The Combination Laws.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE TI1MES. Sir,-Rdaving, from my previous situation, had some knowledge of the Combination Laws, antl observing what I conceive to be a sonmewhat inconsiderate zeal for their re- peald I am indaced to make a few observations upon that subjset- The Committeeappointed by the House of Com- mons has comprised two other points in its reports; but Upon these it is not my intention to touch. I am aware that one who takes that part in the dispute which I think it my duty to sustain, may be dee-ned hos- jle to the journeymen ; though they may perhaps find, when it is too late, that the policy which w@uld exempt them from the operation of the Combination Laws, and leave them within the occasional grasp of the old law against conspiracy, is a policy much more grinding and se- vere: for the old law at once encouragedl conspiracies (the term then used for combinations) by the infrequency of 'ts application; and, when put in force, crushed the convict- ed wxith the heaviest and mo3t disgraceful penalties. By the lawvs which it is nowv sought to repeal, both a milder term is applied to the offence, and a more lenient treatment fol- lOws conviction. Thus, by the former laws, convicted persons were liable to transportatien, pillory, and to being rendered infamous: by the latter laws, against which the cr is raised, the severest punishment (which, it i3 true, can be inflicted summarily) is an imprisonment of three months. That the Comnmittee have proceeded-I will not say rash- ly, but-upon misinformation, will be evident from a slig'ht attention to the evidence of :Mr. Richard Tavlor, printer. In reply to some initroductory questions, le states that he has been a printer about 20 years-that he has turned his attention to the combination laws-and that his opinion is, that they are of no service. He afterwards states as fol- lows:- "There were some men imprisoled for combining a great nany years ago, and that created a great deal of misun- " derstanding; for they were some of the most respectable " of the workmen-these who had been intrustedl by their 't"sWlow-workmen at large to negotiate an advance of prices with the masters; and of course the inflicting of " inprisonment on men wlio were generally respected was .C a thing which created a great deal of ill-blood: a deal of mischief wvas the consequence of it" Mr. Richard Taylor, then, here states, that a great deal of mischief was effected by that prosecution. But what will the Committee say, if, when that evidence is put right, it shall b: found to reflect, not upon the Combination Laws now attempted to be repealed. but upon the old commonl law, which it is intended to leave in force? Mr. Taylor makes a slight mistake as to the fact; which mistake being corrected, the whole tide of his evidence is turned away from tbe Combinatlon Laws, and made to bear against the common la vfor conspiracy. For if I am rig.ht, as to the prosecution to which Mr. Taylor refers, the men then prosecuted were NOT prosecuted upon the Combination Laws, and the mischief then said to be done was not occasioned by putting the Combination Laws in force, for those laws were nover appealed to. Whether mischief or benefit accrued from that prosecution, I shall not now inquire; suffice it to sav, that tbe Court and Jury were of a totally different opinion from Mir. Taylor: but I think I have a right to make this statement, as a proof of the erroneous recollection upon which Mr. Talylor had formed his owvn opinion against the Combination Laws, and upon which the Conamittee may have been in part in- duced to make a report unfsvoturble to those laws; for the truth is, that the whole of the supposed severity of that case is removed by Ir. Taylor's evidence from the common law of the land, upon wvhich the offenders were proseauted, and imputed to the Combination Laws, which were no more before the Court than the Statute of Usury, or the Bill of Rights. Alnd this may serve as a proof of the extremely incansiderate manner in which evidence has been given be- fore the Committee, by a gentleman, also, who said he had made the Combination Laws his study; and of the unsound- ness of any report founded upgn such evideuce. How MIr. Taylor, knowing that some of the offenders in that case were sentenced to two years' imprisonment, and knowing, at the same time, that the Combination Laws do not ad- mit of an imprisonment for more than three months, should yet say that those men were trie.l upon the Combination I am. Sir, &c. J. NV. Laws, is most inconceivable. THE COMBDlVA2VON LAWtS.