The Sun.
London, England, 1864-02-17 00:00:00

CHAINS, CABLES, AND ANCHORS BILL.

Mr. LAIRD, in moving the second reading of thin bill,
said that the object of the bill was to enable private to anu.
facturers to erect testing machines, and so render them i re.
sponsible for the manufacture of their own articles. The
London Society of Shipowners were in favour of the. bill,
which would be of great benefit to small manufact carers,
He combated some other objections to the bill, and s aid it
would not come into operation until June 1865.

Sir J. ELPHINSTONE seconded the motion, an KI ex-
pressed a hope that the bill would be allowed to go.into. com-
mittee when any improvement in detail could be introd awed.
The expense that would result from the alteration in the law
would be insignificant when compared with the importance
of the subject to which it related. He quoted diffe rent
statistics to show that there was a great increase in the x lum-
ber in 1862 of the wrecks, which amounted to a loss c f no
less than 325,043 tons, involving the loss of several ;hun-
dred lives, and jeopardising the lives of no less than 14 ,073
lives. Ninety-three of these disasters were occasioned by
the imperfectness of the chains and cables used.
Mr. HUTT said he would not oppose the bill, but con-
sidered that its provisions would not be adequate to prevent
fraud.

Alderman ROSE supported the bill, and remarked that
abeat 80 per cent. of the chains and cables manufactured
were below the proof required.
Mr. LINDSAY considered that the bill was unnecessary,
as the object it proposed was being carried out in Stafford-
shire, and other parts of the country where chains and
cables were extensively manufactured. the fact was,
that shipowners, for their own sake, would before long
use cables and anchors that were not properly tested.
If it were known that shipowners used chains and cabl es of
an inferior description it would injure their own interests.
He admitted the benevolence of the object, and if the bill
would effect only one tenth of that object it should have his
hearty support; but he denied that it would be attended
with such a result. He deprecated the interference of Par-
liament on this subject, which, he contended, would have
the effect of relieving manufacturers from a personal
reaponsibiltty, which at present was imposed on them,
to produce articles of a good quality. Another
evil would be that all the small manutacturers would be
ruined and the trade thrown entirely into the hands of the
great manufacturers of ttitaffordshire and Wales, which
would be a great injury to the interests of the shipowners
as well as the public generally. Moreover, by the bill no
chains and cables that were not tested were to be issued
after June, 1865, and those manufacturers whose stock
would of course be seriously depreciated, would come to the
house, and justly, for compensation. He would not offer
any factious cppoeition to the bill being read a second time,
but he repeated that it would defeat the object in view, as
it was founded on false principles.
Mr. CAVE said he had no doubt there was necessity for
legislation on this subject. With reference to leaving, as
had been suggested, this subject to a committee of Lloyd's,
is must be remembered that Lloyd's was a very private
company, whose determination one day might be cancelled
the next ; and he contended that it would be more advisable
to place on the statute book an enactment on a subject of
such importance. He agreed in the principle of the bill, but
considered
htwhato shitrezd haveiredal to decideterationin this ti
detail, aqnudetshaotn ny
committee, the
Board of Trade and other public bodies should be repre-
sented.
Mr. BENTINCS supported the bill, and he believed
that unless they were compelled to do so, shipowners in
many cases would purchase not the best articles but the
cheapest. They had on record that a large number of
casualties had resulted from the use of bad chains and cables,
and although in some cases no human provision could pre-
vent disasters, still it was desirable that there should
be legislation in order to prevent a recurrence of
such disasters as might be averted. He thought
that their would be no difficulty in securing efficient articles
by the means of such being properly certificated. He con-
sidered their should be not only immediate but stringent
legislation on the subject. (Hear, hear.)
desireand staoi d
carry that iofutth
ae
Bollalrrd. Ho
f. OTRr
Trade
AwLe
rLe supportedn t ht
he e
ri I,
measure of this nature they would not find any insuperable'
difficulties in details.
[LEFT SITTING.]

Foreign Mail Packet List.

MAILS DUE.

-Alshedplae cs ke. . .........
Australia and Mauritius, via a Southampton...... 18.
Ascension, and St. Helena.. Feb. 28.
.. Fmeabr..l64..
Cape Verds, vi
British
by
China, Penang, and Singapore, via Southampton. Feb. 18.
via Marseilles ...Feb. 27.
CapeAr aziolfanocl ooCdapuope,

Falkland Islands .......
Gibraltar, via Southampton Feb. 18.
India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via Southampton Feb. 18.
via. Marseilles Feb. 27.
India (Bombay), via Southampton
via Marseilles Feb. 20.
Portugal.... Mar. 6.
Malta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton Feb. 18.
via Marseilles Feb. 20.
Newfoundland ..Feb. 19. i
Oporto and Vigo ... :
U. S. and British N. America, by Brit. packet Feb. 26,
by U.S. packet
W.C. of
by Canadian packct.Feb. 39.
Africa, Madeira,
Mar. 10.
Bahamas, via New York Mar. 11,
and Teneritlo
Mexico.,
All parts of West Indies, including Chili, Peru, (
Feb. 29. •
California. and British Columbia..