The Sun.
London, England, 1852-05-08 00:00:00

Abet no one except military or naval officers could form
.an opinion on a matter of this kind. His own belief was
that the punishment was unnecessary, and that if ever
inflicted it would arise from the incompetency of the
offieers in command as much as from the depravity or
• insubordination of the men. It had been asserted that
the punishment was often necessary in an army en the
march; bat it ought to be recollected that the militia
would not be engaged in any foreign war, and would not
be exposed to those temptations and to those atrocious
stets which had occurred in our army in the Peninsula.
The militia was altogether a home force, and would be
formed of men of a higher and more respectable cha-
racter than the soldiers of the army of former times.
He felt certain that tho Houle would see that that which
had been thought necessary in the Militia Act of 1802,
was not necessary in a Militia, Act for 1852. It often
happened that men of an irritable temper had the com-
mand of a regiment, and he did not think it right that
such men should have the power of punishing soldiers
by flagging for immortality or a slight neglect of duty.
'The House might recollect the case of the soldier in the
Scotch Greys who was flogged in 1834. Since that
time he had had the happiness of the acquaintance of
that man.—(A laugh.) He could tell Hon. Members that
that man had written works which would last as long as
the English language itself, and had written a history of
his own life as graphic as any narrative of Defoe.—
( Hear.) Ho was quite certain that if any case of
flogging should occur in the militia it %mild cause a feel-
ing of disgust. He proposed his proviso with the inten-
tion of asking the House to agree that the militia should
under no circumstances be liable to the punishment of
the lash. He might remind the House that when the
Dumber of lashes was reduced to fifty, the Duke of
Wellington stated that be hoped to live to see the
punishment of flogging in the army entirely abolished.
—(Hear, hear.) He hoped that the House would take
the first step, and abolish it with respect to the 80,000
militia it was proposed to enrol. Ho had, therefore, to
move his proviso.
Colonel THOMPSON seconded the motion.
Mr. BERESFORD said that he concurred with the
Hon. Member for Manchester in one observation, and
hoped that he himself should live to see corporal punish-
ment entirely done away with in the army. He did not
express that hope in consequence of anything that had
fallen from the Hon. Member. The House might recollect
that when he addressed the House on Tuesday last he
stated that during the time he was in the army there
was no single duty he had to perform so painful to his
feelings, and he believed to those of his brother officers,
as that of ordering corporal punishment. Since then a
great change had been made, and corporal punishment in
the army had almost ceased. The proviso of the Hon.
Member, however, proposed to do away with the punish-
ment altogether in the militia, and would leave a military
force to be embodied without giving the powers which
bad been always considered necessary for ensuring disci-
pline. He had that morning looked into some returns of
the amount of flogging in the English army during the
last year, and had found that only 197 punishments had
been inflicted in the whole British_ army at home and

Abroad. That army consisted of 148 regiments and
battalions, and the number of punishments during one
year had been in the proportion of only three out of

4,000 men. That showed that a great alteration had
taken place in the discipline of the army, arising, no
doubt, partly from the more kindly and paternal
spirit in which it had been commanded, and partly
from a superior class of men who entered it. If, there-
fore, 80,000 militia were called out for 21 days,
they had no right to assume that the number
corporally punished would be greater than in the army,
and consequently that the number would not exceed four
or five case during the whole time they were out. There
was exaggeration, therefore, in the agitation which had
been got up against the use of the lash. It was some-
what remarkable that those who maintained that in no
case should there be a power of inflicting corporal
punishment in the "militia were the very persona who
openly told the House that the militia would consist of
the very scum of society.—(Cheers.) If the militia were
exempted from the provisions of the Mutiny Act with
regard to flogging, the army would feel aggrieved, and
the House having passed the Militia Bill, there would be
one law for the army and another for the militia, if the
present proviso were agreed to.
Mr. BRIGHT said the Hon. and Gallant Member had
mistaken the nature of the proviso. It did not go the
length of exempting the militia from the terms of the
Mutiny Act, except with regard to flogging.
Mr. BERESFORD contended that if the provision
'with respect to punishment were struck out of the Mutiny
Act, it would no longer remain the Mutiny Act.—(Hear,
hear.) The Hon. Member had stated soldiers were
liable to be punished with the lash for immorality and
neglect of duty. The lash of late years had been only
inflicted for very serious offences. The Hon. Member
for Manchester had stated that punishments were in-
' ificted on men for no fault of theirs, but because of the
'irascibility of their officers. That was not the case, for
n court-martial composed of 'officers sworn to do justice
between the Sovereign and the criminal, should first de-
clare that criminal guilty.—(Hear, hear.) The case of
White, of the 7th Hussars, had been referred to, and he
had,z been pronounced a " murdered man" by the Hon.
-member. He regretted that the Hon. Gentleman had
4:,1 examined into the case before he used the expression.
---(llear, hear.) White had been guilty of a most violent
breach of discipline. He struck a non-commissioned
officer with a poker, and with such violence as nearly to
cause his death.—(Hear, hear.) He was tried by a dis-
trict court-martial, in compliance with the directions of
the Horse Guards, composed of thirteen officers drawn
Iroln several localities, and sentenced to receive 150
ashes- The punishment was inflicted, after which he
was taken to the hospital, where he remained from the
15th June to the 4th or sth July. He even improved
80 much as to have left the Hospital, but he suddenly
took ill and died. On the circumstance being re-
Ported at the Horse Guards, two surgeons were sent
down to assist in the inquiry as to the cause of death,
and these gentlemen declare on their professional repu-
tation that the man had not died of the corporal punish-
Meat inflicted on him, but an inherent disease.—(Hear.)
Re believed that even in the case of a militia, or of any
0850 where men were embodied and arms placed in
`their hands, it was necessary to reserve their punish-
:mend; but it did not follow that it would be used ex-
`cent in cases of absolute necessity.—(Hear, hear.) He
'did not think the Hon. Gentleman had made out a case
to induce them to abolish this punishment, and he
therefore hoped the Committee would not accept the
lr"iso--(Hear.)
, Mr. T. mgcuLLAGH referred to the Irish constabu-
inrY—as loyal and gallant a body of men as could be
found—and considered that as they were exempted from
attch degrading punishment, so also should their militia.
Mr. LENNARD thought the time had arrived when
this degrading punishment should be removed, both as
regarded the army and navy.—(Hear, hear.) As a
,matter of policy it should not be enforced at present,
when they were seeking the enrolment of men by means
of voluntary enlistment, otherwise, all men of self-respect
'would be deterred from volunteering.—(Hear.)
Captain BOLDERO could not admit the justice of the
comparison as between the Irish police and the militia.—
(Hear, hear.) If soldiers could be placed on the same
footing as police, then indeed they might abolish flog-
ging. But the soldier, for a shilling a day, was not—
either in point of morality, conduct, or education—what
the policeman at 18s a week was.—(Hear, hear.) Give
the soldier 3s. a day, and then they could abolish flog-
ging- He rejoiced that for five successive sessions he
united with Hon. Gentlemen who brought the whole
quvesetiveoLof corporal punishment before the House, with
a .1. its abolition or great mitigation.—( Hear.) He
throlootocedoweqrauanalldyerw..ihen the mandate of that groat man,
which reduction tah-Chlef' reduced the punishment,
compromise," Since
Member for Manchester
tGeremsteldnia,n
advocated thepfruerstshr mitigation or abolition
Since that period no Hon.
of thee punishment. The g had given up writing, and
as settled,
the public given up speakin it; and, in fact, the
question was regarded
annocwhester. revived
The
the Hon. Gentleman the Member fourta
militia bad the same duties to discharge as the regu-
uneocted to corporal
yeomanry lars. Ought the latter to be
punishments and the former to be exempted? Would
4nwiesfte vo-
lunteersod yet were subject to this
the
punish-
that be The
member of Punishment
just?—(Hear, hear.)
corps,
under the Mutiny Act. He knew
been sentenced _ a yeo_
manry corps who had
ment, though it was commuted; so of
the volunteer
corps when embodied. He saw yesterday the Horse
Guards—that gallant body of men among whom crime
TM almost unknown; ought they to ho subject to the
punishment, and the militia exempted, whom it had
been said would be a set of scamps and vagabonds?—
(Loud cries of "Hear.") There was no reason why
- should now re-agitate the general question; and he 1,405
the House wuuld settle it by a decisive division.
Mr. ROEBUCK was astonished at the speech of the

---
Gallant Gentleman.
Captain BOLDERO—I don't care if you are.
Mr. ROEBUCK—The boldness of. that declaration
does not remove my astonishment. The Gallant Gen-
tleman has been for years advocating the abolition of
egging in the army.
Captain BOLDERO—I said abolition or mitigation.
--(Loud cheers.)
Mr. ROEBUCK—Mitigation!—(Laughter.) What
uc'es that mean?—(Land laughter.) It means that the
thing is to be retained, and the infliction of the punish-
"'tint made as unfrequent as possible. Flogging,
then,
R'ss to be retained, and to be inflicted on the militia,
Who were to be invited voluntarily to enlist! The Gal
lant Gentleman had been labouring to exempt the regu-
lar troops from the punivhment, and not having sue-
Zeeded, sought to subject the militia to it. He (Mr. Roe-
buck) contended that the militia were not a force which
required such a punishment at all. Were honest and
rto espectable men wanted in the force? If so, ought they
Mbe liable to the degradation of flogging?—(Hear.)
°111(1 any but the rabble and refuse be expected—if
The were to be liable to the punishment ?—(Hear, hear.)
I•be voluntary enlistment would not succeed on such a
9,67,tteni, and the ballot would never be endured.
4
'"e People would not bear such a punishment; and
„tIY attempt to maintain the militia by such means
'3l brute force would fail. The punishment of
the stripes—that infernal punishment.—(A laugh, occa-
c'ned by the peculiar manner and tone of the Hon.
Glentlernap.) Well, I really am surprised--(Renewed4oghter)—l am surprised that in an assembly of English
eetlemen a laugh and a sneer should be elicited by an
allusion to the punishment of stripes, and that the Right
I')n- Secretary of War should set the example.
Pa rdr. BERESFORD—I beg the Learned Member's
Mon.
Mr. ROEBUCK —I beg the Right Hon. Gentleman's
Idon. I believe it was the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Clerk of the Ordnance, who sits next him.
Colonel DUNNE—I beg to say I laughed, but not at
the punishment of stripes.—(Elear, hear.)
Mr. ROEBUCK—Only at the mention of it. I sup-
P°se--(0h.) I am surprised that in a assembly of
gentlemen this should be matter for laughter.—(Oh, oh.)
The Learned Gentleman went on to repeat what he had