The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-09 00:00:00

Sir H. HARDINGE Could not agree to the proposition.

Dr. BOWRING said that 2,813/. was stated to.be the sum
arising from the sale of commissions. Was that the only sum
received by the Goveinmen't from that source?
Sir H. HA RDINGE said that it was.

Mr. W. WILLIAMS, in allusion to what had been stated
by the Secretary at War as to the saving.effected in the half-
pay, would observe that in 1822 the total expense of the army
was 3,782,0001., and this year it was 2,201,000/. He thought
a much larger saving might have been effected in the half-pay.
Sir H. HARDINGE said that in 1.22 there were 9,741
officers on half-pay, combatants and non-combatants, and
the vote for half-pay for the year amounted to 807,811/. ; this
year the number of officers on half-pay was 4,032, and the
half-pay amounted to 450,000/., thus showing a diminution in
the number of officers of 5,709, and in the amount of half-
pay of 420,8281. He should be very happy to grant the Hon.
Gentleman any returns on the subject he might wish.
Sir C. NAPIER slid the Gallant General had given them
a pretty specimen of the mortality in the service, yet his Hon.
Friend did not seem to think they died fast enough.
Mr. WILLIAMS hoped that the, returns would show the
number of officers on half•pay in 1818, as well as in 1822.
Colonel RA WDON thought the Right Hon. and Gallant
Gentleman must have misunderstood the question which he had
put just now. He had meant to ask, if there would be any ob-
jection to allowing officers who had sold out to retain the rank
which they held on quitting the service ?
Sir HENRY HARDINGE said the subject had been con-
sidered by the Naval and Military Commission, and they had
decided that it would not be proper to grant such permission,
except in very extraordinary cases.
The vote wis then agreed to.
The next vote of 4,932/. fur the half-pay and pensions of fo-
reign officers, and for the' allowance to the widows and children
of foreign officers, was agreed to without discussion.
The next vote proposed was for a sum of 141,6101., for pen-
sions to officers' widows.
Lord HOWICK wished to ask for some explanation respect-
ing the refusal of the pension to the widow of Colonel Fawcett,
on the ground that her husband had fallen in a duel?
Sir HENRY HARDINGE said that the Gallant Officer
opposite had given notice of a motion on the subject for Mon-
day, and he thought that the discussion had better be postponed
until that evening. He would, however, go on if the' Gallant
Officer wished to take the discussion now.

Captain BE RN A L—No.
Sir HENRY HARDINGE would content himself with
stating that he did not think that the circumstances of the duel
were such as to justify him in recommending the widow to her
Majesty for a pension, and his Bight Hon. Friend, with whom
he had consulted, agreed with him in opinion.
Captain BERNAL—Had postponed his motion till Monday,
at the request of several 'Hon. and Gallant Members. He
brought it forward as a distinct motion, because he doubted
whether the subject would meet with so much attention as it
deserved, if it were only discussed incidentally in Committees
of Supply.
Lord HOWICK could not agree to this vote without some
explanation on the subject. He objected to a motion such as
that of which the Hon. and Gallant Member had given notice, on
the question being put that the Speaker do leave the Chair, con-
sidering as he did that it was interfering with the progress of
public business. It was more constitutional and Parliamentary to
discuss such a question in Committee of Supply, unless they were
prepared to take the strong step of addressing the Crown on
the subject of granting the pension to Mrs. Fawcett, a course
which he for one was not disposed to recommend. He could
not let the present vote pass without making some observa-
tion on the subject of the refusal of the pension. If the Go-
vernment were prepared seriously to take up the question of
'duelling and to do all in their power to discourage and put
down that unchristian and improper practice, then he should
acquiesce in the necessity, however painful, of refusing the pen-
sion to. Mrs. Fawcett. But if the Government were not pre-
pared so to deal with the general question, then the refusal of
the pension to the widow of Colonel Fawcett was an act of
great cruelty and injustice.—(Cheers.) Was it not manifest
that officers were frequently punished for refusing to go out
to fight a duel? Less than a year ago an officer had been sen-
tencedito be suspended from rank and pay upon the finding
of a. court-martial for not taking steps to obtain immediate re-
dress for a gross outrage which had been offered to him.
He knew that he should be told that the redress meant was
that Which could be obtained by applying at the Horse
Guarda. But he would say-boldly that that was a mere eva-
sion.—(Cheers. ) They all knew that the real redress was
that which was called demanding satisfaction.—(Cheers.) He
would ask the Judge-Advocate if a sentence of a court-martial
had ndt been submitted to him without that evasion, in which
an offer had been sentenced to punishment for declining to
fight a: duel. The Right Hon. Gentleman had felt that a
sentele in that shape was illegal, and could not be allowed
to pas. ; but the fact of, such a charge having been enter-
tained ,by a court-martial, proved that what was really ex-
'pectic' lof an officer was—not that he should appeal to the
Horse Guards, but that he should take redress into his own
hands.L(llear, hear.) If such things were allowed to go on
, in the army, and no more effectual measures were adopted to
put down.cluelling, it would.be the height of injustice to re-
fuse to' the widow of an officer, who had fallen in a duel, her
pension. They might talk of the difficulty of legislation on the
suhjectl, but it was in the power of the Government
to prevent, duelling in the army without any legislative
measuie whatever. Let them make known in an authoritative
manner that the present system should not be permitted to
continue. Let them call upon all officers who had received an
insult o submit their ease to some superior authority. Let
a Court of Inquiry be assembled to consider each case, and
havinglascertained the merits of it, let them exercise the pre-
rogative of the Crown• by pronouncing the dismissal of the
guilty arty. Let them give ample means for punishing per-
sons who were guilty of insults, which, uncle:• present circum-
stanceS, must lead to a duel. He would also have it made
knownthat in every ease in which officers had recourse to
duelling, all the parties concerned, both principals and seconds,
'should be dismissed the service. By these means they might
put doWn the great evil of duelling in the army. He did not
believe that it was impossible to put it down in the community
generally. The first thing required was to mitigate the.undue
severity of the existing law. The killing a man in a duel,
althOugh ' nominally a great crime, 'was a crime of a
different' ' nature from that of murder, and required
a different punishment. And it was on account
of the:undue severity of the punishment inflicted by law, that
the law was not enforced. Let there be a moderate and just
punishtrient inflicted by law upon those who engaged in duels,
and let that law be uniformly and impartially enforced.
Anothp- step, which should be adopted to do away with the
necessity of duelling, was to, give to persons who had been in-
sulted 'some means of obtaining proper redress from the legal
tribunals of the country. He did not think there would be
difficulty in framing some law that would enable any person
who might be insulted to obtain redress proportionate to that
insult in a court of 'law. As he said before, there were two
courses open to her Majesty's Government—either they might
allow hings to remain as they had hitherto been; and if they
did—i they would shut their eyes to the practice of duelling, and
do not ing more than connive at its existence, then they ought
to grant the pension to Mrs. Fawcett. ,The other course was,
'that they should set themselves seriously to work to put down
the piactice altogether—not to look over a case of duelling,
whoe4r might be the parties concerned. They could not
d forget the case lately of a person in a high and distinguished
statio —a station which made the offence infinitely more
aggra ,ated than it could be in a military officer. In that most
remarkable case, he thought that the high authorities before
whom lit had been brought had acted improperly. The Go-
vernmrnt had passed over that offence, which had attracted so
much notice, as one of the most venal crimes—in such con-
e.

duet t'
to be
offends
must (

'ere was no consistency. One line or the- other ought
adopted; they ought to act impartially against all
rs ; or, if not, they ought not to be guilty of what he
Insider the cruelty and injustice of refusing to the

widow of one of the unfortunate victims of this most unhappy
system the pension which, it was very possible, her circum-
stance might render most particularly necessary.
Captain BERNAL did not consider himself open to the lec-
ture which the Noble Lord the Member for Sunderland had
thougljtr, fit to read him on constitutional law. He had con-
'suited ther gentlemen, who were as competent to give an
*opinion as the Noble Lord, upon the course he had adopted,
and'nothing had fallen from the Noble Lord in the course of
his'speech which would hinder him from moving, on going into
the Committee of Supply, the special notice of the House to the
case of Mrs. Fawcett.
Sir H. HARDINGE said the speech sof the Noble Lord was
not characterised by his usual fairness. The Noble Lord knew
that the case of the unfortunate lady was to be brought forward
orilUceiday, and yet he now took occasion to discuss the entire
question-of military discipline, notwithstanding the opportunity
which he" Would have 'of discussing the subject cn Monday.
This was a vote for the pensions of widows. After he (Sir H.
Hardioge) had stated the grounds upon upon which he refused
the pension, be thought if the Noble Lord took a different view
from that of the Gallant Officer, it would have been more si
propriate if he consented to postpone his observations till: I
Gallant Officer's motion was before the House. With regard •
other parts of the Noble Lord's speech, viz., that officers in the
army were expected to fight their way out of any difficulty by
andi hat that practice was connived at by individuals
at the, head of the army, he must give the Noble Lord,
notwithstanding his having been so long Secretary-at-
War; the strongest contradiction. He did not believe
that the statement of the Noble Lord was borne out by facts.
•He was confilent the Noble-Lord could not produce any case
where any officer was brought to a court-martial arid cashiered,
for-not havingfought,a duel in consequence of an insult offered
to him. Officers,, by the Articles of War, were liable to be
-cashiered fo'r' fighting. a: duel. It was .stated in one of the
-Araks of-War; that•auy officer who., should give,liend, or proms
mote a challenge, or accuse an officer of disgrace for refusing a
challepge, should be brought to a court-martial, and be

cashiered. Another article set forth that if an officer behaved
in a scandalous and-infamous manner, and unworthy the con-
duct of a gentleman and an officer, he was also to be tried by a
court-martial, and cashiered ;• and in another article, it was
stated expressly, by order of her Majesty, that every
officer was acquitted of disgrace for refusing to fight
or accept a challenge. Having thus shown what was required
by the articles of war, in the case of any officer who refused to
fight, or accept a challenge, he asked how it was possible for
any body of officers, upon their oaths—men of education—who
were told that it was no disgrace to refuse a challenge, to try
a man for conduct unbecoming an officer, and notwithstanding
their oaths, tell him that he was cashiered for not fighting a
duel ? Why, such conduct would be a violation of oaths, of
decency, and of common sense, and he did not believe the
Noble Lord could adduce any case of that nature. The
Noble Lord had had opportunities of proving if there were
such cases. While Secretary at War, he had, in accordance
with his duty in that high station, to recommend these Articles
to her Majesty, and when the Noble Lord told him that. the
Government possessed the power of putting down duelling
in the army, and that it ought to be put down, he asked
the Noble Lord what he had been about during the five years
he was in office, and why he had not taken some such steps in
that direction which he found fault with the present Govern-
ment. for not taking? But he could assure the Noble Lord that
the subject had not escaped • the attention of her Majesty's Go-
vernment. However, as some•reforms were to be submitted to
her Majesty on the matter, he was precluded from entering
more particularly into it at present. With respect to the
Noble Lord's statement, that officers were broke for not fight-
ing duels, he (Sir H. Hardinge) would refer to the case of
which an Hon. Gentleman, a few evenings ago, had said an
account had come by the last mail from the West Indies, where
an officer was tried for having submitted to an insult. Of
course he could not mention the name of the officer, but he
would read the charge against an officer who was brought to
a court-martial in the year 1843, for scandalous and infamous
conduct, unbecoming the character of an officer and a gentle-
man in submitting to be chargad with ungenileinatilike and
blackguard conduct, and with no- refuting the store charge, or
reporting it to his commanding officer, or taking measures to
exculpate himself from charges so derogatory to his character.
Now he (Sir H. Hardinge) thought that that officer ought to
have gone before his brother officers and asked them to try the
charge ; but, according to the Noble Lord's version, the officer
was tried for refusing to fight a duel. Such a thing was most
improbable. He ( Sir H. Llardinge) had been for 40 years in the
army, and he had neverheard of such a case as the Noble Lord ima-
gined. He would give another instance in the same year of 1843.
He took the most recent eases as the Noble Lord said that the
system was going on at the present day of officers being forced
by the regulations of the service to fight duels when they ought
to have the matter settled by a Court of Inquiry. The case
was this :—ln April, 1843, an officer was tried for scandalous
and infamous conduct, unbecoming an officer and a gentleman,
in having submitted to be stigmatised as a " liar" and a
scoundrel," and suffering other opprobrious epithets to be ap-
plied to him by another individual. The Court found him
guilty, and he was cashiered. He (Sir H. Hardinge) had in-
quired into that ca.e, and he found that that individual had con-
ducted himself in a most ungentlemanlike manner, and
that he had not dared to face an inquiry by his brother
officers.—( Hear, hear.) Accordingly they forced him
to a court-martial. How such cases could be distorted in the
way in which the Noble Lord had done, he (Sir H. Hardinge)
could not understand. Indeed; in the case of one officer in-
sulting another, and not making a demand for explanation, he
might be put into " Coventry" by his brother officers, and thus
find himself in a Very unpleasant position.—( Hear, hear.)
Well, he would take the Noble Lord upon that point. He
knew the case of a field officer, who; being a religious individual,
and having conscientious scruples on the matter, declined to
fight a duel, because he -felt that he ought not to sin against
the laws of God. The officers of his regiment, from the
manner in which his name was used, in consequence felt very
uneasy; but the present Commander-in-Chief protected him
to the extent of having the matter inquired into.
The cause of quarrel was' investigated, and the result
was that the proper conduct of that field officer was corrobo-
rated and confirmed, and his brother officers withdrew their
objection to him, and he was now one of the most respected
officers in the service. • Again in 111t04 Sir Charles Morgan, in
the case of a lieutenant who had associated with the surgeon of
his regiment, notwithstanding his having been collared and
struck by hien; and svho had been brought to trial for conduct
unworthy an 'officer—in that case Sir Charles Morgan wrote
an observation upon the second article of the charge to the
effect that it was tantamount to making it a crime to refuse
fighting a duel, and that if he had been aware of it before the
investigation that he would not • have suffered the article to
have been brought forward. He ( Sir H. Hardinge) could
only appeal to the Noble Lord, that in every case with which
he had anything to do, and having made eeery possible inquiry
at the Horse Guards with respect to other cases, he count not
find an instance of • an officer being brought to trial because he
was wanting in courage to fight. a duel.
Colonel FOX asked the lion. and Gallant Gentleman if
he did not know of any instances of the Sovereign dispensing
with the services of officers, because they were put into
Coventry for not fighting a duel ? That he believed • was
generally the way in which cases of that kind were disposed of.
Sir H. H A RDINGE said if he understood the question of
the Gallant Officer, it seemed to imply that the Sovereign of
the country was a party to punishing officers for not fighting
duels.

Colonel FOX—The Sovereign acting by the advice of the
Ministers of the Crown. •
Sir HENRY HA RDINGE knew no instance of an officer's
services being dispensed with in such a case, except where the
harmony of the regiment rendered it necessary to remove cer-
tain officers.—( Hear, hear, from Lord Ilowick.) But the
Noble Lord could not expect that the army should be sub-
jected to restrictions and restraints to which other parts of the
community were not subjected.
'Sir A. L. HAY tieked what would be the condition of
officers in the army if they were not allowed to take steps to
remove any stigma which any young and ill-tempered officer
might happen to cast upon them ? He questioned if duelling was
as prevalent in the army as in other portions of the community.
They might de away with duelling in the army by means of
-statutes, but he would tell them that they ought to pause be-
fore they prevented the officers of the. British army from assert-
ing their honour and repelling indignity.
Captain BERNAL said a very wide field had been opened
by the discussion, which had taken place, and he thought it
was necessary to consider at once whether it were right to go
into the whole question on the present motion.—( Hear, hear.)
He was perfectly prepared to discuss the subject whenever it
should be the pleasure of the House to do so. There was a
vast deal to be said upon it.—( Hear.) The whole system was
an anomalous one. They had statutes which pronounced
duelling to be an offence nothing short of murder.
—( Hear, hear.) They had juries endeavouring to evade these
practices ; they had judges, who were prepared to give them
the go- bye ; whilst the majority of that House were always
ready to assist in the evasion. Under these circumstances,
would any man say that the widow of an officer who had fallen
in a duel should, on that account, be deprived of a pension ?
( Hear, hear.) Let them either say at once that an officer of
the army should be supported in his conscientious views, or let
them be prepared to treat his widow, if he fell in a duel, in the
-same manner that they would treat the widow of an officer who
fell in battle. He (Capt. Bernal) had no wish to interfere with
the discretion of the Crown. He knew perfectly well that no
„officer's widow had an absolute right to a pension. He would
not, however, enter into the question on the present occasion,
considering, as he did, that it ought to form the subject of a
substantive motion.—( Hear, hear.) Without assuming to
himself the light of advising the Committee, he must say that
he thought it would be much better to waive any Waller dis-
cussion.
Colonel FOX explained.
Mr. P. BORTHWICK said the question simply was, whe-
ther a particular lady should be deprived of a: pension which
under ordinary circumstances she would have received, merely
because another person had committed a crime. As at present
advised he (Mr. P. Borthwick) thought it would be a most
unjustifiable mode of punishing an offence to visit it upon the
person who 'did not perpetrate it, and who,-of all persons in the
kingdom, would have been most anxious to prevent it had it
been in her power.
Lord HOWICK said the Hon. and .Gallant Officer near
him (Sir A. Leith Hay) hod argued that duelling was abso-
lutely necessary in the army. Now, jie slid not ask them to
pronounce an opinion either way ; but he did ask them either
to sanction or discourage it consistently.--( Hear, hear.) If
they sanctioned duelling, it was nothing less than gross cruelty
and injustice to deprive Mrs. Fawcett of her pension ;. if they
came to a resolution to put down the practice, then, however
painful, it might perhaps be necessary to pursue that course.
The Hon. and Gallant Officer opposite (Sir Henry
Hardinge) had only answered his argument in a
miserable spirit of personality.—( Cries of "No, no," from both
sides of the House.) He repeated the observation. He had
brought the question• forward as a general one, and what was
the Hon. .and Gallant Officer's reply ? Why- he said that the
Mutiny Act provided so and so, and he asked, why, if that was
not sufficient, he (Lord Howick) had not added to its provi-
sions. What did it signify whether he did, or did not, during
the time he held the office of Secretary at War, suppress duel-
ling in the army ? The Hon. and Gallant Officer knew very
well that questions connected with the discipline of the army
never came under his (Lord Howick's) notice, except when
some particular difficulty arose; and during the time that he
was Secretary at War, it-so happened that.there never was a
case similar to that of Mrs. Fawcett's. His notice was never
called to this anomaly, and therefore it was that he had never
thought of adopting any means for its removal. But he begged
to tell the Hon. and Gallant Officer, that if while he was Se-
cretary at War a case had been brought before him, in which
he was called upon to exercise the painful discretion of ad-
vising her Majesty not to grant a pension to an
officer's widow because he had fallen in a duel, he would not
have given that advice unless he had been prepared to carry
out the principle, and to take every measure in his power to put
an end to duelling in the army.--( Hear, hear.) Now what
was the argument of the Hon. and Gallant Officer? He
to ted, and he believed correctly, that officers, practically
and substantially, were brought before courts-martial for
refusing to fight duels. It was perfectly true that the letter of
the law was against duelling-the articles of war were most
express and decisive ; but the officer was called upon to do
nothing unbecoming the character of a gentleman, and if he
received an insult without taking immediate steps for redress, he
was liable to a court-martial. An officer had been brought
before a court-martial in India for an offence of that description.
The charge was that he had received a blow, and had not taken
steps to obtain that legitimate and immediate redress to which
he was entitled for so gross an insult. The measures were an
appeal to a superior authority and a duel. Put it was per-
fectly well known that if an officer took the course of appealing
to a superior authority, he had the punishment inflicted upon
him which was known-by the name of being sent to Coventry.
Under penalty of this sentence, he was virtually compelled to
choose the alternative of the duel.
Sir HENRY H A RDIN GE inquired as to the particulars of
the case to which the Noble Lord referred.
Lord HOWICK safd the case was exactly what lie had
stated. Ile rather thought that the officer belonged to the
Indian army, but the two services were governed exactly by
the same rules. In another caso, a field-officer had been actu-
ally sent to Coventry for refusing to fight a duel on religious
ground.. The Hon. and Gallant Officer ( Sir A. Leith Hay )
had argued that duelling was the keystone of the honour of the
army.
Sir A. LEITH HAY said he had not used that expres-
sion.—( Hear, hear. )
Lord HOWICK begged the Hun. and Gallant Officer's pat-
don. Ile had meant only to state the purp ,rt of his argument.
The Hon. and Gallant Officer had argued that duelling:was
necessary to maintain the discipline and honour of the army.
Sir A. LEITH HAY—lllost certainly. •
Lord HO WICK—In the case to wkich he had just referred,
had the officer been a sebaltern. instead of a field-officer, he
would probably have been forced out of the army.—(Hear,
hear.) He would again say that they were imperatively called
upon to adopt a decided course, and, not suffer. the present
anomalous state of things to continue. '
Captain BERNAL hoped the Hon. and Gallant Officer (Sir
H. Hardinge) would not be tempted by the Noble Lord's re-
marks into the discussion of this subject.—( Loud cries of" Hear,
hear.") He thought eothing could be more unfair than the
attack made by the Noble Lord, but he trusted that the Right
Hon. Gentleman, against whom it was directed would main-
tain a judicious silence.—( Hear, hear. )
Sir H. HARDIN GE said the Noble Lord bad talked
of miserable perSonaliiies, He left it to the House' tok say
remark.—
(Hear, the Noble Lord was justified in that emako
(Hear, and cheers.) He had simply reminded the Noble
Lord, that the ,present Government had been in .officey
two years, and asked him why the late Government had not,
wt
remedied the evils of which he complained.. He would- be
ready to meet the Noble Lord whenever the question came

on fairly for discussion, but he hoped the Committee would
not discuss it on the present motion. He thought that very •
little good could arise from discussing the subject of duelnsit
that evening. With respect to the constitution of a Court 01
Honour, which should inflict certain punishments, pecuniarY
or otherwise, in his opinion it would not be attended with
any beneficial results. He was of opinion, that pecuniary fine;
would not be popular in England. In former days the Royal
power interfered most beneficially with duelling. He need 04 •
renal to the recollection of the House the numerous instances
in which that power had been so exercised, with the hap-
piest effects. He believed that unless that power were re-
stored to the Crown, it would be impossible to put down
duelling. It was in vain to look to legislation to remedy the
evil. H believed it could only be cured by the state of Po'
pular feeling on the subject.—The vote was then agreed to.
2,327,196/. was then voted for the pensioners of Kilmainhan3
Hospital.
On the motion that 38,0001. be granted for retired allowances,
Colonel RAWDON said that he thought this was a Proper f
opportunity of mentioning that Colonel Moore, the brother of
Sir John Moore, had given up his retired allowance when be
found that his private fortune was suffidient to enable him to
live without it.—The vote was agreed to.

ORDNANCE ESTIMATES.
Captain I3OLDERO, in rising to move the Ordnance E 5;.
tiroates, said that there had been an expense of about 93,80 t
in the expenditure upon the Sappers and Miners. But in the
expense of barracks and barrack masters there was a dintio%
tion to the amount of ItiB,ooo/. ; and that reduction sisou,_
have been greater if it had not been necessary to augment tne
commissariat in China. An additional charge would be OS
ces,ary for the expense of rebuilding the powder-works a'
Waltham Abbey. At the Cape of Good Hone also, an
diture was incurred, inconsequence of the destruction of one
wing of the fort, occasionea by the indiscretion of two children ,
playing with lucifer matches. The charges for the restoration
of the Tower would not be felt by the country, for in the T.
propriation of the now building to the purposes of stores t.
country would be compensated for the expense. By ealculanng
the price of fuel in the two countries he found that the
ante to an officer in England would be 61. 10s. a year, Eder •
Ireland 71. 10s. Since they had been in office they b? • ,
fected a reauction in the Ordnance estimates of 303,4831.
the
nually. He hoped this would be taken as an earnest of t
integrity of their desire to reduce the expenditure as much $ '
possible.
Dr. BOWIIING said he did not intend to divide the C4rl-
- on any of these items, nor did he mean to detain the _ •,
Committee, except to regret that a similar course had not been
~,
adopted in the ordnance as in the other votes. He saw Oil;
~.•1
large part of the expense was incurred for the colonies ; f
thought that the colonies ought" bear part of the burden °‘,
their own defence. He saw
.that the lonian Islands did 0, Or .1
why not the oth.rs?
Sir HOWARD DOUGLAS said; as-the lonian Islands b
been referred to, he hoped he might be allowed to make a fecf'
observations with respect to them. They formed a most
i of
teresting country, front their soil; their position on the 'err°.
civilisaton, their climate, and classic associations. These ieivilr-
taPr •
had been thrown back on this country for regeneration and
zation. But their progress had been arrested, and their prospefel
injured, by the fixed csroribution which they were consaeuxa s
to pay out of their revenue, to this country, towards the s„, •
penFe of their military defence. That contribution !,:"; ;
35,000/. a year, for this purpose alone ; other expenses bioe ,l, ,s?
were compelled to pay, raised that sum to 54,0001. At Yea,.
The whole revenue of the islands, some years ago, • a,'
180,0001. ;. it had since been so much reduced that it was 0,,1-••
no more than 100,000/. ; the fixed contribution thetel,4.
amounted to no less than 50 per cent. of the revenue. He Pt;l0;
been unceasing in his representations to the Governor' .0 S."
the necessity of making some abatement in this contributiotteisSi
favour of the islands. The depreciation in the price of t",,,,a,
chief exports, currants and oil, had dried up the sources et 'sec' ;a'.
venue, and though they had reduced taxation and made e.velf,4
sacrifice possible, the contribution was found to be excess eeeif4,')fA
oppressive. The state of their public institutions seal ,asr
lamentable. There were no asylums, and the lunatics taceo),
mingled together with felons. The lonian Islands were slot
colonies ; they were in an anomalous position hetWede
colonies and independent States. They should tleibeir
their duty to that interesting people unless ' a'
reduced somethingof that fixed contribution.—(Lord Stse!et osase's
"We have done it.") He appealed to the Government, wisg,
they he had not brought forward this question stronglY awig.:r:a7;
last year ; and he asked the Noble Lord whether he was deals ss
fairly with him, as a friend and supporter of the Governtseli
in not acquainting him with the step he had taken. He 1:00-St' 0
appeal to the House to say whether the Noble ,Lord hadisisto stla
justice to him in not communicating to him what the %at aS,
Lord said he had done. But he would still exercise his ts,„igLithe
Desl" making these representations to the Committee. In bet
no poor of the island were begging about the streets, there ussn2
no poor-house to receive them. He built a poor-house/1;r; :0,,
it answered exceedingly well ; hut a few months ago, ;..asis,s'a •
peered that it was abolished. He would appeal to the aiSS.SS.
mittee whether he had not a right to state these cirestp
stances ; and he appealed to them again to say vlbeboi
the Noble Lord had treated him as he ought to have got
in not first communicating with him, after he had mist ae,rd/a
a case so strong that the Noble Lord himself requested KJ."
would not press for the production of the papers, the esderssal
which was yet uncancelled by the House. If he had are'os ,
for those papers he should have bad the credit of 11005 ')
complished the redaction.
The conversation on this subject then dropped. t
Mr. WILLIAMS complained of the immense arnottnoi,a,;4
money spent in building fortifications and new barracks., 600/.,4075a
barracks at Manchester alone were put down at
_ails", olasy
There were others also at Newport and Bristol. What „`'t
• there in the state of Manchester that required those boss ssalf
now more than at any former time? He thought this aln*:" •• ssrit
a •
the erection of new barracks was most enormous. 1013
Captain PECHELL, in alluding to the late militia,' ;440)9r,f,
which had occurred at Brighton, said, that after the serieslSS
punishment which had been inflicted upon the 'offenderatiset
did not wish to do more than allude very briefly to the Ina be'
Damage to the amount of 501. had been done, and it was :ors
fore stated that compensation would be made by the reggnae.
to the foreigner whose home had been attacked. All hisoPips
perty had been destroyed, and he was now without the to a S
of subsistence ; and he (Captain Pechell) hoped that the ~0141"4,
Hon. Gentleman also would suggest some means for retie': sr)
the distresses of those persons. ti'toa
Sir H. HARDINGE said that whatever might have ...saires's')
intention of the soldiers originally with respect to,raising**J'Sd
scription amongst themselves for the purpose of repaylngarasfxs
expenses and damage done, the course adopted by t h.e Tr, '4).4
secutor's solicitor had entirely frustrated it.
VAIM
After a few words from Mr, AGLIONBY and Sir H. """ ' •
DING E in reply, the vote-was agreed to.
A sum of 110,707/. was then voted, to defray the OW • le Al
of the Royal corps of Engineers, and Sappers and Miners,.
343,5271. was voted to defray the expenses of the
gusnery department. aett
391,197/. was voted to pay the salaries of barrack-0e
on foreign stations. tda ,
A vote of •483,7211. was then proposed for defrayinfts,
charges of the ordnance works, &c —This vote was agree
A vote of 166,7961. was then proposed for the expert
the ordnance surveys.
In answer to a question from Colonel RAWDON, .nireSs•":
Sir R. PEEL said the Report of the surveys takee inky,,
land land would be laid before the House in the course of the •
The vote was then agreed to. RV • ,
A vote of •229,5801. for the expenses of ordnance stores •,.
then proposed. . .
In answer to a question from Sir C. NAPIER, oaile"'
Captain BOLDERO said that in all new ships the.
and marines were supplied with the new muskets. iar
eo
The vote was then agreed to.
the y
• .1„.,1
A vote of 163,6801. was proposed for defraying. use ;;ooso
of the superanuation and pension list.
Captain PECHELL wished to call the attention
essofsf,
Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary-at-War to ,a, dto '
some hardship. A poor pensioner had been eompe"e aster 2a'l
into a workhouse, and during the time he was there his Piesa thei.tas,
was withdrawn. When he was discharged from the
pension was renewed, but its proceeds were taken by net
dians until the expenses to which they had been Pleetira,
maintenance during his stay in the workhouse had
frayed. He (Captain Pechell) wished to know if tb
legal?
Sir H. HARDINGE said it undoubtedly was
not.
The vote was then agreed to. of g'
A vote was agreed to of 174,688/. for the caper,' • las ;
missiriat supplies. • 'Ws' V
•ar sr'
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress and tbe sasa-,
resumed. , I •
The House then resolved itself into a Committee ° • ,
qte
and Means. .44;0
The 'CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER 'll°' •
O. •
• 'l)*
of 8,000,000/. out of the Consolidated Fund. ordered
The vote was agreed to , and the Report was
brought up on Monday next. • fr'
The House then resumed. 'the „
Dr. BOWRING presented a petition regarding
chester Railway.—(Against it as we understood.) 0(11' o,',
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed °e• it
House adjourned at a Quarter past Eleven &Clock. • •
00
[ADVER ME TISENT.]—DROPSIES GURA,'"--LE Char- ot,
I.(WAY'S PII,I.S.—EXTRAORDINARY
Liggle, residing in one of the almshouses in Charsaso, 0.
Westminster, was by the watery dropsy so drettdfol.llls'ol ter
in body and legs as to be increased to double hera.aced,
Medical man had declared her past all cure (1f..0.1t0`4,4
death was daily expected), yet, however eastraordin" tellfter
appear, she was reduced several inches in hulk ilciaa. fer
only few doses of the above extraordinary tualket curette
wonderful remedy may be considered as a Pe.;3* s,SeesliSott
any kind of dropsy, however long-standingosLWite. •
case may be.—Sold at Professor Holloway's be'
244, Strand (where advice may be had gratis), area
sa2So
all respectable medicine venders throughott*o., IJ.
world, in pots and boxes at ls. nd., 2s. 9d., vibe •
and :335. each. e1e0111: tissta
The Dublin Papers state that Mr. dying the oil
was examined as Witness for the Crown du o'oeet
trials, has ceased to be the Dublin Corse')
Morning _Herald.
. • gasc
BIRTHS., of the
On the 3d nit ,at Larkhill, Worcester,•the I°4 -• '
George Bayley, of a son. of "
On the 23d ult., at Boulogneasurslller-; 4,11 e•;„ lx' .- ir
et.
Eeq , Bengal Civil Servieca talsOlas
,Seassa. '
On the 28th tilt at Caen; Madatteliclar r. oiee,
ullagar,
a daughter. a • of '
1l•
On the 2d inst., Mrs. John Edward of
Sussex, of a son. . goo-1 , P'-
On the 3d inst., the lady of Mark Willie', • •.,,,oropt
Albany-road, Camberwell, of a daughter. ,
On the 3d inst., at the Vicarage House, Asn' burt°ll'the
the lady of the Rev. W Marsh, of a son.
e,
On the 2(1 inst., at Monti)ellier-terrae Riff
lady of E. H. Blakency, Esq.,
the ladf. •
meat, of a son. • • stare'',
On the 6th inst., at Clapham-rise, .enot
f Deur .
Mathews, Esq., of a daughter. lad °
On the 6th • 31't• 1, tone the. Y
inst., at . s
n. genes •cda
Colonel Grifliths, of a FOIC
1'011513 ^ fad, ,
On the 7th inst., at Gloucester-place; Or f°
lady of the Rev. W. Palmer, Of St•
Gill's
daughter. .. •
Royal Cana tau
;of
11.
.211.111.1?1ED, to
On
Crichton, 14,30f1'at"7 ,
Loveday, eldest daughter of W. Gard .11.59.•,
1 e et,l flits 28th(
t,llllllllets'
Cornwall. la‘t..lll Souls, Laonfglkaenwl,-ifig"ton.b.tLittotx.
yeto
'" ThOmas PYfan't*, •
•On the sth inst., at St. gar onca, ~csnive an ons •
eton rt,
W. Humphreys, Madras sS.ststa's
thoSsliaosSlatehußa egtiiiznettivitioolax?d,raosiatic
late. Gap: _

On the 4th hist, at IZ1))-dieEDIs.16' •of ''
C itt,the- f3nt"''''.llii,a
l)u the Gth inst., in the Strand,
of Richard Twining, jtw., Lsq•
ClaooOxinnitotttilitl:ecer666tsth inst , at lioxi On,' Richa.lll, son of Iticb3r.
ei'Dr°cl
tqh;litibslits',.t,..,llll-iri.i.
Ili oatila4stße
tlind-Pracfr '
g°ll
rit)a_
snttrteeert, eatiln9plst.l37lls.:ol:P. :t;

London : Printed. and Pnfilisbcd *by 1111.7E1 tra
1190-; LP. ll°
No 112, Strand, at The Sun Office,
County of Bliddle'ex, ~sattiday, tiarch- 9,
•
112 s

IP.
kileii,

4
)1114k1
1