The Sun.
London, England, 1864-02-19 00:00:00

le ag ties, would often, upon those fatal Wednesdays,
upon those Wednesdays so fatal to the Liberal cause
and tto pernicious to the last degree to the reputation
of the Government, after speaking upon one side
coolly go into the lobby upon the other, blow hot
and blow cold, and by necessity come to grief re-
peatedly in consequence. Session after session the
ranks of the Ministerial supports have been visibly
and appreciably diminishing. Having said which,
it becomes, of course, in a manner superfluous
to add that session after session the confronting
ranks of the Opposition hive as visibly and as
appreciably increasing. A single loss to the one
side, has, upon each occasion of coarse, been a
double gain to the other. A fact that was, at

any moment, open to demonstration, upon a
division of the whole House, supposing any
fitting opportunity for such a division might have
occurred. The increasing disorganisation of the
Liberal Party within the walls of the House of Com-
mons has all this while been emulated by a disor
ganisation no less lamentable, no less glaring of its
kind outside the House,'Among the great mass of
electors, wherever a chance has presented itself to
the Opposition for contesting any vacant seat until
then sacred to the ♦indication of the interests of
Liberalism. A more signal illustratio❑ of what is
here referred to—this external disorganisation as
emulating the internal disorganisation of the great
Liberal Party in the House of Commons itself—
could not be adduced than has been presented to
view by the result of this recent election down at
Brighton. That result has been the distinct loss
to the Liberal party of a seat in the House, and, at
the same time, a positive gait, to the Conservative
Opposition of two votes upon any very important
division, any division that is, upon which the fate
of the Ministry might happen to be dependent.
What was tolerably certain long since, therefore,
namely, that the small Liberal majority with which
four years ago Lord PALMERSTON and his col-
leagues undertook to carry on the labours of go-
vernment, in this present House of Commons, has not
only dwindled away altogether, but has been trans-
formed on the contrary, by the loss of seat after seat,
into a small Conservative majority, hitherto held in
terrorem before Ministers by the astute leader and
the faithful whips of the Opposition—what
in this way was tolerably certain before, is now—by
every additional loss of a seat to the Liberals and
every additional gain thereby of two votes to the
Conservatives, rendered more and more matter for
absolute certainty. The Opposition has meanwhile
waited so long that it appears to feei
as if it could afford to wait yet a little while longer
for the selection not simply of an opportunity, but
of the very best of all possible opportunities. And,
certainly, never has any Ministry—even Lord
JOHN'S, even Lord MELBOURNE'S (towards
the close of each)—played more wilfully
or more deliberately into the hands of their oppo-
nents. Ministers, indeed, would almost seem to be
bent—beyond everything else—upon testing the
powers of endurance, not of the Opposition alone,
but of many of the more independent among their
own supporters.

We are glad to find that Mr. LAIRD'S Chain
Cables and Anchors Bill has passed the second

reading, and is ordered to be committed on Wednes•
day next. No time will therefore be lost in con-
verting this very useful and humane measure into
law, thereby diminishing the frightful loss of life
and property which annually takes place on our
shores. We have frequently called attention to this
matter, and have discussed the objects and merits
of the previous Bill very tally, since it has long
since become painfully Evident that it was entirely
useless to trust to the manufacturers to produce a
sterling article unless they were by law compelled
to do so. It is only astonishing that legislation on
this subject should have been so long delayed,
especially after it had been publicly ascertained
that about 80 per cent. of the cables actually tested
failed to stand the trial. Influenced possibly by
the public feeling ou the matter, the opponents of
the measure have this year withdrawn from active
opposition, contenting themselves with making
disparaging comments. Mr. LAIRD in bringing it

forward observed that there was a slight alteration
from the bill of last year. The interference of the
Board of Trade is now limited to licensing com-

panies or persons, not being manufacturers, to erec'
testing machines. It is satisfactory to find that

owing to the modifications in the present measure,
the Shipowners Association, who opposed the Bill

last year, now give it their warm support. We
have already heard that LLOYDS' committee are
strongly in its favour, as is the Peninsular and
Oriental Company. and most of the chambers of
commerce throughout the country, as well as iearly
the whole of the principal chain cable and anchor
manufacturers of the kingdom. Mr. LAIRD pointed
out that since nine out of ten of those who
used these articles were anxious for the
Bill, it was most incorrect to object to it

on the ground of interfering with trade. With
regard to the difficulty about the testing-houses, the
hon. member for Birkenhead said that the manu-
facture was chiefly carried on in certain localities
where iron and ccal are cheep, and that testing
machines were already established in London,
Liverpool, Stafford, on the Clyde, and at other
places. The Bill, too, is not to come into effect
until July, 1565, so that there will be ample time
to erect any machinery that may be requisite. The
wreck returns of last year tell us that 93 vessels
were lost from the parting of cables, a fact which
would alone, one would think, silence all opposition
to any remedial measure. Sir J. ELPHINSTONE,
who was formerly member of the Anchors and
Cable Committee, brought forward most valuable
evidence in support of it. Mr. LAIRD observed that
it had been proved that the difference between
danger and safety to a small ship of 350 tons burden
amountel to only L 7 10s. ; while for a ship of
1,000 tons, costing £25,000, the difference was only
/35. If for these trifling sums vessels are to be
constantly imperilled, it is, indeed, putting the old
adage into practice, of "spoiling the ship for a
ha'porth of tar." Sir 3. ELPHINSTONE also said
" that the amount of tonnage wrecked, or seriously
damaged, in 1862, was 325,949 tons ; and putting
this at an average of £lO a ton, the yearly loss of
Property was no less than £3,259,430, and this, too,
accompanied by the loss of nearly 1,000 lives out
of
fthel4,ooo placed in jeopardy. Surely this
ought to be put an end to." No one can have
studied
the Wreck _Register without being
appalled at the number of vessels annually lost
round our shores, the greater proportion being of
course
coasts. Thethesmall ownersili-fonnda
vessels
these vessels ar
tbattradere ouod
the too
often indifferent to the loss of the ship, since an
ample insurance fully compensates them, and men's
lives in some quarters appear to go for nothing.
Mr. HASSARD mentioned -a
case within his own
magisterial experience in which some men had been
brought before him for deserting a vessel loading
ore upon a rock-bound coast. It was necessary
whenever there was a south wind to ship anchor
and be off, but so ingeniously was the ship equipped
that when they put out an anchor strong enough
to bold the ship the cable invariably gave way;
when they put out a cable of suitable resisting
powers the anchor never failed to come home.
Under these circumstances the magistrates dismissed