The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-17 00:00:00

Captain PLUMRIDGE seconded the motion, and iu
doing so, said he would take the opportunity of asking
the Right Hon. Baronet if they might expect the report
of the Commissioners on the Harbours of Refuge,
before the termination of the session.
Sir R. PEEL knew that the Commissioners had been
diligently engaged in the consideration of the subject
ever since their appointment. He believed that their
first report might b' expected about the first week in
August, but he should he extremely sorry to hurry them.
With respect to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman, he
acknowledged its importance, and wonld grant the mo-
tion, 'not on occount of the warlike considerations to
n hich the Hon. Gentleman had referred, but because he
considered it of the greatest importance to do everything
to promote our commercial prosperity ; and it certainly
was most important that the internal parts of the king-
dom should be enabled 'by means of our rivers, to keep
up a communication with the sea. He thought that
it would have been better if the terms of tie
motion had been more general, but he would
not object 'to it. In granting the motion, -he
mu-t be understood as consenting merely to a pre-
liminary inquiry—all after matter must be for future
consideration. He thought the Hon. Gentleman had
rather over-rated the danger. lie seemed frightened—
( Laughter)—and showed unnecessary grounds for alarm,
The Admiralty were not to blame, for the Bill brought
in—a Bill which conferred considerable powers on the
Admiralty —was so mutilated by Parliament that these
pokvers were greatly abridged, almost annihilated. He
thought inquiry might be of service; and having made
these explanations he would not further obstruct the
object which the Hon. Member had in view.—(Hear.)
Sir C. -NAPIER thought the Right Hon. Baronet
had treated with undeserved contempt the remarks of
the Hon. Member. He certainly thought it a matter of
the greatest importance that the harbours of refuge, as
well as the other harbours should be kept in a state of
efficiency. Although relations between this country
and France were at present of an amicable nature, still
it was incumbent on them to be in a-state of readiness,
and not by their neglect and inefficient state of their
harbours, to give France advantges, in case of wstr, which
might prove disastrous to this country.
Dr. Bowanso supported the motion, as . did Sir
DENHAM J. NORREYS.
ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSKIN.
• •
Mr. E. DENISON then moved for an address for an
account in detail of the sums of money received and ex-
rnded by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for Eng-
land. He thought that these Commissionors had' exer-
cised their powers to an extreme length, and d
great hardships on private individuals, in violation of the
expressed opinion of Parliament. When bhp xe..turas
for which he moved were on the table of the House, ha
would bring the whole subject under the consideration
of Parliament.

Mr. ELPHINSTONE did not think the returns pro-
posed by his Hon. Friend were sufficient. He should
therefore move for a return of the incomes of all Arab-
bishops and Bishops of England and Wales since 18'37.
Sir J. GRAHAM consented to the motion on behalf
of the Government. When the Hon. Gentleman brought
t;,rward the subject, he should be able to show thist the
principle adopted bx the Church Commissioners, with
respect to Church property, was founded on ecatity and
justice. As to the amendment of the Hon. Meatier who
had spoken last (Mr. Elphinstone), he telt bound to re~
sist it.

After a few observations from Mr. Hume, Mr. V.
Smith,, the Chancellor of the
.Exchequer, and Mr. G.
Knight,
Sir R. PEEL.said he hoped the Commissioners would
exercise the powers which the Legislature had given to
them unfettered in their discretion, and that nothittg
which occurred in debate in that House would induce
them to take any other course than that which a sense
of duty dictated. The Orders in Council were in them-
selves great, but in his opinion the Co missioners had
exercised their power under them with great ,disicreCco,
and judgment. The chief object of their labours wout.l
1)4 to increase the value of ecclesiastical property, ult.('
apply that increase to the supply of the spiritual wants
of the nation. Again, he would express his. hope that
they would not be influenced in their conduct by ie.ny
mere debate in that House.

Mr. LIDDEL said, as the Hon. Gentleman oppo4e
(Mr. Dennison) had expressed his del ermination to hrit g
this subject distinctly before the House on a futaret
occasion, he shi,uld be prepared to take part in the dis—
cussion, and protect the interests of the ithabitants„
Dr. BOWRING said, this was a motion mer 4 asking
foi some statistical details, and he had tioi heard it
shadow of a reason for refusing them, when that
House asked for certain facts of ease it was net right
in the Government to refuse them,

Mr. BROTHERTON said, Hon. Gent'emen ob i 4,1
opposite side of the House, when sitting on the seats
occupied by himself and friends, used to charge
upon them that they were great gpariatora (4'
Persns whb thug
,
the Church ; but he believed those
Z,
impugned the conduct of otherswer.o, after all
but pretended friends of the_ nureh—(Hear hear)
loelieved that Lord John Rev.
and he (Mr. Brotherton;
sells Bill for tht getter regulation of Church prop-ety
would have been carried if there had not been found so
many leaseholders of Church property in opposition to
it.—(Cheers and laughter.) The landed interest heel
got hold of Church property on easy terms, and the/
liked it very much.—(Laughter.) He (Mr. Brothertqn
therefore, hoped with the Right Hon. Baronet a the
head of the Government, that the Commissir‘;i,ers wona
the ec**.l..esiastical property
make the mast they could of
committed to their charge, and te
sense of what was right guarded .by their own
rather than to the suggestions oC
other people,
Mr. W-4...71rN said, that coming from Durham, he &MA
sPett of that place as well as most people, and he hogged
to give his opinion that the greatest spoliators of Church
property were the clergy themselves.
• The gallery was then cleared for a division, and the
numbers were—
For the amendment
Against it . 55,
Majority against the amendment —la
The original motion was then granted.
LUNATICS AT
Captain PECHELL brought,under.t.n cotisirierati
of the House the case of 'le lunatic naval officers in the
hospital at liaaar. He stated the cirounistances under
which they r ere removed from the asylum at Hoxton to
thislar, and the regulations made by the Admiralty for
ft:meting from the half-pay, received by their wives, one
half of the usual amount opt account of additional expense.
By an order from the Admiralty, dated 11th Jan. 15332,
it was agreed to restore this pay, with the arrears, but
the order was afterwards cancelled. When the Right
Hon. Gentleman recollected the suffering which haa been
caused by withholding those small sums, he thought he
would alter his opinion and allow an inquiry into those
cases. He now came to the particular case of Mrs. Forbes,
whose claim the Government refused, because, they
said his insanity was not caused while in the service he
was employed in. But it could be proved beyond all
doubt, he believed, that the seeds of the disease under,
which he suffered were in consequence of the errployii.ent
he was engaged in, on board the Vengeur, in -New Or-
leans. It was said that Lieutenant Forbes had left the
service and entered into the merchant service ; but he
retained his half pay, and had the sanction of the Ad-
miralty for taking that step. If the Gallant
Admiral made the proper inquiries he would find
that what he (Captain Pechell) had stated was correct
lie did not believe that either the Hon. Member for
Montrose, or the 1-ion. Member for Coventry, would have
any objection to granting those small sums to those per-
sons in llaslar Hospital, and that those were not items to,
which they had any objection. The motion lie had to
make wa.l for a Select Committee, to which the petitions
of Mrs. Charlotte Forbes, Mrs. Sarah Ricketts, and Mrs.
Burgess were to be refented.
Mr. HUME had supported the claims of Mrs. Forbes.
eighteen years ago, and he looked upon the claim as one.
of justice, and trusted the time was come when it would
be granted.

Sir G. COCKBURN said that the rule had formerly
been, that officers who became insane while on service
were taken into the asylum at Hasler, and that half
their half-pay was devoted to their maintenance, the,
other half being paid to the relations. In 1822 this in-
dulgence was extended to officers on half-pay. In 1831,
instead of deducting half the half-pay, a deduction was
made of Is. 6d. a day, but that was merely a prospec-
tive regulation, and there was no claim on. the
Government for the repayment of that money
which had been before paid voluntarily. Now,
with regard to the case of Mrs. Forbes, he
agreed in all that had been said in the prai.e of that
most meritorious lady ; but he denied that Lieutenant
Forbes's insanity had been occasioned by his sufferings
in the service. He had been a midshipman on board
the Vengeur: before New Orleans. It did not appear
from the surgeon's books that he had suffered any Hitless
there. He had been promoted at the peace, and in 1822
he had taken the command of a merchantman. She had,
been seized by Bolivar, either at Lima or Guyaquil,:andl
Lieut. Forbes had left her. He returned across the
Isthmus of Darien, and, in consequence, probably,
of the unhealthiness of the climate of Panama,
he had lost his sight. He retired to London,
blind but not insane, and two years afterwards his friends.
applied to the Admiralty to have him admitted into the,
lunatic asylum at Hasler, of course, in accordance with
the regulations there in existence. He gave the Hon.
and Gallant Officer great credit for his wi,sh to a,sist.
Mrs. Forbes, who was a most deserving lady, but he
could not hold out any hope that the Admiralty would
()Taut her claims.
Mr. P. BORTHWICK supported the motion.
Mr. PLUMPTRE bore testimony to the high and ex-•
cellent character of Mrs. Forbes.
Mr. S. HERBERT could also bear testimony to the
excellent conduct of Mrs, Forbes, and regretted that
neither the Board of . Admiralty nor the Government
Could promise to take her case into consideration be-
cause .that would be tantamount to saying that- the aaiins
would be granted. The subject had been carefully eon,-
sidered, and the Admiralty had decided that they could
not, consistently with their duty, grant the claims of Mrs..
Forbes.
Mr. WILLIAMS said this case was one of extreme
hardship ; and if anything would justify the dsiparture
from an established rule, it was such eiscumittancei as
had just been brought under the notice of the House..
He would go as far to maintain economy as any one,
but he thought the strongest sticklers for prudence in
the outlay of public money would be disposed to. look
with most favourable feelings upon the present case.
Mr. HAWES said, in such a case as this, the techni-

cal rules of the service ought to be allowed to give way
to considerations of humanity.
Sir. C. NAPIER said it appeared to him to be the
most unjust thing in the world to refuse this claim. As,.
however, the Gallant Admiral (Sir G. Cockburn) seethed
disposed to do something in this matter-rand did hot •
doubt his sincerity—(Hear, hear)—he hoped his other
Gallant Friend (Captain Pechell) would not,pkess the
question to a division, as perhaps, such a course might
weaken the kind feeling which now he believed to lire-
vail et the Admiralty in reference to it.--(Hear.)