Page:The Factory Controversy - Martineau (1855).djvu/34

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
24
THE FACTORY CONTROVERSY.

as was stated by the hon, and gallant officer, and the subject was brought before certain magistrates, who dismissed the case. He had not felt satisfied with the ground upon which they had so acted, and he had, therefore, expressed an opinion to that effect. Upon that a correspondence took place: and after he had quitted the Home Office he had an interview with certain of those magistrates, who were, he was bound to say, men of the highest respectability: and he could not concur in thinking with the hon, and gallant member that the fact of some of them being millowners, or employing workmen, disqualified them from performing with fairness the duties of a magistrate. He had at first thought that, in this particular instance, they had taken a partial view of the case; but, upon communications which had been made to him, and which had been officially made to his right hon, friend who had succeeded him at the Home Office, he had been led to believe that the view which he had originally taken of the law was an erroneous view, and that those gentlemen were borne out by law in disposing of the case as they did: and, therefore, no implication could rest upon them. With regard to the motion of the hon, and gallant gentleman, he personally had no objection to the production of the correspondence, and he thought that its production would turn out to the credit of the magistrates to whom reference had been made; but, as to agreeing to the motion, which would have the effect of superseding the Committee of Supply, he felt himself bound to oppose it."

The interest excited by the prosecution of Messrs. Worthington was very strong, for various reasons, but especially because no accident had ever happened from the machinery of their mills. Their establishments are regarded as pattern mills, in their erection, management, and constant condition. It was understood that they were prosecuted because one of them had, as a magistrate, given a decision which was disapproved by Mr. Horner; and this incident is just of the kind which is sure to