The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — 1844-03-19 (Liverpool, Merseyside, England)

HOUSE:OF COMMONS.-MONDAY.  The report of supply being brought up, and the resolution relating to the pension of officers' widows being put from the, chair, Captain BERNAL moved for a copy of any correspondelide respecting the refusal of the War-office to allow a pension to Mrs. Fawcett, the widow of the officer who fell in the late duel. There had been a refusal some years ago to a widow whose husband had committed suicide •, but between suicide and duelling there was no analogy. A law for giving damages to the relations of the deceased against the survivor might be of some use; but not a stoppage of the widow's pension. The articles of war contained a prohibition against duelling or carrying hostile messages; but it was a dead letter. He read the challenge addressed from the Duke of Wellington to Lord Winchelsea, observing the writer of the letter was now at the head of the army, and the gentleman who conveyed it was the distinguished officer now filling the office of Secretary-at-War. Captain Bernal then cited an instance in his own regiment of an officer who had been driven from it for having submitted to an insult without challenging the aggressor. If Colonel Fawcett had sold out one week before the duel, a sum of between 3,000 and 4,000 would have been at his widow's disposal. The seconds in this very affair had been acquitted, and were still in her Majesty's service, and he besought the house and the Secretary-at-War, whose courage was equalled only by his humanity, that this calamity might not be visited solely upon the unhappy widow. Sir H. HARDINGE defended the refusal of the pension, not upon general grounds, but upon the special circumstances of the case, particularly the near relationship of the parties, the slightness of the affront, and the precipitancy of the hostile meeting. Those circumstances continued to form in his mind a sufficient reason for the resolution he had taken. The consideration of the widow's pension was the public service of the husband, and there were several kinds of misconduct by which the merit of that public service was considered to be so far obliterated that the pension was refused to the widow. The case of the Duke of Wellington was not that of challenge to another officer in the army. Her Majesty had now authorized him, with a view of repressing the practice of duelling, to introduce an alteration in the next articles of war, which, he trusted, would effectually discourage them. The main scope of that alteration was, to enjoin that apologies should be frankly made and frankly accepted, and that when the matter could not otherwise be accommodated, it should be referred to the commanding officer of the regiment. If this kind of arbitration were established in the army, he trusted that a like recourse would be adopted in private life, and that this crime and folly would be finally abolished. He must confess, however, that the remedy was not complete, for it would apply only to cases between officers being both on whole pay. It could not be made applicable to any officer on half-pay, nor to a dispute between an officer on whole pay and a person not an officer; for it was obviously necessary that the control, if applicable to either, should be applicable to both. Lord PALMERSTON said, that the ground of the pension was the officer's service. It was in the nature of an augmentation to his pay, as relieving him, pro tante, from the necessity of laying bp a provision for his widow. He was inclined, however, to think that in this case the pension might properly have been granted. Colonel Fawcett had not been the challenger; and the seconds seemed to have been very culpable in not having prevented the meeting. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE entered into the merits of the duel, shoVing that the duel had not been fought until after the opinions of several distinguished officers had been taken, all of whom deemed it impossible for Lieutenant Munro, as an officer on full pay, to avoid the unhappy extremity of a hostile meeting. Sir R. PEEL gave his cordial approbation to the course adopted by Sir H. Hardinge in respect of this pension. Colonel Fawcett had selected a very young person as his second. Had the second been a man of higher standing, his influence might have availed to stop a duel which ought never to have taken place. With respect to the hardship on Lieutenant Munro, that officer bad been warned that it was necessary for him to return and take his trial. He had declined to do so, and the consequence was inevitable, that he must forfeit his commission in the army. Sir R. Peel declared his hope that the proposed alterations in the articles of war would be effectual.  After some observations from other honourable members, Captain BERNAL withdrew his motion, and remaining resolutions of the committee of supply were reported and agreed to. Mr. O'CONNELL moved for leave to bring in a bill for amending the law respecting Roman Catholic charities and places of worship in Ireland. His objects were to obviate the necessity of expensive applications to courts of equity, and to facilitate the establishment of residences for parish priests, and with these views to give a regular succession to the Roman Catholic hierarchy for the purpose of taking grants of land. After a few words from Mr. SHAW, and on an understanding that no member, by his acquiescene at this stage of the measure, should be considered as committing him. self to the approval of it, leave was given to bring in the bill Mr. HUME moved for a committee on the tobaccotrade. to prevent smuggling. Adjourned.