The Sun. — London, England, 1827-03-13 00:00:00

// V <> ,, ;,..fV.W-90 . \ • ..--,,... --vi ~, . -_,- ~,- t , „.!.-._ Q' -if ••-,,,,,, • , i --, • 1. - - , :.;--, 4,,, , . 1 .. ' ---- 11 - '- - (.- lievi , :,:i _•,:i t - , .....-, •-," V-, , I- , ,-.- : „ .- ;s---' • an not fl og at a ll, and WO 1 t 6 er a. „ Ewe were sought by flogging wo uld le better attain - Id by appealin g t o men's reason rather than to their backs. . . . iAST. INDIA HOUSE, FEB. 28, 1827. THE COURTof DIRECTORS o f t h e U NITED COMPANY of MERCHANTS of ENGLAND Trad ing to the EAST INDIES, do hereby give Notice, That a SPECIAL GENERAL COURT of the said COM PANY, will be held at their House in Leadenhall-street, on WxnlsrsnAy, the 14th MARCH Next, at Eleven o'Clock in the Forenoon, at the desire of Nine Proprietors, agreeably to the fol lowing Letter, viz. : To the Honourable the Court of Diroetors of the East India Company. " Honourabl e Si rs --We, the undersign e d Proprietors of East India Stock, tieing duly qualified, request you will convene a Ge neral Court of Proprietors, for the purpose of considering the fol lowing propositions :--To inquire whether, in the present state of the Honourable Company's Empire in the East, the condition of the Naval Force, called the Bombay Marine, is such as the welfare of the country, and the interests. of the Honourable Company, _demand. "We are, Honourable Sirs, " Your most obedient humble Servants, " JOSEPH HUME, " JAMES PATERSON, " JOHN ADDINELL, " LEICESTER STANHOPE, " W. MAXFIELD, " JN. BORTHWICK GILCHRIST, " W. MASON, " JOHN LEDGER, " WM. THORNTON. JOSEPH DART, Secretary. " Peb. 22, 1827." EAST INDIA HOUSE. FEB. 14, 1827. THE C OURT ofDIRECTOR S ofthe UNITED COMPANY of MERCHANTS of ENGLAND Trad ing• to the EAST INDIES, do hereby give Notice, _ Th at the C ourt will be ready to receive Proposals, i n wr i t i ng, an or before Wednesday, the 14th March next, from the wa, o f good, sound, ,and substantial SHIPS of the burthen f rom 400 t o 65 0 tons reg i stere d measurement , spec ifyi ng t h e !ate . of:Fr e i g h t at which they may be willing to let such Ships zor One Voyre to and from Bengal. T▪ hat the Court will also be ready to receive Proposals, in writ 2g, nu or before the said Wednesday, the 14th March next, from `ue Owner or O wners of good, soun d , an d su b stant i a l Copper- b ot- L °la la SHIPS, of the burther of from 550 to 650 tons regis *vrad m easurement, specifying the rate of freight at which they mm be y f illi n f mn , g to let such Ships for one Voyage to China, and 'ulna to Qnebec in North America, at which port they Will be discharged from the Company's Service. That the Court will also be ready to receive Proposals in "g , nn or before the said Wednesday, the 14th March a l t, from th e O wner or O wners o f goo d, sound, and substan "4l %Per-bott ome d Ships, of the burthen of from 750 to SOO tons registered measurement, specifying the rate of freight at Which they may be willing to let such Ships for one Voyage to 4 ! and from - China to Halifax in Nova Scotia , at which P they will be discharged front the Company's Service. The Tenders, with the words " Ship Tender" on the cover, • be severally sealed and left with the S ecretary , at t hi s „ °44 e, at or b e f ore T we l ve o 'Cl oc k a t noon, on the said Wed the 14th of March, beyond which hour the Court Vilna receive any Tenders. JOSEPH DART, Secretary. sl :The Particulars of the Terms and Conditions upon which the sL. -- " 134 will be respectively employed, may be had upon applica at the Office of the Clerk to the Committee of Shipping, at this House, on or after Saturday next, the 17th inst. METROPOLIS ROADS. NOTICE is hereby Given, that the GENERAL ANNUAL MEETING of the COMMISSIONERS of the ,I,WIIROPOLIS TURNPIKE ROADS, NORTH of the te l ! I II MES) will be held at the Commissioners' O ffi ce, No. 22, n't ehill-Place, on FRIDAY, the 6th day of April next, at One o , n' in the afternoon precisely. By Order of the Commissioners, J. L. PANTER, Chief Clerk. ketropolis Roads Office, 'Whitehall-place, March 12, 1827. TITLE FOR ORDERS. AGENTLEMAN, who has taken his Degree in one of the Universities, and who, being qualified in all other reepeoto, is desirous of having a TITLE, on which he may be "tlained to HOLY ORDERS, may, if all circumstances should be found mutually agreeable, obtain his object by a CURACY in tretired* Parish, in a county about an hundred miles north of °lldori,i-by• applying through letters, post-paid, directed to C. H., sun Office, Strand, London. THE QUARTERLY REVIEW, No. LXX. was published YESTERDAY. This Day were published, price 30s. PARLIAMENTARY ABSTRACTS; con ,rwa utaining the Substance of all important Papers laid before the Ruses of Parliament in the Session of 1826. TAE Also, price 7s. 6d. A_ P ARLIAMENTARY REVIEW, for the same Session. t a i i i7, price 25 5 . Th e PARLIAMENTARY HISTORY, con psiathe Debates of the Session, carefully arrange d under a pp ro- Read s . '=tedfor Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, and Green. Just published, price 6d. 1 1111 E OBJECTS, ADVANTAGES, and PLEASURES of SCIENCE. airicourse introductory to a Series of Treatises, to be Zo e . '" under the su rintendance and management of the fur r y for Pe the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, and intended to A LIBRARY OF USEFUL KNOWLEDGE. easi,t* pl ainese treatises it will be endeavoured to convey in the est, and most familiar manner, and at the same time the they ari n „ ea P e lt possible form, a full and practical knowledge . of sciences and useful arts; including the Histories of A f e an t / of Eminent Individuals. 441 es of' t h e of the plan of this work, comprising also the t ul i a b e b`L' e Society, and the names of the present Committee, '''' 4( hvitC,-, 2 on application through any Bookseller, to Messrs. ""......:,ZZadock, and Joy, London. I'A INTINGS OF THE OLD MASTE RS. To BE SOLD BY AUCTION, At a l , A By Mr. WILLIAMS, -4"6ll ‘lart, Bartholomew-lane, on WkE:YNESDAY NEXT, A. 1 7 • MARCH 14, at Twelve o'Cloc I ,•,,ALIJABLE COLLECTION of PIC RIVA....__ItES, chiefly of the Old Schools ; and afewan- Cie and ENGRAVINGS, the property of a Amobrought from his Residence in the Country. q imens of the f o g! the Paintings will be found some capital ~..pec 1 4.:C0k %Thi n g "ainent Masters, viz. : ,-, val euino 41° Spagnoletti uttereino Van Dyck Tftl ers Ostade ' lO ka rat ; Berkheyden ntrobraudt Metzu Jan s teen I S r e e h rn alk et e mart anen A. V an de Velde To be Rdkor tad at th "d on Y e te Morning of Ala of lkl a r. . Williams , Thr' Steenwick Canaletti Wouvernaans Storck Breughel Hogarth Wynants Decker, &c. &c. f Sale, and Catalogues ognior ton-street. . --__ EST ATE Or RUNTFIELD, INCLUDIN—GB.A.ITLAIV, IN LANA RKSHIRE, Withi n Gte tnws s Tit tut)Ay sale_ Pon SALE, m°llu, Prince's -street, TlllSVerydesirabl P o'clock. Edinburgh, upon ith May next, at Two ...., ~ C R l'- , ":/ ..• of excellent ARA.be r°4 and regularly subdivided, and abou, _. LE LAND, all enc s o rri d r Derty cOntair .e 2 . ,SA RE, and under very Thriving pi anta ' ti Z same tent of PA 40 years old. There is an excellent Afalrt!t of which is nearlyfor the accommodation of a large family, with Kitcher GrLuse', fitf Offices on the Farm of Rnttield; and the vicinity of tahrden and rt to Lanark, Biggar, cart.iwath, Skirling, and Linton, Nx e,ll :i r e o li pe are y all market towns, having annual fairs, affords opportunit for the ready sale or pur chase of every al tick of a,griculttral produce or stock. t r:rhe whole Lands were in 1809 let on Lease at 290/. hut la . e tte:neartilrless rent on account of the ground taken off by the • derate ; 6opci.• etor for Planting. The public burdens are orparochiale ands of Huntfield pay neither Cess nor any to burdens - Feu duty of 31. Scots, perio r . , vXcept a n annual The prohatt it possession of the Proprietor, under the hi g h e ,, t r- Ba Y te or present in For further p rcecuulltivation. Claud Russell, and Thomas Alaymfieid, ur a s. i Aesfs, apply to Claud Great King -street ; or to Hugh matal'ueen, vv.sLoncloitanctsr,vat Ding-street. Edinburgh. Edinburgh, t3tl Feb*. 1527, /•' ....--.."14111 _, ,,, f 2 1 44 1 , . , -,) ' :.• No. 10,766. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS..-MARCH 12. CATHOLICS. Earl FITZWILLIAM presented petitions from the Roman Catholic Inhabitants of Skibbereen, in the County of Cork; of the County of Leitrim ; and of two parishes in the same County, praying their Lordships to relieve them from the disabi lities under which they labour. Lord ROLLE presented a petition, praying that no further concession might be granted to the Catholics, from Charl ton, in" Somersetshire. _ _ _ Similar petitions were presented by the Bishop of Exeter, from the Borough of Plymmith ; and from the Parish of St. David's, in the City of Exeter, by the Bishop of Durham ; from the Sub- Dean and Clergy of the Diocese of Durham ; and a second peti tion from some other persons of his Diocese; by the Earl of West morland, from Kendal and the adjoining parishes in Westmorland —by the Lord Chancellor, from the 'Mayor and Corporation of Beverley,, Yorkshire; and several from parishes in different parts of Ireland. Lofil CALEDON preseiitea:petitions in favour of the Catholics from several parishes in the comity of Monaghan. Similar petitions were presented by Lord Crifden;Trom serer} parishes in Kilkenny, from the town and county of Carlo*, and several other parts of Ireland ; by the Duke of Leinster, from the parishes of St. Michael's and St. John's, Dublin ; and from seve ral parishes in the counties of Meath and Kildare ; and by the Earl of Rosslyn, from a parish in the county of Tyrone. The Bishop of BATH and WELLS presented a petition against the Catholics, from the Archdeacon and Clergy of the-diocese of Bath and Wells. - The Earl of WINCHELSEA gave notice that he should present a petition against granting further concessions to the Catholics, on Friday next, and that he should take that op portunity of making a few observations on the subject. Earl RODEN, in the absence of his Noble Friend Lord Farnham, presented a petition against the Catholics from the Royal Corporation of Shoemakers of the city of Dublin. His Lordship added that he had a number of similar petitions to pre sent, but that lie would take the opportunity of doing it on Fri.. day, and would, like his Noble Friend the Earl of Winchelsea, make some observations on their prayer. Lord KING called the attention of their Lord ships to some petitions he had to present, uttering the cry of dis tress from the distressed Catholics of Ireland. Some of them came from remote districts of that country, but they contained sentiments and opinions he should be heartily glad to find in peti tions drawn up by persons who had a reputation for more learn ing than the inhabitants of these remote districts. He was bound to present the petitions, having been requested to do so, but if he were to use his own discretion, he would rather throw them into the fire. It was of no use whatever to lay them on their Lordships' table. There was a determination formed not to take the case of the Catholics into consideration. This aggrieved part of his Majesty's subjects was still to be aggrieved. At a former time there were Counsellors who entered into the Council Chamber and yet would give no counsel, and now there were Legislators who refused to legislate, and who even refused to take the pro priety of legislating into consideration. Toryism was now tri umphant at Westminster. It had long been triumphant in the last Reign ; it had lost us America ; and might now lose us a part of the King's Dominions, even more important than America. Toryism, however, was popular only at Westminster ; and every where else was out of favour. It was not a marketable commo dity in any other part of the globe. It was like some kinds of French wine, that were exquisite on the spot where they were made, but which would not bear transportation, and which lost all their flavour when sent abroad. The object of the petitioners was, to have the Corporations of Ireland thrown open to them, which contained 2,300 offices, from which the petitioners were ex cluded. In the Corporation of Dublin, there were upwards of two hundred more such offices, making an aggregate of upwards of two thousand five hundred in Ireland, which the Catholics were prohibited from filling. His Lordship concluded by presenting a petition from certain Catholics in Ireland, praying that their Lordships would remove the Laws which disqualified the Catholics to hold office in the Corporations ; and by repeating that he thought presenting the petition of no use ; that it would be better to throw it into the fire ; and that there seems to be a determination not to do justice to Ireland. The Marquis of SALISBURY complained (as we understood), that such imputations should be cast on their Lord ships, when the Noble Marquis, whom he did not then see in his Place, had given notice of a motion on the subject, and had with drawn it from considering the matter. It would be better before the Noble Baron had made such remarks, that he, or some of his friends, should submit a regular motion to their Lordships, and then it would be seen whether or not they would take the case of the Catholics into their consideration. The Duke of LEINSTER presented a petition from the Noblemen, Gentry, and Merchants of Dublin, praying their Lordships to take the Corporation Laws into their coraider- CORN LAWS. ation. Lord REDESDALE presented a petition from the Owners and Occupiers of Land in the vicinity of Exeter, praying that their Lordships would make no alteration in the Corn Laws. Similar petitions were presented by Lord Rolle, from a parish in Devonshire, and by the Earl of Roseberry from the Agricul tural Society of the County of Norfolk, also praying their Lord, ships to restore the Winchester measure. Lord KING observed that he did not mind what other things were estimated in Winchester measure, but ke hoped Bishoprics would never be so estimated. Lord TEYNHAM presented petitions from the Hundreds of Dover, and of Smarden, in Kent, and from the Hundred of Banbury, Norfolk, against any alteration in the Corn Laws. His Lordship, at the same time, moved for a return of all the sheep and lambs alive, exported from all the ports of the United Kingdom, to the Co n ti nent o f E urope , f or t h e last two years.—Ordered. The Earl of DARNLEY presented a petition from the county of Meath, against any alteration in the Corn Laws ; Lord Maynard presented two similar petitions from Hundreds in Essex ; and Lord Kenyon one, from a Hundred in Flintshire. NAVIGATION LAWS. The Earl of ABERDEEN presented a petition from the Merchants and Shipowners of Aberdeen, praying their Lordships to take the present state of the Navigation Laws into their consideration. Lord ELLENBOROUGH rose to move for cer tain papers connected with this subject; viz. Returns of the number of ships, with the amount of their tonnage, and numbers of men, which sailed out of the ports of the United Kingdom, fur the different ports of the Baltic, and of the North of Europe, for the last ten years.—Ordered. A Person from the Treasury presented at the Bar the Ac counts of the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, up to 1827. Mr. Joyce, from the Board of Trade, presented Accounts of the Averc.ge Price of Grain, in the Home Market, from the year 1823 to 1526.—Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 12. DOVER ELECTION. Sir C. COLE brought up the Report of the Com mittee appointed to inquire into the merits of the Dover Election Petition. The Committee confirmed the re t urn o f Charles Pow lett Thompson, as the sitting Member, but declared the opposition not to be frivolous or vexatious. CORN LAWS. Sir C. BURRELL presented a petition from the Hundred of Cuckfield and Fisherley, in Str:sex, praying for pro tection to the Landed Interest. Mr. CARTWRIGHT presented a similar petition from the County of Northampton. FEES OF OFFICERS ON PRIVATE BILLS. Mr. DICKENSON presented a petition from the Trustees of a Road (the name of which we could not learn) coin plaining of the enormous amount of Fees required by the Officers TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH 1827. . ._ ... . . . .. . , gi" •7,--'• '4 '4, 0 U - - , ' • ' ..- \ '''-•'-• ~,..: , ' '-''',...,,':,:49.44/..,"''' 0 _,.._ ~,, ~ --- -.• •. • , ,- C.,,:-:,"!. • --• ..,,.--,, , . • c -, ... * 1161 - V , NA 4"' - ~. , .-,--- - - -0 -- r'i tlz,v if i• - •,.', 11 "-1- T.d. -.... •...z,..c7,4,1,,, - ....• ~,,, ~,,.., 4 ,.. • ~A; I , ' 4 ::',3 1 \ .• IllaeloW l ekt , i , "Ntre ,, lr' llll,l l , 7l ''Ult, t'.;':, :, i '.'44.,,t.1it , " ~ ,a • • 0 lag' I. T of the House upon the passing of a Private Bill, and praying some examination into the subject. NAVIGATION LAWS. Mr. W. J. POWLETT presented a petition from the Shipowners of Sunderland, complaining of the effect of the present Navigation Laws. Mr. HART DAVIS presented a similar petition from the Shipowners of Bristol. STATE OF IRELAND. Mr. SPRING RICE gave notice of his intention to bring under the consideration of the House, on the 27th of March, the present state of the Government of Ireland. The same Hon. MEMBER moved for a Return of the Names of all those who had been appointed to the office of Lord Lieutenants or Lord Justice of Ireland, since the time of the Union, with the dates of their appointments.--Ordered. IRISH VESTRIES AND CHURCH RATES. Mr. S. RICE presented 4. petition from the Roman Catholic Inhabitants of Paiigh of Denasw, complaining of the levy ing of the Irish Church Rate. Mr. AGAR ELLIS presented: a petition fr.om the Roman Catholic Inhabitants of the Town. of Naas, id Kilaffe, complaining of the Parochial Vestries. MACHINERY. Mr. Alderman WOOD presented a petition from the Operative Sawyers of South Shields, complaining of the use of Machinery. After a few words from Mr. SYKES and Mr. WAIBURTON, the petition was ordered to be printed. CORN LAWS. General GASCOYNE presented a petition from the Inhabitants of Liverpool, praying for a Repeal of the Corn Laws, and the Abolition of Places and Pensions. Sir -JOHN POLLEN presented a petition from the Owners and Occupiers of Land in the vicinity of Andover, against the Importation of Foreign Grain. Mr. CURT E IS presented petitions from York shire, and from the Agricultural Society of Norfolk, against any Alteration of the Corn Laws.—Ordered to be printed. Sir THOMAS I:ETHBRIDGE presented a pe tition from IL Williams, of Devon, praying for certain Altera tions in the Corn Laws.—The petition, which was ordered to be printed, suggested the alterations which the petitioner deemed re. quisite. MR. O'CONNELL AND MR. SHEEHAN. Mr. H. GRATTAN presented petitions from the I , Parishes of St. Luke, St. Paul, in Dublin, and certain Parishes in the County of Westmeath, praying for Equal Laws. The prayer of the petition for equal laws induced him to call the attention of the House to a matter which had lately occurred in Dublin. A violent assault was lately committed on a gentleman, Mr. O'Connell, well known in Ireland and in this country. This as sault was committed by a person connected with a portion of the licentious press in Dublin, which was remarkable for vili fying the King's Representative in Ireland, the King's Attor ney-General, and other officers connected with his Majesty's Government in Ireland. This person (Mr: Sheehan) was tried before the Recorder of Dublin, and sentenced to what the Re corder termed a mitigated punishment, imprisonment for three months. However, his Majesty's Ministers thought proper to advise that he should be let out after an imprisonment of only fourteen days, and to add to the irritation which this act on the part of Ministers must create in Ireland, the order for his release went over at the very time that the House was dis cussing the measure of such vital importance to ,that country-- the Catholic Question. It had been said on the pther side of the House, " that a triumph should not be given to either party—(Hear, hear.)"—He wished the House to compare the professions of Ministers with their actions. The conduct to which he called the attention of the House, was not a favourable specimen of their acts being conformable to their declaration—of their disposition to govern Ireland by what the petitions prayed for—equal Laws.. The measure, he must say, in the present cir cumstances of Ireland, was most injudicious, irritating, and ill advised. The Petitions were then brought up. None of the Ministers were present whilst the Hon. Member was addressing the House on this subject. It was then nearly half-past five o'clock. Mr. J. GRATTAN presented a petition from cer tain Persons connected with the Linen Trade in Ireland, praying for an Encouragement of the Growth of Flax, and for the appoint ment of a well-established Linen Board in Ireland. Mr. MABERLY thought the Linen Board had been altogether abolished. It was a Board, in his opinion, highly injurious and prejudicial to the fair interests of the linen trade, and he understood that there was no further charge to be made for the maintainance of such a Board. Mr. 'MAXWELL presented a petition from Bother-Glen, pra*g for alteration in the existing Corn Laws. Mr. F. BUXTON moved for the Report made by Colonel Moody and other Commissioners, respecting the state of the Slaves condemned to the Crown in his Majesty's Colonies. Sir G. CLERK obtained leave to bring in a Bill for Regulating the Weekly Payment of Widows' Pensions. MUTINY BILL. Bill M beingt . Y L movedEC E b y S L r f o r E d R p - a c m o e l: s t t o h n e: third to e r x e p a r d es i s ng his of this re g ret,rose that the reflections of three nights upon his pillow did not induce the Noble Lord to alter the sentiments he entertained respecting corporal punishment, in the army, when this subject (on Friday) was last under their consideration. The continuance of corporal punishment was a proof how men, by habit, became reconciled to things the most loathsome, and how powerful was the influence of custom in sanctioning the greatest abuses. If it were proposed to institute corporal punishments in the Army, now, for the first time, the proposition would be received, he was satisfied, by indignation by the House and the country; and he was at a loss to know why that practice, the commencement of which they would not now sanction, should any longer be continued.— (Hear, hear.). It could not now be defended on the ground of necessity ; that there was no necessity for such a practice was shown by its not being introduced into the armies on the Conti nent ; it was further shown by its diminished use in our own army, and by its not being at all prevalent in our Volunteer Corps, which were by no means composed of very manageable stuff.—(Hear, hear.) Neither was this practice to be defended on the ground of expediency, either legal or moral. That it was not required by legal expediency, he would appeal to the Secre tary of State for the Home Department ; and he would appeal to tie good sense and good feeling of the House that moral expe diency did not require it. If any Gentleman entertained a doubt as to the propriety of continuing this odious practice, he hoped he would throw that doubt in favour of humanity, of justice, and christianity. Aiding in relaxing the cruel and unnecessary seve rity of corporal punishment in the army, the continuance of which was a stain upon the English character. It was his intention to move a clause restricting and limiting the power of inflicting cor poral punishment in the army. Mr. J. SMITH said, that having, in the course of the last summer, resided for three weeks in a large commer cial town in France lie had availed himself of the opportunity to ascertain, by minute investigation, the means by which order and discipline were maintained among a body of five thousand French troops who were quartered them It was well known that the French soldiers were not punished by blows; and that to inflict or to receive a blow in the French army was considered equally disgrace ful. The punishments which were substituted for corporal punish ment, he found to be confinement, hard labour, and privation. A remarkable fact had come to his knowledge, which he would take leave to st a t e t o th e House. In a conversation which he had with an individual who was the Governor of an extensive gaol in this country, with respect to the effect of corporal punishment inflicted upon culprits convicted at the Quarter Sessions, he understood that the greater part of those on whom this disgraceful punishment was inflicted came into the gaol again before' the expiration of a twelvemonth ! It was thus proved that this punishment did not diminish crime, and in his opinion it rather promoted it, as those who had been once disgraced by its infliction were ever afterwards unable to obtain honest employment. They who contended that the dis cipline of the British army could not be maintained without an occasional resort to this punishment, were not entitled to treat the opinions of those who differed from them with contempt until they had tried the experiment. lie was well acquainted with a ' - 1 ' .‘" --:: ','• -: - +lf , ":•;:t i ..: ~,,, j -- ,',. ... ~ .., '.: .11.-- Wl***ftarait-- PRICE 7D. Gallant Officer,, who had served his country in every quarter of the world. This Gentleman bad a great dislike to corporal punishment. During the period of two years that he had about 150 dragoons under his command, no corporal punishment had occurred, although he had maintained the strictest discipline by various plans which he (Mr. Smith) was not competent to detail. One soldier, however, having been repeatedly guilty of drunken ness, was at length ordered to the halberds. On the day on which the punishment was to be inflicted, a number of his comrades presented a petition to their commanding officer, representing that they all felt proud of having been two years in the corps without the occurrence of any corporal punishment, and that they should acutely feel the disgrace of its infliction; and pray ing that the soldier might be pardoned once more. lie was par doned, and erred no more. It was evident that this officer had imparted to his men a sense of honour, much better calculated to preserve order and good conduct, than any disgraceful punish ment could be. _ _ _ _ ----- Mr. HUME requested the Noble Secretary at War would state by what Act of Parliament, or by what Article of the Articles of War a Staff Officer on half-pny, in the situation of-Col. Arthur, was empowered to take the command on a foreign statiost froth . the officer actually in command?- Lord PALMERSTON- said, that the second sec tion pf the last tZittigle of -Avar-,atated, " that any officer who dis obeyed the command of his superioi officer should suffer the pu nishment of death, or such other punishment as a court-martial might order to be inflicted on him." A half-pay officer was ca pable of holding a local commission which gave him the authority to which the Hon. Member adverted : and such commission Col. Arthur had received from Gen. Fuller. Mr. HUME asked by what authority Gen. Fuller gave Col. Arthur such authority ? By Act of Parliament it was illegal thus to supersede the King's Sign Manna]. Why was not the commission registered? Lord PALMERSTON replied, that General Fuller granted the authority in question by virtue of the general authority which was vested in General Officers so situated, for the public good. The Commission did not supersede the officer ac tually holding the command; but only gave local rank and autho rity. When recognized by the King it then became valid. As to the non-registry of the Commission, it was only the Reg mental Commissions, giving permanent rank, which were so registered. Lord NUGENT, adverting to the question of military flogging, observed that the only matter at issue between those who differed in opinion upon the subject seemed to be the practicability of finding some adequate substitute. Unless he had been greatly misinformed, a correspondence took place about eleven years ago between the Lieutenant-Governor of Gibraltar, Sir Alexander Don, and the Deputy Inspector of Hospitals in . that garrison ; since which the punishment of flogging had been en tirely discontinued there. He begged to ask the Noble Lord whether there was any objection to the production of that Cor respondence, and of the General Order that had been framed on it? Lord PALMERSTON said, that as he was not aware of the existence of any such Correspondence, he could not say whether, if it did exist, there would be any objection to its production. Lord NUGENT requested the Noble Lord would have the goodness to inform him in what office it was probable that a Copy of the Correspondence might be found. Lord PALMERSTON replied, that it was pos sible the Correspondence had never been sent home. If it had, he conceived that it would be found in the Office of the Com mander-in-Chief. • Mr. HOBHOUSE, although he allowed that it would not be so good a plan as abolishing corporal punishment altogether, yet recommended making it indispensible •that the members of a Court Martial should he unanimous with respect to the expediency of its infliction. It had been said, that in that case some factious subaltern'might oppose it in order to curry fa vour with the soldiers. With submission, the same officer would not sit on all Courts Martial ; and if he wished to curry favour with the soldiers he might do it at present by declaring his dis approbation of the punishment. If it were requisite that twelve Jurymen should be unanimous before a civil individual could be pronounced guilty of . any offence with which he might be charged, surely it was not too much to declare that five Officers should be unanimous before they proceeded to inflict on a fellow subject so horrid and disgusting a punishment. This, however, would be only a palliative. The best plan would be, to root out the evil altogether. All that he could hear, by way of ar gument, in its defence, was, that it ought to be so, because it ought to be so. No argument whatever was adduced in favour of the existing practice. In former days, it was declared that the hors id punishment of picketting could not be dispensed with in the army. At last, it was found out that men could be made good soldiers without the apprehension of this dreadful punishment; and it was abolished. It had been admitted, that in some regiments the same men were so repeatedly flogged, that they were called " flogging-blocks." Did not this fact offer abundant proof that the punishment was not calculated to make men better ? That was, indeed, notorious. In the French Army, which might be considered as, at at any rate, the second army in Europe, the punishment of flogging was unknown. He was glad that the subject had been brought before the House. He hoped it would he made the ground of a regular motion ; and that not a single Session wcnld he allowed to pass without discussing it ; and he was convinced that the end of that dis cussion would be, to convince the House and the. country that there was no, necessity whatever for corporal punishment in the Army. • Sir JOHN SEBRIGHT had been connected with the Army during the greater part of his life, and must say that he was ready to take his full share of the unpopularity of those who thought that it was necessary to retain the power of inflicting corporal punishment. He put it to every Honourable Gentle man who had ever been in service, or who had any knowledge of military life, whether soldiers could be effectually restrained from those irregularities which were so destructive of the dis cipline of a regiment, unless by the apprehension which resulted from their liability to corporal punishment. It was dangerous to talk of experiments when the matter at stake was nothing less than the discipline of the British Army. If once the present ex cellent discipline of that army were overturned, what would be the consequence? Many years must elapse before it could possibly be restored. When he was first in the army, the state of the soldier was much less enviable than at present; but his situation now was one of great comfort, to the maintenance of which dis cipline was indispensible. Sir A. HOPE maintained the necessity of retain ing corporal punishment, which was beneficial even to the soldier himself; and contended, that the sentence of Regimental Courts Martial (the Members of which were upon oath) were invariably tempered by feelings of kindness and mercy. Colonel TRENCH thought that the degradation was in the crime, and not in the punishment. The punishment of flogging adults in the army was not more disgraceful than that of flogging boys of sixteen at school. Whether the infliction were on the shoulders, or on any other part of the body, it made very little difference. The agitation of this question created an irrita•• tion in the minds of the soldiers, and he hoped that the question would be discussed fairly and freely, and put an end te. Mr. C. W. WYNN suggested, that it was intended to bring up a clause by way of rider, with the view of abolishing corporal punishment, it would he better to reserve the discussion until that clause should be before the House. The question was now put, and the Bill was read a third time. Mr. LEYCESTER now rose for the. purpose of submitting the clause of which he had given notice. He for one, as long as he had a seat in that House, would continue to notice the subject until the practice was abolished. The practice was defended by gentlemen who had been in the army, and as it ap peared, once a Captain always a Captain ; but he thought any gen tleman who was or had been an officer in the army, was by no means a proper judge on the subject. This was said to be an experiment he would admit. It had not yet been tried amongst them how far we coui!l do without flogging in our army, and he thought the experiment was worth making. The Hon. Member concluded by moving the clause, but it was not then read. Mr. \VARBURTON.—ton. Members objected to any alteration in the practice, on the ground of experience. This was the old argument. If a Turk were consulted, be would say experience had shown that the bastinado was the best kind of Government. An Hon. Member had said that we should not flog our horns or our dogs ; but he, (Mr. Warburton) would say, Mr. HUME contended, that the discipline of the army would be much better kept up without flogging. He trusted the House would consent to try the experiment of its abolition, at least with our army at home. _ _ Lord PALMERSTON here suggested, that before the discussion proceeded, it would be better to have the clause brought up and read. _ _ _ The clause was then brought up, and Was to this effect,—" And be it further enacted, that it shall not be lawful, after the passing of this Act, to inflict any punishment by lashes or stripe's, within the United Kingdom, by sentence of any court-martial or other wi.e, any thing in this Act to the contrary notwithstanding." - Colonel DAVIES was not friendly to the too fre quent use of the punishment of flogging, but he believed it Wes reFlrted to only in extreme cases, and that in those cases it was justified by necessity. Sir R. WILSON, from his knowledge of the character and habits of the British soldier, could not bring him self to believe that he could ever view the punishment of flogging as in. any way connected with his happiness.—(Hear.)— He did not see that the British soldiers were in this respect dif ferent from the soldiers of the continent, who had to a man hailed the abolition of flogging as an act founded at once in justice and prudence. He had that morning seen a work written by a com mon soldier, but which proved him to be a man of no common mind. ,The writer, in alluding to the manner in which sol diers were generally treated, observed—that the system adopted towards them should be one of encouragement, ind not that of terror.; that the officers should proceed by patient investi gation, having a reference to the character, of the soldiers, and' that if this course were pursued, the necessity of corporal pu nishment would soon be done away. He (Sir Robert Wilson) would assert, from his own experience, that he never knew an instance where a man was severely punished by flogging, who did not by that means become a bad man.—(Hear, hear.) — He had in Portugal the command of a corps called the " Lusi tanian Brigade." It was raised under circumstances which gave no great promise of discipline, and in fact when he - took the com mand the want of discipline prevailed to a great extent. But after some time it was seen that complete order, subordination, and dis cipline were established in that corps, though without recourse being had to corporal punishment in a single instance.—(Hear, hear,; hear.)—The corps conducted itself in tt way which did honour to him and to the country to which it belonged. It was some time after in Spain, and though it had to struggle with the hardship of want of funds wherewith to purchase rations, and to depend almost for subsistence on the bounty . of the Spa 'niards, it conducted itself in a manner which would do credit even to the best disciplined corps of the British army.—(Hear, hear.) Although he concurred in the general principle of the amendment before the House, there was one part of it which he could not approve. It confined the abolition of flogging to our armies at home. Now, he thought it would be found a dangerous princi ple to have one law of punishment for our army abroad, and another at home. But, though he agreed in the principle of the amendment, he thought it would not be quite fair to the Noble . Duke who had so recently entered upon the office of Commander in -Chief, to pass such a law just at this moment. Time, he thought; ought to be allowed to the Duke of Wellington to ex amine the system in existence when he got the command-in-chief s and to see whether any improvement might not be made. Such a vote as that now called for would appear rather a vote of mis trust to his Grace, which would be wholly unfounded. It might be well to express an opinion of the House on the subject without proc,eding to positive enactment. On these grounds he hoped the amendment might not be pressed. The JUDGE-AD VOCATE addressed the House, but in so low a tone as not to be clearly audible in the gallery in several parts of his remarks. He contended that by the statute of Charles 11., the Crown was intrusted with the management of the army—that, in consequence, the responsibility of its manage ment rested on the Ministers of the Crown, and that those Mini sters would be unable to fulfil the responsibility thrown upon them, if the power of inflicting corporal punishment were from them, Dr. LUSHINGTON was surprised at the doc trine which had been that night promulgated by the Right Hoe. Gentleman opposite, namely, that the right of inflicting corporal punishment on the soldiers of the British Army, was a power which Ministers possessed in conformity to the common law and consti tution of the land. He was astonished that the Right Hon. Gen tleman instead of defending this abominable mode of punish ment by impressing on the House its absolute neeeeaity to the preservation of discipline, had thought proper to defend it by branding our ancestors with the disgrace of having given to their posterity an army to be punished at the will and discretion of the I ,Crosta, not merely by corporal punishment, but also by degrada tion and death.—(Hear, hear.) The JUDGE-ADVOCATE here entered into as explanation of what he had said, but his explanation did not reach the gallery. Dr. LUSHINGTON asked the Right Hon. Gentleman what he meant by the common law of the land, if it was not that handed down to us from time immemorial by our ancestors? The Right Hon. Gentleman likewise asked how of fences were to be punished in the army supposing this mode of punishment was to be abolished? To that he would reply by saying, " Enact a new Mutiny Bill by the authority of Parliament." How was the army punished at present ? Not by the common, law of the land, not by— The JUDGE-ADVOCATE here made some observations across the table to Dr. Lushington, from which we understood him to say that he had not in his speech alluded to the common law of the land, but to the common law and usage of the army.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Dr. LUSHINGTON knew of no such thing as the common law of the army,—(shouts of hear,)---and God for bid that in a free country like this he ever should know any thing about it. —(Hear. )—The army, except in cues where the contrary b w y as t e h n e ac sa te i d ne b ru y t i h es e a e n x d pr i e a ss ws a w ut h h i o th rity of applied Pa to rlin, was e individuals ina governed eivil capacity. It was not many years since an officer, with whom he had the honour to be acquainted, told him that when in Canada with his regiment, not a day passed without his seeing 500 lashes inflicted. The feelings of his friend were so severely wounded by the con templation of so much human suffering, that he left his regiment and returned to England in disgust ; and on the circumstance becoming known to the Duke of York, his Royal Highness told him that he would see the grievance which had so disgusted hint remedied, and would take care that his (the officer's) interests should not be insured by what he had done.—(hear, hear!) — The learned gentleman, after some further remarks in reproba tion of corporal punishment, concluded by declaring his intention never to desist from his attempts to mitigate the severity of our military code. Lord PALMERSTON commenced his speech by observing, that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who had just sat down had wasted a great deal of constitutional enthusiasm on this subject, which it would have been quite as well to have saved for - a better opportunity. Never had there been a greater misre presentation than that which had been made that evening of his L ni, e loo a u r tli n ds e eGentleman, sste titihe aut o o p hn p cs o saitnec.i RightL Any enarnotei d. p ; o r ei o en n ut lae w mh h aa n o d Right Hon. Friend's speech , unintentionally he had no doubt, by g t d , he said, that it was by the co mmon l aw o f t h e l and the King had the right to inflict punishment s i n t h e army. N ow, hi s Ri g h t H on. hadth wase entered s H p o e a n Friend bad said no such thing. What, indeed, was the course of his Right Hon. Friend's argument? That the Government of the army was placed not only by immemorial usage, but also by Act of Parliament, in the hands of the Crown,—that if the House looked to what kind of punishment had hitherto been adopted to preserve its discipline, they would find it to be eor pond punishment,—that the House ought, therefore, to infer that the infliction of corporal punishment was a necessary mode of punishment, and hence that it was sanctioned by the common law or usage of the army.—(Hear.)—His Right Hon. Friend had never been so foolish as to confound the common law of the land Nvith the common law of the army.—(Loud cries of hear.) It:had been said that corporal punishment was not inflicted in the French Army. Now, he contended, that in the French army soldiers were liable tea blows, not indeed inflicted by the deliberate sentence of a court-martial of officers, but in a more arbitrary manner—by the interference of the men. The superior officer of a regiment gave up any offender to be punished by his comrades with the flat of their swords. Now, it was idle to draw a die. tinction between blows inflicted by a piece of iron and blows in flicted by a piece of leather. If there was any degradation in bodily pair., it was inflicted equally in both cases.—(Hear.)—But when a comparison was made between the punishments inflicted is the English, and those ir.flicted in the French army, it was not fair to keep out of sight the results which had arisen from them. The discipline of our army was acknowledged on all hands, but the in discipline of the French army was so great as to have impeded their military operations on several occasions. He should advise Parliament, if it ever acceded to the proposition made by time other side, to proceed without delay to disband the army ; for sure he was, that if it continued in existence, its existence under suck,