merited every attention; and perhaps in discussing the remedy which had been proposed by the right hon. gent, one less objectionable might be discovered.

Lord Milton

joined in opposing the bill, which had a direct tendency to ruin the manufactures, and to increase the distresses of those employed in them. For these distresses he felt as much as any man, but he thought the house ought to be extremely cautious in raising hopes which must infallibly end in disappointment. The inevitable consequence of the present measure, if carried into effect, would be, that the manufacturer would discharge a number of his workmen, by' which they would be reduced to complete misery.

Sir Robert Peek

disapproved highly of the principle of the measure, and was anxious to make it known, that this disapprobation was founded upon a true regard to the interest of the work-people them-selves. The great cause of the distress at present felt, was not the oppression of the masters, but the shutting up of the foreign markets, and the fact was, that masters were now suffering from this cause still more than the men. As to what the hon. gent, had said respecting this application being countenanced by the masters, he was sure, if this was the case at all, it was only in a very limited degree, and that if the present measure was persevered in, they would soon have the cotton manufacturers at the bar craving the protection of the house. He hoped, therefore, that they would not permit the bill to be brought in from any sentiments of false compassion towards the men, for the inevitable result would be, that a great number of those whom they wished to relieve, would be discharged by their masters and thrown upon the parishes.

Mr. Thompson

said, that before fixing the minimum of wages, the right lion, gent, who moved for leave to bring in the bill, ought to equalize the abilities of the workmen.

Mr. Rose

explained, that it was his intention to have fixed the minimum of wages not for the time but the quantity of work done. He repeated, that he had been induced to propose the measure, not from a conviction of its propriety, but in compliance with the wishes of the cotton weavers, backed with the consent of their employers.

Mr. Tierney

declared, that he should be as happy as any man, if some relief could be granted in a proper way to the persons employed in the cotton manufacture, but he never could accede to a measure which went to fix the minimum of wages.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

entirely agreed with those who thought that the house should manifest a disposition, which he was sure was universally felt, to accede, as far as a sense of duty would permit them, to the wishes of that numerous and respectable class of individuals whom his right hon. friend was anxious to relieve. He did not think that the present measure would be productive of advantage. The principle of the bill, which went to fix the minimum of wages, carried into operation, could do no good, and might do a great deal of harm. It would not have the effect of at all increasing the quantity of work, and it would diminish the number of persons employed in it, because only the best workmen would be retained. At the same time he was of opinion, that it was better that the cotton weavers should be disappointed after a discussion of the merits of their application in the house of commons, than by a refusal of his right hon. friend to submit it for consideration. This discussion the application had now undergone, and he hoped that those who made it would be convinced, that it failed not from any indifference to their sufferings, or any indisposition to relieve them; but from a persuasion that, by granting the object which they sought to obtain, they could do no good, and might do much harm.

Mr. Rose

said, that after the manner in which the proposition had been received, he should not press it upon the house.

Mr. A. Baring

expressed his satisfaction that the motion was withdrawn; but he could not omit this opportunity of stating his opinion, that the distress complained of arose from the suspension of foreign trade, which had taken place in consequence of the Orders in Council.

Mr. Lascelles

observed, that had the right hon. gent, persisted in his measure for fixing the minimum of wages, there was no reason why the maximum also should not have been fixed. He reminded the right hon. gent. of the observation of a celebrated writer on political economy, 'that commerce in this country had continued to prosper, notwithstanding the existence of a Board of Trade,' and recommended it to him to allow it to take its own course.