The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-22 00:00:00

NAVAL INTELLIGENCE.

PORTSMOUTH, TUESDAY.—Prince Albert and Prince
Waldemar of Prussia inspected the fleet at Spithead this
afternoon.

The Spiteful steam-sloop, Captain Sir William Hoste,
Bart., arrived at Spithead last evening, about six o'clock,
from the East India and China station. Her dates are—
Bombay, March 6; Point de Galle, April 5; Cape of
Good Hope, May 29; St. Helena, June 9; and Ascen-
sion, June 19. The President, 50, flag of Rear-Admiral
Decree, the Rosamond steam-sloop, Commander Foote,
and the Iris, Captain Munday, were in Simon's Bay
when she left, the latter to proceed two days after for
England. The Belle Poule, 60, flag of Rear-Admiral
Des Fosses, was at St. Helena, en route to Brest. The
Penelope steam-frigate, Captain Giffard, bearing the
broad pendant of Commodore Sir Charles Hotham,
K.C.8., and the Mariner, 12, Commodore Mathison,
were at Ascension, which island was very healthy, water
very scarce, but turtle plentiful. The coals at the depot
at Ascension (ashore) had ignited while the Spiteful lay
there, and created great consternation; they were nearly
all consumed before the fire was extinguished. Lieute-
nant Mends, on promotion from the Fox, Captain
Priestly, of the 25th Regiment, from the Cape, Lieute-
nant Spencer Pickard, from the Fox, and Mr. Hutton,
nephew of Captain Hutton, Governor of Ascension,
have come home in the Spiteful, by whom we learn that
the Agincourt, 72, flag of Rear-Admiral Sir T. Coch-
rane, was to sail from Penang two or three days after
the departure of the Iris. The Spiteful has been in com-
mission four years and seven months, and was first com-
manded by Commodore Maitland, who recently died on
the station. She has had two acting commanders besides
Captain Sir W. Hoste, Bart., who has brought her home.
She sailed in company with the Fox, 42, from Bombay,
and kept company with her under canvas to Goa, parting
company at Cannanore on the 18th of March. From
the latter place sho went to Colombo and Trinco-
malee. The Sapphire troop-ship was at the latter
place when she left, where, also,ltheyeterel, 16, was
daily expected. The Spiteful has been much employed
in carrying troops, in disembarking and embarking
whom her paddle-box boats have been of the most
eminent service. She was employed in the expedition
against the pirates of Borneo in July last. She left the
Cape with 230 tons of coals in her bunkers, and took in
100 tons at Ascension. She made the passage to Ply-
mouth in fifty days, a strong head wind blowing the last
five; she steamed (exclusively) for thirty-ono days, with
a constant succession of light winds. The following
shows how cheaply a steamer may be navigated with
judicious management and scientific application of the
means at disposal in making passages of great distance:—
Total amount of coal expended, 361 tons.
Total cost of vessel, 597/. Os. bid.
Total cost of coals, 5701. 2s.
Total number of miles run, 4,378.
Ditto oil and tallow, 261. 18s. qd.
Under steam, 746 hours.
Average distance, with one ton, 13 miles 9-10ths.
Average expenditure per day, 10 tons 9 cwt.
Cost per day, 191. 4s. ld.
This was with one boiler and three fires, and the
constant use of the expansive gear, and reflects very
great credit upon the perseverance and economy of
Sir W. Hoste, as well as proving to the ma-
ritime world generally, how far that little means,
when properly applied, will take the steamer. The
Spiteful is in admirable order and condition,
so far as discipline and accessories imply ; but
her machinery and boilers, of course, require repair.
She is a Surveyor vessel, but monstrously under powered,
being of 1,050 tons, but of only 280-horse power. She
will proceed to Woolwich to be paid off after replenish-
ing,. fuel. The Hindostan, which arrived also yesterday
at Southampton, reported the Spiteful at Ascension on
the 29th of June, together with the Penelope and Iris.
The latter may have been there, but the Spiteful left the
llindostan for that island, not vice versa.

FORGED BANK OF ENGLAND NoTEs.—Parties
would do well to be exceedingly careful in examining
Bank of England notes before they are taken, as there
are some forged notes now in circulation, of most
superior workmanship, and in which the resemblance to
the true notes is carried into the most minute particulars.
On Tuesday a note was returned to a gentleman i❑ Man-
chester, stamped as forged, by the Bank of England,
which appeared from one of the endorsements on the
back to have previously passed through the well known
London bank of Robarts and Co. In this note, which
purported to be a Birmingham one, No. A. 05204, dated
April 14th, and signed " S. Roberts," not only were the
water mark and the lettering of the note imitated so
closely as to defy detection on a very close examination
by the unpractised, but there were even in the note some
of those minute dots in the letters of the word"
by the absence of which forged notes are sometimes de-
tected. The signature was an exceedingly close resem-
blance as to the form of the letters, though there were
some small differences between the flourishing in the
false signature and a real one of Mr. Roberts's ; the
false signature was also in much darker ink than the
true one. The only other variation that could be de-
tected was an exceedingly slight one in the border
tracing of the stamp in the corner of the note.—New-
castle Guardian.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, July 21.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
NEW PEERAGE.

The Marquis of Drogheda was introeuced by the
Marquis of Cholmondeley, the; Earl of Rf_desdale, and
Lord Wharncliffe, and took the oaths avid his teat as
Baron Moore.
The House then adjournel till to-morrow at a Qu leer
before One o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMOIVS, July 21.
BISHOPRIC OF MANCHESTER BILL.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he would abstain from
again going over the arguments which he bad already I
urged upon the subject of the union of the sees of Bangor
and St. Asaph, but he would at once address himself to
the ground upon which the Right Hon. Gentleman
founded his opposition to the third reading of this Bill—
namely, the temporary exclusion of the Bishop of
Manchester from a seat in the House of Lords.—(llear.)
The Right Hon. Baronet thought that there was great
danger from the expulsion of one of the bishops from
the House of Lords, and founded his opinion upon
statements made in this House, while he altogether
overlooked the fact that the bishops in the Upper
House had a full opportunity, ii they thought
proper, to express their opinions upon the subject. The
Right Hon. Baronet set aside all this silence upon the
part of the bishops, and said that ho attached great
weight to the statements of the Hon. and Learned
Member for Bath and the Hon. Member for Kerry; but
he (Lord John Russell) did not think that that Hon.
Member had even recorded his vote on the subject, so
little weight did he appear to attach to
his own opinion on the subject.—(Hear, hear.)
He did not wish again to enter into the question of the
rotation of the bishops ;he did not see any danger, real
or theoretical, in the proposition. He thought it would
be of some advantage to the.bishops if, instead of their
having to spend the first portion of their time, after their
appointment, in London in attendance on their duties in
the House of Lords, they had the opportunity afforded
them of becoming acquainted with the duties of their
dioceses. Such an opportunity would have, no doubt,
been of great service to the last created bishop—the
Bishop of St. Asaph. With respect to the grievous di-
visions of the Church, he would only say that it was his
most earnest wish to see the Protestant character of the
Church of England fully and entirely maintained.
Mr. S. WORTLEY felt it incumbent on him, not-
withstanding the support which he had formerly given to
-L n;11 in its other stages, to join in the opposition to
the Bin in tse His ream,n ex opposing
the Bill was because of the retention in the is;il of
clause for excluding the new bishop from a seat in the
House of Lords, a principle which he considered to be
utterly subversive of the constitution of the country. If
this measure were to pass, the responsibility of dealing
that severe blow to the Church would not rest so much
with the Noble Lord at the head of the Government,
but with those Hon. Members on his side of the House
who had uniformly given their support to the interests
of the Church.
Sir R. H. INGLIS regretted the omission of such
words from the Bill as the Government had thought
proper to omit; but even the Bill in its present shape,
mutilated as it was, was such as in bis opinion was
deserving of his support, and he could not therefore
concur in the opinion of those Hon. Members who had
considered it advisable to reject the measure in its pre-
sent stage.
Mr. HOPE thought, that as the Roman Catholic
episcopate had been increased from six bishops to ten to
superintend its few hundreds of thousands of members,
surely the Protestant Church of England, with its mil-
lions of members, ought:to have a corresponding increase
in the number of its bishops.
Mr. HORSMAN regretted that the discussion upon
this measure had been more upon the ground of the
wants of the episcopacy than of the serious existing
wants in the parochial system of the country. He
hoped to hear from the throne on the opening
of the next session that her Majesty had taken
into -her most serious consideration the wants
of the country in that respect. With respect to the
welfare of the Church, it would be highly conducive to
its interests if the existing 'system of patronage were
reviewed and remodelled. The subject of church-rates
was also one which deserved the serious consideration of
the Government, with a view to removing the dissensions
which constantly arose out of the present mode of levy-
ing them.
Lord H. VANE supported the Bill, but could not
help stating, at the same time, that he should have pre-
ferred a unioa of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor.
He considered the doctrine preposterous that the increased
revenues of the different sees—of London for instance—
should be devoted to the creation of colonial bishoprics.
He wished to have the revenues of the Church solely
devoted to the purposes of the Church. The expulsion
of the new bishop, and of the other three referred to, from
the; House of Lords would cause much bitterness, ani-
mosity, and jealousy. The Bill in its present shape,
however, was preferable to the state in which it was ori-
ginally brought in.
Mr. GOULBURN should support the third reading
of the Bill, as he considered it would be a great step
towards promoting and extending the religion of their
forefathers. He deduced from the statement of the
Right Hon. Baronet (Sir James Graham), with respect
to a near and dear friend of his (Mr. Goulburn's), the
Bishop of Carlisle, that a bishop with an extensive dio-
cese, and a limited number of clergy, could discharge all
the duties of his sacred office effectually. The labours
of that Right Rev. Prelate were an example to all others.
If his diocese were to be increased, as he understood, the
harmony which prevailed in his present diocese would
doubtless be extended to the increased portion. He
thought no ono could doubt that a Bishop of Manchester
was absolutely required, and ho contended that the
Government would have done well to have conceded
that new bishop a seat in the House of Lords.—(Hear.)
No one denied that the Dissenters had obtained in-
creased power in the administration of religion, but he
did not think that they really objected to another bishop
representing a large diocese taking his seat with his
compeers in the House of Lords. He regretted, there-
fore, that the Noble Lord had abandoned his original
intention of allowing the Bishop of Manchester a seat
in the other House.

Mr. B. ESCOTT adverted to his arguments against
the Bill, and advised the Government not to introduce
into the new Parliament questions with respect to sees
which could not bear investigation, but to honour
bishops and parochial clergy when they did their duty,
instead of making their set s and their conduct matters
of daily discussion in that House. He should continue
his opposition to the Bill.
Lord CLIVE supported the Bill. He considered that
more danger might be apprehended from limiting the
number of bishops than from extending their number.
There was no force in the objections against the new
bishops having a seat in the House of Lords.—(Divide.)

Mr: AGLIONBY denied that Dissent was nut rife ill
the diocese of Carlisle, as various Dissenting congrega-
tions existed.

Mr. GOULBURN did not deny that Dissoit existed
in the diocese of Carlisle.

Sir. J. GRAIIA AI explained that be did not say that
Dissent did not exist in the diocese of Carlisle. He said
that the Right Rev. Prelate did not meddle with trifles,
and that as harmony existed between the whole Church
body, Dissent was less bitter and antagonistic than in
other dioceses.—(Hear.)
After a few words from Mr. LEPROY and Mr. ACLAND,
Mr. DUNCOMBE said, Hon. Gentlemen who spoke
so highly of the Noble Lord's conduct in this matter
would do well to support him at the ensuing election—
(Laughter)—and if he was the great friend of the Church
they said he advised him to come over to his side, and take
his seat behind him as his supporter. They had put an
extinguisher upon the Government manufacturing ten
bishops, and he thought, after what had taken place,
that the Noble Lord would not burn his fingers with any
more bishops.—(Laughter) At any rate, if he did feel
disposed so to dabble, he trusted he would bring forward
his Bills earlier, in order not to drive the discussion of
them to almost the last day of the session.
Mr. COLLETT rose amidst loud calls for a division.
He said the very name of bishop was offensive—
(Laughter)—and considered that the country could do
very well without their aid. They were now going to
meet their constituents, and many of them might not
have seats in the new Parliament—(Laughter)—but if
he should not appear in the House again, he should
look back with credit to the exertions he had made to
prevent the addition of another bishop to the overgorged
Church Establishment.—(Laughter.)
The House thea divided, when there appeared--
For the amendment l4
Against it
Majority 79
On the question that the Bill be read a third time,
Mr. P. BORTHWICK moved the omission of so
much of clause 2 as enacts the exclusion, in rotation„
of the future bishops of certain existing sees from seats
in the House of Lords.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL would not repeat the argu-
ments which he urged yesterday against the motion of
the lion. Gentleman, and he hoped that after the ex-
pression of opinion that had been given by the House in
favour of the Bill he would withdraw his motion.
Mr. L A W supported the amendment.
Mr. P. BORTIINVICK would not divide the Home
upon the motion, and it was by leave withdrawn.
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' BILL.

The report on this Bill was brought up.
LONDON BRIDGE APPROACHES' FUND BILL.
The Lords' Amendments in this Bill were considered
and agreed to.
LEITH HARBOUR AND DOCKS DUES BILL,
The Lords' amendments on this Bill were considered
and agreed to.
COMMUTED ALLOWANCES FOR PENSIONS.
Sir DE LACY EVANS moved for copies of such
orders, warrants, or directions as may have been issued
by the War-office or Treasury, bearing date about the
year 1832, inviting or authorising pensioners to re-
ceive a commuted allowance for their pensions with
the promise of land in the colonies; of such un-
published representations to Government as may have
been made by the Earl of Durham while Governor of
Canada, on the consequences of these commutations; of
such orders or explanations as may have been issued
by the English Treasury or War-office to the Ca-
nadian Government or otherwise, on the subject of
restoring the pensions of the pensioners in Ca-
nada under certain specified circumstances ; of such
minutes or orders as may have been drawn up by the
Treasury, showing why the measure of restoration of
pension extended to the pensioners in Canada, ought
not to be granted to the commuted pensioners who may
not have left England, or who may have returned to
England from Canada. Also, of such repreerd:ttions
as may have been addressed to the Treasury subse-
quent to 1832, by the Right Honourable Edward Ellice
and the Right Lioutirable Sir henry Ilardinge, when