The Sun.
London, England, 1863-07-15 00:00:00

Commence at 7.

ROYAL STRAND THEATRE.
Manager, Mr. W. H. Swanborough.
THIS EVENING (for the Benefit of Mr. E. Swanborough)
ASMODEUS. Messrs. VoHaire and Belford.
Followed by WHILE THERE' 3 LIFE T
VoIER HE'S Honey ;
OPE.
Messrs. W. H. Swanborough. Parselle, 'sire, G. H
Misses Ada Swanborough, L. Thorne, F. Hughes, Mandera,
and E. Bufton.
Concluding with LOVE IN
nc L VERY.
Commee 7.

THE THIRD EDITION OF " THE SUN,"
Containing the Latest SPORTING INTELLIGENCE,
Can be had Every Evening ot
G. R. GLENIE, NEWS AGENT,
No. 4, Connaught-terrace, Hyde-park.

The Weather—Sun Office, July 15, 1863.

THERMOMETER.

This morning
This day at Two o'clock

Barometer-30.29.
Wind—N.W. ; moderate, and fine weather.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.

Pais DAY.—Morning, lh. 52m.—Afternoon, 2h. 12m.
To-tomtow.-Morning, 2h. 30m.—Afternoon, 2h. 50m.

1111.10"1%,,,,-,0' -

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JULY 15, 1863.

We may congratulate the hon. and learned
member for Dudley upon the happy accident of his
success, last night, in carrying by so large a
majority his resolution in respect to the Duty on
Fire Insurances. More than a happy accident we
fear it is not—particularly occurring, as it has done,
towards the very fag end of the session. Neverthe-
less, although nothing practical can possibly come
of it this year, there will remain, upon the records
of the Session of 1863, the formal notification of the
fact that during the sitting of the House of Com-
mons, on Tuesday, the 14th of July, Mr. H.
SHERIDAN not merely succeeded in carrying a reso-
lution to the effect that the Duty on Fire Insurances
is excessive in amount—but that he succeeded in
doing this by a clear majority of 36 in a House of
170-103 voting for and 67 against it. The
announcement cf the numbers, says the reporter,
was received with loud cheers. And, very compre-
hensibly, it was received with cheering. For the
result of the division was very signally in, support
of a scheme of reform in regard to fire insurance, that
those who have thought upon the matter the most
deeply have long looked to it with wistful solicitude.
The circumstance of this favourable division yester-
day in the House of Commons is beyond all ques-
tion the most propitious incident that has occurred,
as yet, to hearten on the advocates of this rational
reduction of duty, since first the proposition for
that particular reduction was mooted within the
precincts of the Parliament. Coale the actual re-
duction of the duty here talked of must—in the
natural course of things, Sooner or later, it is a
thing quite inevitable. As such, it has long come
to be recognised by the more prominent observers,
both in the House and out of it. And now that the
Commons have distinctly declared themselves in
favour of the reduction, the probabilities are that it
will be "sooner" than was anticipated ! It will be
found, on reference to the debate, that the proposi-
tion of the honourable member for Dudley amounts
to this, that the existing (exorbitant) rate of
3s. per cent. should be reduced one shilling
per cent. to begin with, and that at the end of five
years it should then be reduced ye: another shilling.
His argument being, of course, one that fiaaLcial
reformers have long come to recognise the wisdom
of, as proved again and yet again by the results of
experience, namely, that the immediate loss to the
revenue will be more than made up by the increase
of insurances! The reduction itself being all the
-while a direct advantage to the whole community !
As to the vastness of the amuunt of property that
might by this means be readily brought within
the area of insurance, we ourselves feel perfectly
well persuaded of it, that the estimated proba-
bility submitted to the House yesterday, i❑ the

course of his remarks by the member for
• Dudley (in bringing, forward his somewhat
tardy but still, even thus late in the session,
most opportune resolution), is, in no one
particular, characterised by exaggeration.
On the contrary, we believe it to be rather an under-
statement than an exaggeration. The success of
Mr. SHERIDAN'S resolution yesterday was the last,
and not by any means the least noteable, discom-
fiture her MAJESTY'S Government has experienced
during the course of this do-nothing Session. Again,
too, the Minister whose province it was to speak
on the side of the minority, was that man of sorely
diminished influence in the British House of Corn
mons, the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of
the Exchequer.

The discussion on the Fortifications Bill was re-
sumed oa Monday evening, and the consideration
of the various clauses gave rise to the old arguments
for and against it, happily terminating in the old
conclusion of a decisive victory for the Ministry.
Considerable objections were raised to the vote for
a central arsenal, owing to a misunderstanding on
the part of several members, who thought that it
was intended to erect a fortress at the spot in ques-
tion. Every voice was raised against such a pro-
posal, but Lord PALMERSTON clearly explained the
mistake, and cited the example of Woolwich as evi-
dence that an arsenal by no means implied a forti-
fication. The Government, he said had no inten-
tion of erecting a great inland fortress, but it was
desirable to have some position in the interior of
the country, where stores might be deposited, and
case of need even manufacture. Woolwich, from
its site on the river, is manifestly within reach of
attack, and the nature of the place is very unf,,-
'mutable to fortification. It is therefore most ad-
Tumble on e'illrY ground to have a depot out of reach

of invasion, which, from its very impregnability,
will afford protection to its weaker rivals, who will
no longer be of so great importance as points of
attack.

We are sorry to see Sir MORTON PETO persist in
his oppoeition to the Spithead forts. The hon.
baronet moved the omission from the schedule of
the items for the Horse Sand Fort, No Man's Land,
and Sturbridge. His arguments in favour of
such a practical abandonment of the design
of fortifying Portsmouth were very untenable. He
began by asserting that nothing had happened to
change the position of the question since last year,
when it was agreed to delay the building of these
forts until the powers of iron clad vessels had been
more fully tried. Why, everything has happened
that is necessary to guide our judgment. We have
seen the question submitted to a trial of un-
paralleled severity, not a mere experimental test
between theorists and scientific critics, but a
struggle of life and death—an attack made with all
the energy with which England's
her
rtterest
invinciblefoe
could attempt to gain a footing on
shores, a defence maintained with an
e desperate
nesaperEeatealsh
de-
terminationi which even the garrison
thebest
The s t longire
e
city in danger coaldscaroolYwheexanol•
day's struggle at Charleston,
clads of the North retreated crippled from the
terrific fire that greeted them from guns of English
manufacture has altered the position of the question
very considerably since last year. There are men
against whose cherished notions argument and ex-
perience alike prove useless. If we could
carry the impregnability of their theories into
either forts or iron clads it would certainly settle
the question of competition most effectually. Of this
we had several specimens on Monday evening—
among them Capt. JERVIS, who declared it was
absurd to waste money on immovable masses of
masonry, when we might have ships that could
follow the enemy. That is one of the very argu-
ments in favour of the forts, since a clever ruse
might mislead the ironclads and carry them off in
pursuit of some decoy, while a reserve force quietly
steamed up the defenceless harbour. He said also
that great stress had been laid on the Armstrong
gun, but since 1859 great improvements had been
made in the construction of iron ships. The gallant
captain seemed to ignore the great improvements
also made in artillery since that time. His asser-
tion that the American war supplies no evidence of
the value of forts, is sufficiently answered by the
mere names of Hudson, Moultrie, and Sumter. An-
ether objection brought against the Spithead forts
was that as the Channel was 2,000 yards wide, and
our guns would; it was said, penetrate the Warrior
target only at a distance of 800, ships could easily
pass up the centre of the Channel. This was first
stated by the mover of the amendment, Sir MORTON
PETO, and it was reiterated by the hon. mem-
ber for Liskeard, who proved himself to be
as resolutely prejudiced as the honourable
baronet. Mr. OSBORNE appears to find a
special satisfaction in opposing every really good
measure which the Government brings forward, and
in the present instance he was so extreme in his
opposition that it was comparatively powerless.
He said we had not a gun above a 40-pounder of
which we could say what it was worth. Another
argument was brought against the forts which
should certainly encourage the partridges and
pheasants for the coming autumnal season. The
difficulties of aiming at anything in motion were so
gravely dwelt upon, that we can only conclude last
year's sporting experience to be very unsatisfactory.
Sir DE LACY EVANS, Lord HARTINGTON, and
Lord C. PAGUT were all ready to defend the naea-
• sure, but the best reply to all frivolous and vexa-
tious opposition came from the lips of the veteran
Premier, whose never-failing sagacity and common
sense left him completely master of the field, We
cannot do better than give his reply to the often
raised objections in his own words;—" Your float-
ing force is liable to be called from one place to
another, and therefore you cannot depend on having
that force superior to the force of the enemy on
every possible point. But then it is said ' You
have not guns of sufficient range to
penetrate vessels at a distance of 1,000
yards.' But, in the first place, you are
assuming that the ships passing between the
Horse Sand and No Man's Land would go so ac-
curately in the middle between the two forts that
they would be exposed to only an equal fire from
the two. But that is not an easy thing to do.
It might, perhaps, be done by a few vessels, but not
by a considerable force attempting to go through.
Suppose a large flotilla attempted to get through,
and they tried to place themselves so as not to he
much exposed to the fire from the forts, and that a
floating force was sent to encounter them, between
the fire from the latter and from the forts they
might get into a very embarrassing position. Well,
it is said, ' You cannot bit a moving body.' But
that is not the fact. It is a well-known practice of
gunnery to fire from a moving body to a fixed ob-
ject, which is equivalent to firing at a moving object
from a fixed body. A ship going at the rate of 12
knots an hour would move at the rate of about a
mile in five minutes, and a shot moving with the
velocity of 1,200 ft, in a second would go a mile in
some four seconds. The difference of velocities 1
being so great, what would happen ? At the dis-
tance of 1,000 yards, if you aimed at the bow of a
ship you would hit the body before she had moved
the whole of her own length. There is therefore
no difficulty in the matter." With regard to the
floating defences, the noble lord said it was never
intended to rely upon forts alone, but that it was con-
sidered that forts would be most valuable auxiliaries.
With the floating batteries witehr win
etyheeppobretst,waeneyn
vessel succeeding in forcing
three fires, would certainly be a very remarkable
and fortunate exception. The scheme has been
devised in a bold and liberal spirit. Lord PALMER.
STON has taken it up with an energy and foresight
for which the country will one day thank him, and
we cordially endorse his homely advice to .the hesi-
tating legislators—" The thing is of considerable
importance; do it in time; make hay while the sun
shines ; and don't wait till the moment arrives when
the forts will be wanted, for use." Forts, like Rome,
are not built in a day, and we are glad to see that a
majority of nearly three to one expressed their con-
viction of the value of the old adage—Forewarned,
forearmed—over the dilatory and vacillating policy
that would leave us to find out our mistake in the
hour of danger and emergency.

Th.e Working Men's Club and Institute Union
held its meeting on Saturday at Burlington House.
Lord BROUGHAM was in the chair. It was a most
interesting
affair altogether. Lord BROUGHAM'S
as all his lord-
ship's addresses are. He served that some years
speech was of
course toe tehbe
ago he had made the remark that the reason tem-
perance societies had not succeeded was that they
offered no substitute to the poor man for the ale-
house. It was a fact that the working men fre-
quented the public houses more for company than
for drink, and to obtain the conversation and diver.
sion that they could not find in their own homes.
It was to supply this want that working men's
clubs were founded. His lordship most .trulz ex-
plained the importance of these institutions in a
few sentences. More misery, and even crime, is
occasioned by the neglect of proAding means of