The Express.
London, England, 1847-04-22 00:00:00

Mr. AINSWORTH was surprised at the attack which
hod been made ape him. (Hear, bear.) He did no more
them several other bor. neemben who cheered at the hoe.
number's proposal, and the reason why he cheered was, that
he bed come sap inns the manufacturing diriricts, and he
had set hard • single manufacturer or spinner say that they
wished lira 'slot the house. (Hair, hear.)
A disenedpn el em. length having ensued with respect to
the flziog et • Eq for the third reading, it was finally agreed
that it lima In peripemed till Friday, with a view of giving
the government dams name some other early day.
NAVAL PRISONS BILL.
The hems having gone into committee on this bill,
Mr. W. WILLIAMS said he expected from the present
Secretary of the Admiralty that something would be done
Vthis hill to effect a better treatment of the worst treated
ass of men in the kingdom, namely, the sailors in her
Mejeaty's navy. In feet, this bill made their condition
Irate, fur it legslimed these acts of parliament which before
were doubtful respecting the flogging of • sailor at the will
of his commanding officer. The tyranny and eavrenies
practised in the case of the sailor was much greater than in
the case of the moldier. For instance, a private of madam
was tried at Portsmouth for spilling his grog, which led to
his striking the reticent ; and the court-martial, over which
Sir William 'Parker,. one of the most distinguished naval
officers in the service, presided, sentenced him to be hanged
from the yer Larm ; while, the day after, a drummer of the
guards was tried for striking the drum-major; and the
court-martial, ever which the hon. and gallant member fur
Middlesex presided, only sentenced him te twelve months'
imprisonment. But the Court of Admiralty, te show their
mercy, remitted the punishment of death, and directed that
the man should be transported for seven years. Such wee
one instance of the difference in the degree of seventy prac-
tised in beta services. Another sailor, who also was tried at
Portsmouth he desertion, was ordered to Naive fifty holes,
and to be confined for twelve months. In this case, also, the
infliction of the lashee was remitted; but be thought some
remedy should be applied to prevent theme abeam. By one
of the ileums of the bill, a sailor might be sentenced to
receive forty-eight lathes, or to be imprisoned for twenty-
eight days, at the mere will of one man. It was no wonder,
when math was the state of things, that men were unwilling
to enter the ravel service. By another clause, any person
assisting • sailor to desert was liable to tranaportation
for 14 years. Wu it right that a father, it might be, should
be subriet such punishment if he assisted his son, wbo
might have been forced from him by impressment, to de-
em ? Recalled en the house not to permit the defenders
of their country to be so tasted as they might be under
this biß.
Mr. WARD oonsidered it most unfair that the preload
opportunity should be taken to repeat attacks on the disel-
plane of the navy ; but these attack" were never so ultr-
ou the present occasion, when steps were taken,
placed as e
first time, by the Board of Admiralty, to correct the
evil of which kis hon. friend had spoken. His hon. friend
entirely misrepresented and distorted the whole scope of the
bill. His hon. friend said this bill would legalise powers few
which there wee no legal authority. There was nothing of
the kind in the bill. Its object was to substitute imprison-
meet for corporal punishment ; and, though the bill gave
power to imprison for 28 days, they all knew that that term
of imprisonment would not be inflicted. Seven or eight
days' imprisonment was the genteel period of imprisonment
in the inky • and it was found to be the most effectual. In
the navy the,'" were stronger reasons than in the army why
the tars of imprisonment should be RS short as possible.
But be the sentence of the captain what it might, it must
have the previous sanction of the admiral or other officer in
command of the station. He admitted that the naval system
of the country was not free from blot, and that many things
in it required amendment and alteration—(hear, hear)—and
of late years a emit improvement had taken place in am-
formity with public opinion. No person was more remark.
able for the kindness of his disposition than Lord Nelson,
yet the list of punishments on board the Victory for fourteen
mouths, from August, 11103, to the 31st of October, 1804,
was toilets than 311. and the number of lashes inflicted was
9,392; whereas in 1844 the total number of punishments
for the whole navy, with 30,000 men aft sat, was only 1,411,
and the number of lashes 42,000 ; in 1845 the number of
punishments was reduced to 1,020, and the number of
lashes was reduced to 32,095, with an increased number of
men. (Hear, hiss) This was an incontrovertible proof
that the discipline of the navy, Mitred of going
.on from
had to worse, had taken that turn which public opinion in
the country pointed out; and that the moral influence
which the officers might bring to bear on the men was more
resorted to thanunnecessary punishments. lie could assure
his hon. friend that the promp'est attention was bestowed
by his hon. and gallant friend near him upon the quarterly
reports of the punishments in every ship, and that the Beard
of Admiralty cloddy attended to every case of severe pun-
ishment. With these explanations he thought be might with
confid nee ask the sanction of the house to the bill
Col. T. WOOD said that in the case of the drummer to
which the hon. member for Coventry alluded, the prisoner
declared he was tired of soldiering, and that be struck the
drurnoinjor for the purpose of getting himself transported.
It war ex this account that he was sentenced to twelve
months' imprisonment. He would, however, observe that
he did not think any punishment which was not carried out
in the pretence of the soldiers, would be so effectual as one
that was
Admiral DUNDAS said that, in the case of the sailor
punished for desertion, the man had obtained an increase of
pay, and there was no mason why he should take such a step.
Captain PLUMRIDGE defended the memory of Loid
Nelson final thecharge of anything like severity or oppres-
sion on board his ship. He recollected (as was understood)
that the Victory had a sad set of fellows on board, who
required • strict kind of discipline.
Captain' PECH ELL expressed a hope that corporal
punishment would soon be aed. He had hitherto voted
retire abolition, except in the owe of the navy, where it
was necessary to retain the power of administering corporal
punishment until some substitute had been provided. With
the quarterly returns now published, it was impossible that
ally officer meld escape censure if punishment were impro-
perly indicted by his orders.
Capt. FITZROY said it was necessary, at least, to re-
serve the power of inflicting a severer kind of punishment
in the cal& than in any other branch of the public service.
He was willing to assist in carrying out the measure, be-
muse it was founded on the simple principle of doing away
with corporal punishment, as far an war practicable. As long
as the government proceeded cautiously in this direction he
would give them hie support.
Capt. BERKELEY thought it desirable that the hon.
member fir Coventry should adhere to facts when speaking
of naval punishments. (Hear, hear.) The statements made
by him were doing great injury, by discouraging persons
from entering the navy. The hon. member said that the
punishment ought to be taken out of the hands of single in-
dividuals, and confined to courts-martial. Is reply to this,
be would remark that the Board of Admiralty had latey
ordered two courts-martial on deserters, and the punish-
ment inflicted by those tribunals was ten times more severe
than that which could be inflicted by naval captains.
Mr. P. HOWARD thought that the great cause of deser-
tion in the English navy was the inadequacy of the pay.
The wages given in the American navy were much higher,
and he hoped that no false economy would prevent the Ad-
miralty from making greater assimilation in that respect
between the two naval services.
Mr. WILLIAMS hoped the right hon. Secretary to the
Admiralty would coneenteto strike out the first clause of the
preamble.
Mr. WARD said it was impossible that he could anent to
the hon, member's request. The legality of corporal punish.
ment at the present time was undoubted.
Sir C. NAPIER agreed with the bon. member for Carlisle
on the subject of the payment of the seamen. The conriquenoe
• of the present rate of payment was, that 40,000 or 50,000 British
seamen were garaged in the American service. At all
events, if they could not immediately increase the pay of the
men, they might increase that of the petty officers, which
was very little more at present than that of the men. The
three officers whose salary should be raised were the car-
penter, the boatawaio, and the gunner ; and, were the sug-
'ethos acted upon, there would be a greater inducement
offered to the men to endeavour to raise themselves in the
service. He thanked the Admiralty for introducing the
measure, and believed it world do • great amount of good.
The practice of desertion was now so common, that deserters
were to be met daily on the road between London and
Portsmouth, end no one thought of taking them into cus-
tody. He disapproved of the order of the Admiralty that no
captain should inflict punishment, without first communi-
cating with the commander-in-chief, believing that it would
tend greatly to relax discipline.
Admiral DUNDAS maintained that the order was one of
the brat regulations ever introduced into the naval service.
Mr. HUME also defended the order. With the attention
now paid to health and to the quality of provisions, they
aught to seeore the very best elms of men for the naval ter
vice ; and if the pay of the petty officers were not sufficient
he agreed that it should be raised, and thought that would
be better even than raising the pay of the common men. He
felt certain that the neceneity which there would now be few
inquiry preceding punishment would tend to introduce •
much better order of men. He would suggest that rewards
should be given to serjesats of marines, in order te place
them in as good a position as serjesnts in the army. He
would rather incur an additional expense than am, as the
had seen, the best men leaving the navy. (Hear, hear.)
The reason why so many left our naval service wan,
that there was no prospect for an old sailor but that of
misery and the poor-house.
Mr. WARD said the subject of improving the pay of the
petty officers had been fully considered by the Board of Ad
'surety, and he hoped a proposhion fur that purpose would
be made in the next session. Nothing would give him more
Veastire than to introduce a proposal for granting increased
pay and honorary distinction, to petty officers and r tjeants
of mnrincn ; and no one could be more desirous of improve-
ment in that revest than the noble lord at the head of the
Admiralty. He wished to esplain, in reference to the ques-
tion of punishment, that one of the customs of the nn. 'had
been for her Majesty to flx, at her discretion, the 1111201111 t of
punishment, which had bees repeatedly rt rte by orders in
council. The tendency of all past regulations had• how-
ever• been to restrict, instead of increasing, the amount of
punishment.
Capt. HARRIS thought that some increase might easily
be made in the pry of petty officers this year, through the
medium of a supplementary odious., The expense would
not be more than 50,000/. or 60,0001. He also objected to
the invent undefined state of the amount of punish went.
The house then went into committee. Clauses I to f, were
agreed to.
Clime 7 occasioned discussion, and was ultimately post-
poned. The other clauses hryine been pawed, the hosts re-
Itzti ,it to b., rceniced on Friday.
SPANISH LEGION.
I.e.ird G. BENTINCK withdrew the notice which he had
given for a motion on the subject of the correspondenc- la la-
tire to the arrears of pay due to the British leal:m, and the