The Sun.
London, England, 1865-06-24 00:00:00

NEW MEMBER

Mr. BRASSEY took the oaths and his seat for Devon-
port in the room of Sir A. Buller, resigned. He was
introduced by Mr. Jackson and Col. White.
POOR-LAW BOARD CONTINUANCE, &c. BILL.
On the order for the committal of this re-committed bill,

Lord FERMOY denounced it as a sham, and moved as
an amendment that the bill should simply limit the con-
tinuance of the powers of the Poor-law Board for one
year.

Mr. H. LEWIS seconded the amendment.
The SPEAKER reminded the noble lord that if he car-
ried the amendment it would negative the motion, that he
should leave the chair, and the house would not be able to
go into committee even for the purpose of continuance.
Sir B. BRIDGES, Sir J. SHELLY, Sir M. W. RIDLEY, and
other members earnestly pressed upon the Government
that the bill should be simply a continuance bill.
Mr. VILLIERS defended the bill, which, he said, was
exactly what it professed to be.
A long discussion followed, which resulted in the amend-
ment being withdrawn, the President of the Poor Law
Board, however, agreeing that the bill should be made a
'"ll""aue,e bill simply fore year, end the whole of the
other claims were, therefore, negatived.
The sitting was suspended at half-past three.
At six o'clock the house resumed.
CHAIN CABLES AND ANCHORS.
Mr. LAIRD called attention to the report of Mr. Gal-
loway and Mr. Gray to the Board of Trade on the Chain
Cables and Anchors Act of 1864, which was laid before
the house on the Bth of March last. He complained that
the tendency of the act was to throw a monopoly into the
hands of manufacturers whose works were situated near.
Government establishments.

Mr. GIBSON suggested that it would be
better to
pone discussion until the act had been some, tune mra
post-
tion. The Government had licensed the testinginmLhine-
of Messrs. Brown, Lennox, and Co., believing
it to be a
perfectly effective one—and had they not done so therewould not have boon any machine to be depended u in
London. If it were necessary there was no objection to
defer the operation of the act ; but by the Ist of July there
would be a sufficient number of machines licensed to an-
swer all purposes, and representations had been received by
the Government that it would be absolutely detrimental to
defer the operation of the act beyond that date.
Mr. HUMBERSTON was of opinion that it would not
be prejudicial if the operation of the act were postponed
until the Ist of January next.
Mr. HENLEY considered that the law required amend-
ment, but he did not think any serious injury would result
from postponing the operation of the act for six months
longer.

THE ROYAL NAVAL RESERVES.
Mr. CORRY then rose to call attention to the policy of

the Government in relation to the naval reserves. He did
not consider the present state of things at all satisfactory.
A reduction had been made in the number of en, and the
noble lord the Secretary of the Admiralty (L C. Paget)
had annolmced that a still further reduct would not
improbably take place. In 1863 the navy est. ates provided
for 10,000 men on shore, and likewii 00 coastguard
volunteers, and there were also 10,000 rines on shore.
By the estimates of this year, however, the latter were
reduced to 9,000, and the coastguard volunteers to
7,750. Then, again, at the beginning of the present
year the reserve of men disposable for the force was
reduced from 4,400 to 1,500. These reductions appeared
very considerable, especially when it was borne in mind
that the reduction in the fleet this year amounted to only
one thousand men. It was the opinion of the late Sir J.
Graham that the marines should be increased to a force of
20,000 men, never to be diminished, and he stated at the
same time that he had seen with pain the reduction of 1,000
men. There had been a reduction of 300 men in the coast-
guard force ashore this year, although it did not quite
appear; and he (Mr. Corry) thought a reduction of this
force more objectionable than that of the marines. The
expense of the coastguard service, both afloat and ashore,
in 1863, when it numbered 10,000 men, was only £79,045.
He found by a return that the value of property saved by
this service was something like £40,000, and the number of
lives 4,000 ; so that the value of the property saved during
the past six years was very little short of the entire cost of
the force. All the evidence before the Royal commission
went to show that the reserve was to provide for the first
exigency of war ; but there was this difficulty, that it could
not be called out without an order in council. At present
both the regular and irregular reserves were many thou-
sands below the number recommended by the Royal com-
mission, and he did not think the increase made in the
former compensated for the reduction made in the latter.
He trusted that next year he would not have to complain
of a further reduction in the coastguard and marines.
Lord C. PAGET admitted that many officers had given
evidence before the commission recommending an increase
rather than &decrease in the number of marines ; and he had
no hesitation in saying that the burden of his own arguments
was to the same effect. But very important changes had
taken place during the 6 or 7 years that elapsed since that
commission had sat ; and they had now a very different class
of men from those who served at the former period. With
regard to the petty officers, there would never be any
difficulty in selecting a sufficient number from the con-
tinuous service men, of whom the reserve force was chiefly
composed. His right hon. friend opposite must be aware
that it was not necessary to keep a force of 5,000 coast-
guards simple for the protection of the revenue, as
smuggling was almost a thing of the past. The naval re-
serve now consisted of 18,000 men, and the coastguard vo-
lunteers numbered 6,000 more ; so that they had in these
two forces a second navy, for he did not believe the navy
proper at this moment exceeded 20,000 men. It was also
important to boar in mind that they were paying more at-
tention in the selection of their seamen, and what they were
losing in numbers they were gaining in skill. By an act
, passed two years ago they could send the coastguard volun-
teers anywhere; but before that time they could not exceed
the limit of 300 miles. The marines were kept in just suffi-
cient exercise to preserve their sea habits, without which
they would be useless on board ship. The number of the
coastguard was being reduced, but the hon. gentleman was
greatly mistaken as to the means that were employed. The
fact was, a careful medical examination had been made, and
though he admitted the number of old men was decreased,
the coastguard was really increasing in efficiency.