Star. — London, England, 1812-03-14 00:00:00

I am-.,satisfied but 'the greater nufnber of those who now' hear me have not formed any adequate .... eo , lceriton of what the punishment of flogging is.— It is A punishment, the severity of which, both in the minds of tf.o more humane of our own people, ansin those of the inhabitants of other parts of Eu ,.,, FP , disgraces . this country. It ie it punishment, the i lea sing nature of which disqualifies those who have ne it for fulfilling the duties of citizens.- - Heretofore, indeed, but a few individual(weresub , *lie it, even thee the voice of humanity should have been raised to ?moue its abolition ; but if its abolition were then expedient, its existence most as _ suredly now -cannot be considered as admissible, . when, if it be suffered to remain, the •whole popula tion of England is exposed to it. h is of consequence to keep this circumstance in our minds in the nurse of the present discussion, as well as the fact before , referred to, that the pdnisliment entails legal disabi. lilies, and for this fact we need seek no higher autho rity than Sir William Blackstone, who says, that the circumstance of an individual having undergone the punishment of flogging, would forma sufficient pound of objection to his being placed on a jury ; it as,. as it were, upon a level with felony. Before I proceed any farther in recommending the removal of this abomination, it may not be improper to observe, that it would be difficult to ascertain how it found entrance, how it crept in amongst us. I have reason to think, indeed, that though it is not actually the .produce of the present war, yet that it is in the course • of the present war that the evil has attained its pre ' .sent alarming magnitude ; and we may naturally ex. pect, that, terrible as that is, it will go on incrtasing —for when one degree of severity is adopted, and not found to produce the effect expected from it, as it appears that this has ant hitherto done, recourse is most usually had to a further measure of it, and, both in military ana l civil life, it often reaches that point from which humanity recoils with disgust • and horror, before an admission of its inefficacy can be extorted. I have no doubt, that most individuals in the country feel some aversion to the practice 1 have reprobated. I have no doubt that many cherish towards it the same detestation that I do myself ; and the very circumstance of its being calculated to rouse every better feeling of our nature against it, as it seems to make the discussion of it unnecessary, so it certainly renders it somewhat difficult, for we know not well how to go about seeking for reasons against a practice, the bare mention of which, we think, ought to suffice to convey to every heart a full and • adequate notion of the disgrace and cruelty which it involves; nor is there any thing better adapted to quiet - the emotion that gives birth to sentiments so just, than to enter into a cold calculation as to the ' quantum of the evil, or the incentives requir ed to retain it. I have observed that the art of . preserving discipline in our army by flogging is not • of ancient date, and in fact we find old Statutes re • gulating the penalties for, military offences, from which it appears, that. there was a period when sol - • diets were tried, like persons in a civil capacity, be. fore a - judge and jury. By an Act of the 18th of Henry V I. it was made felony for a soldier to take ! pumey for serving in foreign wars ; and.for this of-. fence the offender was to be tried in the usual way, that is, by a jury. By other Statutes, of Henry VII. and Edward VI. other punishments,asuch as fine and short imprisonment, were awarded for absence . - from duty, or, as we should now say, from drill, and -' other minor crimes. By a statute of Edward VI. .' desertion. was made a capital offence, but in this case • also thetrial was to be by jury. There are other statutes of the last-mentioned Monarch, and of Philip and Mary, in which no distinction in this particular is made between the military and the other departments of the State ;, and in the reign of Henry VIJI. it was madelelony, still punishable by the civil law, for a sol. dier to take money and depart the kingdom. If we descend from those early times to the period of the great and glorious victories of the Duke of M.rrlbo rough, we shall cot find that the se victories can be in any degree imputed to the lash. Nay, I have con versed with. many military officers of long standing, • who have assured me that they could remember but a very few ir.s:ancei of punishment in the course of their service previous to the present war.. I have been in , tbrmed by one officer in particular, that he remem bered but a single instance, -and then the individual .was turned out of the army. I remember myself, when a boy, hearing it said, that such a one was a black guard, who had been turned out of such or such a regiment, and if such really was the practice, and that we never hear of it now, we must infer not that :crimes worthy of ' expulsion have decreased as 'the number of our troops have multiplied, but that the lash is now considered as the only instrument by' which discipline can be preserved. But what is the 1 round for the necessity, if such necessity does sub sist, of this practice ? It is nothing more nor less than this—you do not render the condition of a soldier in- 1 Viting ; his emoluments are scanty, and therefore the fear of the lash, and not dread'of expulsion or the call of honour, must be his incentive to the performance of his duty. You do not find it necessary to flog offi cers, they have other incitements, and if you hold forth -more of reward and less of punishment to the brave men placed under their command, you will find that the necessity is not greater in the oae instance than in the other. An Honourable and Learned Gentle 'man on the opposite side of the House (the Judge- Advocate) declared on a late occasion, that in tne space of more than two years there had been but eight sentences passed by General Courts Martial ' l aden in England, and out of these eight sentences but one had been executed, and that by the choice of the individual of whom it had been passed, and who refused to commute it for foreign service. I really am quite-at a loss to know what object the Judge 'Advocate had to serve ky imparting such informa tion, Did he mean to spew thereby that the practice *of flogging was on the decline? • Sir, it has never been,a common thing for flogging to be inflicted by virtue of the sentence of a General• Court Martial i but will the Honourable and Learned Gentleman' 'enumerate the number of sentences passed by Regi. 'mental Courts Maria!, and executed too within the period that has supplied him with a boast as to the lenity of General Courts Martial ? If he will, I have little doubt but that he will be compelled to make a melancholy change of his units to so many thousands. .1 think myself, inconsequence of the numerous con: versations I have had with officers op the sub*e l - justified io mulish% that 'even that bddy of ihtilk, though, from being aceustomed to the pectice of flogging, they have been led to consider it as ne cessary, do yet unanimously agree that it is sadly abused, and that if permitted, tl.' offences for which it might be inflicted should be accurately specified. 4 is.the opinion of General Colburn, that it should never be inflicted but for those offences which, carry , jag with them a character of meanness and infamy, would lead to a punishment of a similar nature in civil life. We have now the opinions of many Offi ,eers on record against this barbarous practice.— Among these, it was first protested against by Major James, in his work entitled " The Soldier's Compa nion," and protested against with eloquence and ter ', your. He has been followed by Sir Robert Wilson, General Stewart, and General Coiburn. All these gallant Officers concur in thinking the punishment of flogging infamous, and adapted to stigmatize the in dividual who suffers it. They say, that such an one rarely holds up his head afterwards, and that. for one whose habits are amended, numbers are rendered more depraved and incorrigible. I have been assu red, moreover, that there have been instances of per sons of acute feelings, who, having incurred by same venial trespass a punishment abhorrent to those feel ings, had, after the lapse of years, when the moment of their disgrace recurred to their memory, wept like chil dren. I put it to the House, whether it be proper to adopt a treatment towards persons engaged in a profession, the basis of which is honour, which is only fit for managing the vilest and most incorrigible animals? Is it proper to subdue that high.toned moral feeling on which we must ultimately depend in the hour of trial ? I would ask, whether the injustice of ill treat , ment be not a thousand fold enhanced by the good conduct of our soldiers, who have so nobly upheld the military renown of our forefathers, and are every day reflecting new splendour on the country which they protect ? Is it possible to reflect with patience on one of these gallant men dying in consequence of the se verity of punishment, without any inquiry whatso ever being made as to the cause ? The Honourable Gentlemen opposite have indeed done their best to justify the continuance of the system, by the intro. duction into the army of a multitude of persons from the hulks ; and could it even be worth while to ob tain an augmentation of the numbers of our army to the amount of two or three hundred persons by such means ? But is it reasonable to thus infect the ranks of our gallant army, and then inflict a punishment which humanity shudders to repress—crimes which bear no proportion to the efforts made to produce them ? Muchlias been said with respect to the prac itice of flogging having been abolished in foreign ser vice; but we need not leave the limits -of our own country, in order to find proofs for the little necessity there subsists for it. An illustrious instance particu larly is to be found in the conduct of his Royal High- 1 ness the Duke of Gloucester. His good sense and humanity had taught him to think that flogging was not necessary to form a soldier ; and having inspired the officers of his regiment with sentiments similar to his own, the consequence has been, that there has not been a punishment in it for the last four years, But this is not the only proof of the plenary success of :he experiment, A battalion of his Royal Highness's regiment is now serving in the Peninsula, and Lord Wellington having been lately driven to the necessity, of inflicting the punishment of death on some indivi dual of his army, when it was thought expedient tt make every other regiment witness the executiog this battalion was specially exempted, Lord Welling. ton conceiving their general conduct to be such as rendered their attendance unnecessary. The Honou rable Barofiet,maintained, that they must know very tittle indeed of mankind, and of the feelings of the army in particular, if they were not convinced of the fact, that it was much easier to lead men than to drive them. The esteem of the soldiery ought to be 'courted by all pcy able means; but that esteem was not to be torced by rigorous treatment and harsh-pu nishment, as might be supposed by vulgar minds, it was to be clitained by the Officers as well as the Go vernment sheaving a consideiation and affection for the men. The principle of Caligula, however, seem ed ta he ailoptect— . _ • a Oderint duin mettent." He bad again brought the degrading and odious practice und:r the consideration of the House; in deed, he conceived that he should not have done, his duty to his constituents and by his country, had he not made a fresh attempt to remove so foul a stigma from the co 1e of our military discipline. He should beg leave to propose, that a clause be inserted in the Mutiny Bill, to abolish the practice of corporal pu nishment, which clause should state the reasons for adopting it, namely, eat the mode of punishment by flogging rendered men infamous, incapacitated them to perform certain civil functions, &c.—[Sir Francis was proceeding, when the Speaker informed him that the question then before the House was, tha►. the Bill should be read a third time ; when that was disposed of, the Honourable Baronet would have an opportu nity of regularly submitting his clause to the conside ration of the House.]—Sir Francis then gave notice that he would move such a clause as he had described. Mr. MANNERS SUTTON observed, that the Honourable Baronet set out with professing, that what he had to say would be rather an appeal to the hearts than to the understandings of Members ; but the whole of his speech had been rather an appeal to the passions than to the understandings of men.— Convinced he was, however, that there was nothing at which our soldiers would more recoil with feelings of indignation, than on being told that they were placed in a state of degradation • that nothing could ever wipe out the stains inflicted by the system of discipline to which they were subject ; and that no rewards were provided for military merit, or for the comfort of veterans. *(Hear, !gar.) There were no terms of any kind that would be too strong for ex pfessing their utter contradiction of any such state ment; and nothing was more calculated to call forth the indignant feelings of the army, than many of the arguments introduced into the speech of the Honour able baronet. (Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman had asserted that no man after receiving the punish. ment of flogging could ever again hold up his head among bis comrades : but this assertion the Honour, able Baronet would find on inquiry to be a grievons misstatement. In various regiments there were many men to be found who had received corporal chastise ment, and who yet had afterwards risen to be non. commissioned officers. The Honourable baronet had charged him (Mr. Sutton) with deluding the House on a formg night,. by a statement which be had made as to the number of times in which this punishment was inflicted in the course of last year ; but if the Honourable Baronet 'had thought proper to be.present on the occasion, and had not taken Op his opinion from mere hearsay, he'would have been spared that assertion ; and the clause which he had now introduced would theta have been better.disposed of, as the House was. in a Commiuee on this very Bill. But the Honourable Baronet, for reasons best known to himself, did not think fit to be in his place on that occasion ; and now, upon the third reading, had'brought forward a clause, which, if adopted, would introduce changes into a great variety of other clauses, which respected the infliction of military pu nishments. What he (Mr. Sutton) had said in the course of the discussion which took place in the Com mittee on the Bill, was shortly this :—After stating the small number of cases in which corporal punish ment was inflicted, he had added, that he for one felt it utterly impossible to abolish altogether the practice of flogging. As far as the case would ad mit, the utmost deference had been shewn to the feelings of many Gentlemen on this subject, by in troducing the discretionary opinion to courts-martial, of confinement instead of corporal punishment. But he had also stated, that the exercise of this option was not in many cases practicable on foreign service, where the means of confinement were not at hand. —The Honourable Baronet had, however, grossly exaggerated the. number of fl iggings which took place at home ; and he (Mr. Sutton) still remained of opinion, notwithstanding all his arguments, that, till an adequate substitute could be obtained, the discretionary power of inflicting corporal punishment might be safely left with Courts-martial. The Ho nourable Ba'ronet had observed, that flogging might now be reckoned necessary from the badness of some men lately introduced into the army : but had he been present at the discusion which took place on that subject, he would have learned, that no such bad men had been introduced, in fact. He had also asserted, that a man in 'consequence of being flogged incurred certain civil incapacities, and had referred to Mr. Justice Blackstone, in support of this doctrine. Now, he (Mr. Sutton) had never heard of any such civil incapacity, and believed the doctrine, though so much dwelt upon by the Hon. Baronet, to be to tally unfounded. Upon the whole, the clause, when proposed, should have his decided negative. Mr. ABERCROMBY said, that though an advo cate for free discussion in general, he thought if there WAS any one subject to be approached with caution, it was that now before the ljouse. In his opinion, much was done by the clause of +est year towards the abolition of flogging ; and perhaps, by gradually giving a higher tone to the feelings of the army, the practice might, at no distant period, be abolished altogether. Sir G. WARRENDER wished to set the Honour- I able Baronet right as to one or two points in which I he seemed to be in error. The Honourable Baronet had asserted that military rewards were not conferred upon our soldiers : but had lie forgot the fact, that ' atter the battles of Busaco and Albuera, Lord Wel ' lington had desired every regiment engaged to send in a list of its most meritorious serjeants, who were promoted to commissions on the spot ! Even in l'the small regiment of militia which he (Sir G. War- Irender) had the honour to command, he knew three instances of men who had been in the ranks, who after ! wards obtained commissions in the line. The Hon. 'Baronet had talked of the practice in foreign armies ; I but, besides the inestimable advantages of our system 1 of Courts-martial, it was the distinguishing charac teristic of the Brit sh army, that no officer could raise his hand and strike a private, without being' liable to be cashiered ; while it was generally known, that in the French army the soldiers were beaten most unrritt cifully by their officers. Mr. CHARLES ADAMS' argued generally against the clause, In allusion to what had fatten the other night, from an Hon. and Learned Gentle man, (Mr. Broogham), he wished to say. that Mr. Cobbett did not deserve the praise bestowed upon him. He did not know what might have been the military education of Mr. cobbett, but he was in• dined to imagine, that, if tile discipline of the lash bad been prevalent where hiliad served, that person might have been afterwards saved from another spe ties of punishment. He did nct impute any bad mo tives to the Honourable Baronet in bringing for ward this motion, and it could not be a love of po pularity certainly, for he had already a large stock of that material on his hands : whatever were his mo tives, he was convinced, however, that this discus sion must do mischief, because it tended to raise hopes in the minds of the soldiers which could not be realised. General LOFTUS spoke briefly against the clause. Captain BENNET agreed with the arguments, and would support the motion of -the Hon. Baronet. From the tone and manner assumed by the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Manners Sutton), it would. almost seem, that the question was not for the destruction of an evil, but for the continuance of a ' blessing in the army. The system of punishment against which the clause was levelled, was one which was already abandoned in principle by many great military characters ; and he should not, theretore, take any abstract views of it. He did not either conceive it necessary to trace this mode of punish. went to its origin, although it might not be amiss to ! say, that it was first introduced here by King Wil liam amongst his Dutch troops : it was sufficient for the House to know that it now existed in England alone : that it was not practised in France, nor in the military states of Germany ; and that so far from corporal punishment being upheld in foreign armies, an officer would be likely to tall a sacrifice to the in. ' dignation of the soldiery, if he dared to raise his hand against a person in the ranks. He believed, contrary . to what was said by other Gentlemen, that the dis cussions on this subject were productive of great good. - .Was it not in consequence of them, that Courts-mar l. tial were now sworn—that the evidence before them was obliged to be given on oath--and that the dis cretionary power of commuting punishment wa.s in existence? He thought that this punishment degraded 'the soldier, and prevented the peasant from enlisting . lit the army. Lord PALMERSTON was glad to see that the discussions on this subject had been productive, at least, of one effect ; it was now, in fact, avowed oti all sides of the House, with scarcely any exceptions, that the abolition of the species of punishment under consideration was r it e impracticable. The lion. L a o n rd eo P u a l : met h - a: Tin ß dl it t h an t ham; Hon.but Gifenhtelem( 'Baronet had spoken i n just terms of praise of the ni b , ton) knew any thing of that high character; 1 mcolrYvinocfedMthna‘‘t•le o at beard nothing with more indignati • on, than the H nourable Baronet's comparison this night, of th e s ol. diers of England to negro slaves—( Ikar 1 14 ,,,f roo k Mr. Perceval). Nothing could have bee n pngnant to his feelings, than to hear the Honourable. Baronet describe the army, as the most degraded a mut wretched of human beings. The whol e o f t Hon. Baronet's speech was made up of a ser i es of contradictions—every sentence, in fact, seem e d to be filled with propositions hostile to each other ; suc h , for instance, as saying in one breath, that the coadi. Lion of our alaip was most degraded—and in the next, that this degraded army perf orme d the met glorious exploits. He did not think i t f a i r to ark: from analogy against this mode of punishment. ": foreign armies, where corporal pu n i s h ment was no t 4 systecnotic, there existed what was still more de. grading to men—a , system of wanton and capricious ill-usage. The Honourable Baronet had said, that in speaking on this subject, he, like the author whom he quoted, would not trust himself to redo& That was, in his opinion, a very good reason why th e House should not adopt his clause. He hoped the House would never consent to the abolition of thi s punishment, until an efficacious substitute should be proposed for it. Again, the Honourable Baronet had said, that all was done by punishment, and not hi ng by reward, in our army. He begged leave to differ from the Honourable Baronet totally on this point; and, indeed, the Honourable Baronet had shewa himself entirely misinformed upon it. After the bat. tl.• of Busaco, for instance, he had to tell the H on . 13arosiet, that ten Ensigns' Commissions were sent out by the C )mmander-in-Chief to be at the d.srool of Lori NVellington, for the reward of the Nonoom. missioned Officers n ho had particularly distingui s h e d themselves. Was this doing every thing by moo. ment, ani if e i ifluence of fear ? The Noble Lo r d concluded his svech by arguing on the adequacy o Chelsea Hospital to support those who had grown oil in the service of their country. Mr. W. SMITH could not give his vote mai* the Honourable Baronet's clause without stating Is s reasons for so doing. He maintained, th at the eve. to-be-lamented Mr. Windham was a great benefatar to the army ; and he also thought that it was moo indebted to the Honourable Baronet for bringingtho discussion forward so often ; yet, at the same um, he was compelled to acknowledge, that the mode in which the Honourable Baronet treated the subject this night met with his disapprobation. Hethottght that a discussion of this nature should be conducted in the calmest and most rational manner, and that every means should be taken to avoid any thing that might tend to inflame. Ho complained of the clause being brought forward on the third dating title Bill ; if it was now adopted it might make the whole Bill ineffectual ; whereos it it had been int *toed ia the Committee, precautions might hav: two takes to prevent such an evil. He had no doubt but that they would all live to see this punishment dispensed with, and he thought that of the probability of this event, the abolition of the slave trade was an ample illustration. In almost every case theory corrected practice ; for, if we were to trust to the opinions of practical men alone, we would scarcely ever have the grossest abuses corrected. He had heard from distinguished officer (a Member of that House), dig I imprisonment was attended with better effect thee flogging ; and, with respect to tile influence this pis nishment had upon the character of the men, le stated that a Highlander was never known to boll up his head after receiving it. He was not sure tie the army could be governed without the influeaced fear ; but he was convinced that by abolishinglief ging by degrees the character of the army yea become at last such as to sender it unnecessary. Bt thought that it was a very great hardship to subject the Local Militia to this punishment, as it might le injurious to the sherds ut the peasantry of the cow try, he trusted that it would never be adopted. General TA ItLETON expressed his latentiou giving his entire support to the code of discipline it its present form. He looked upon the Honuurabk Baronet's motives as puie, but tie thought his argo menu very errone. us. It was true that the Officer were not flogged, but they owed the exemption 1: their education : soldiers were punished fur offence which education prevented, such as for beastly druo kenness, which led to the commission of every crime. As it appeared, that through our existing system d discipline we had attained our present height of gboo he did not see a reason for making any innovaticoo With regard to rewards, he stated, that the promo tion of a private did not end in an Ensign's Coulluto sion ; instances had occurred of their attaining the highest rank in the army, as was the case with a Pe neral Officer who died the other day, and who leh behind him a fortune of ,080,000. lie would maio tail, that the soldiers of the British Army were better oder paid, and in a more elevatedsituaticuo than an soldiers in the world. It was stated, that she frock discipline, and the French mode of punishments we/ superior to curs ; he would not commute any dig Boca for any tiling French, and he would satodut our soldiers were better than theirs, and not aka eu meet them on any plain, or any place. lie alluded to the Speech of an Hon. and Learned Gallium!! (Mr. Brougham) on a former night, in whioLa stated, that General Money and Sir Robert W r rii perfectly agreed with him in opinion. He (oe etto fico Tarleton) stated, that he had received al koori General Money, an extract from ohich he leave to read to the House. It. was in sae sl ` t " that having seen in the Papers that his Stair. mentioned in the House, as agreeing in %hi • • professed against corporal punishment, he • /0 state, that although he desired its aboldoot was convinced that it could not be 'clone without ring the discipline of the army."—(Hooralt! mg ' The gallant General then concluded with , he wculd vote against the Motion. , • sir SAMUEL- ROMILLY felt it hirduto'.l post the Motion, though he would not pledge to at:log all the opinions advanced in support I The tubjoct, he owned, was difficult ; but hew prised how any one could imagine that t!foT grace, and ignominy were not the natorat , quences of that mode of punishment. !WA to be lamented that there should he . agr, continue such a mode of punishimet gm ill which it was /Toper to of b repr , Met ; sits 00 1 ( 44 stab soul tiros the tend Cap the the ceR that the the feri He bta thy, thel 401s1 110 1 elf wre 40e; rem • emu fsa ty faci I till • rad lett be • dis 4 pu , act 'ha dis 4 ene eve ten Inc ter oPi the 1 iti Itir the no, t, .coi on die . pu an mi tb. ain be of Ii fo p 1 ! el IV ft CI - C, I a • ~ 1 1 I