The Sun.
London, England, 1837-04-08 00:00:00

justice to that officer to state these facts. He trusted the
House would not sanction the motion of the Hon. Gentle-
man.

Mr. DUNCOMBE could not complain of the course the
Noble Lord had pursued, because he had apprized him of his
intention to read the letters which had been produced to con-
tradiction to what he (Mr. Duncombe) had said respecting
Colonel Arthur in the last Session. What he had then stated
he told the House at the time he stated on the authority of
Colonel Bradley, and this year he had presented a petition
from the same officer, which was now on the table, and on
which he intended to move for a Committee on the Ist June.
He did not think it exactly fair in the Noble Lord to forestal
the debate on that motion by the defence he had that night put
forth for Colonel Arthur. The moment Colonel Bradley
heard of the arrival of Col. Arthur in this country lie presented
another petition to the House offering to prove all the charges
he had made against Colonel Arthur ; and he, for one,
thought the word of Colonel Bradley as good as that of
Colonel Arthur. Both parties were now in this country,
and it was clear that one of them must go to the wall. If
Colonel Bradley had made false accusations let him go to the
wall ; but let not the Government throw their shield over
Colonel Arthur.—( Hear.) The Noble Lord had described
Colonel Arthur as a very humane man, but he (Mr. Dun-
combe) could prove that he was not a humane man. If Co-
lonel Arthur was so good a man, why was it that at Hobart
Town the whole colony was illuminated on his departure ? As
to the subject before the House, he had not intend, d to speak
upon it, but be could not avoid saying that he placed no con-
fi Te ice in the Commission that had been appointed to inquire
into the matter any more than he did the Poor Law Commis-
sion. A case of most cruel military flogging in the 15th Hus-
sars had been stated to him that day. A man of that regi-
ment had been flogged who was an excellent soldier.—( Hear)
Yes, an excellent soldier, who had committed no crime
( Hear)—except getting intoxicated—( A laugh)—when he re-
ceived his pay. Hon. Members might laugh, but lie should
like to know if there was an individual in that House who did
not get intoxicated occasionally.—(Great laughter.) This
man was flogged and taken to the hospital, and before his back
was healed he was flogged again with a new cat, prepared for
the purpose, with larger knots, because the man did not cry
out at the first flogging, and after the last flogging the man
became insane.—( Cries of " Name.") Let a Committee be
granted to him, and he would prove the facts. He admitted
that the occurrence took place twenty years ago.--(0b, oh.)
The length of time surely did not diminish crime.—( Hear,
hear.) He was prepared to prove the facts by an officer now
in Lordon.
Lord HO\VICK said a few words in explanation.
Mr. BRIDGEM AN had been seven years in a militia re-
giment, and he always discountenaeced flogging. He assured
the men of his Company that not one of them should ever be
flogged if he did not deserve it.—(Laughter.) He volun-
teered into the 88th, and a crack man of his regiment who
volunteered with him cut his throat afterwards, in Spain,
because he was flogged.
Sir G. GRE Y complained that the Member for Finsbury
had taken this occasion to anticipate the discussion of a sub-
j,!ct of which he had given a notice of motion. He ventured
to say that if a Committee should be appointed to inquire into
the character and conduct of Colonel Arthur, the charges now
made against him would not be borne out. Ninety-nine out
of a hundred of the inhabitants of Van Diemen's Land were
ready to bear testimony to the conduct of that-gallant officer.
No man had ever done more to benefit that colony and to pro-
mote its interests. The Hon. Member said that on his de-
parture there was a general illumination to mark the joy of
the inhabitants. He could not speak as to illuminations ; he
had heard nothing about them ; but this he knew, that there
was a subscription on foot among the inhabitants of the colony
and persons in London deeply interested in its welfare, for
the purpose of presenting him with a piece of plate, in testi-
mony of their approbation of his conduct.
Mr. T. D UNCOMBE said that the discussion had not ori-
ginated with him, but with the Noble Lord (Howick), who
had, he thought, very unfairly read letters, the tendency of
which was to prejudge a question of which he had given no-
tice of motion

• Sir H. HARDING E entirely differed from the Hon. Mem-
ber for Finsbury. So far from considering it unfair on the
l part of the Noble LOrd to read those letters he thought it was
no more than an act of duty to do so. The statements of the
. Han. Gentleman with respect to Colonel Arthur were not
characterized by that candour which he should have expected
from him. The Hon. Member found fault with the 'Noble
; Lord for entering into any defence of Colonel Arthur's con-
. duct, and complained of it as unfair. The Hon. Member did.
not seem to remember that the petition presented by him con-
tained six whole pages of attack upon that gallant officer,
having reference not merely to the subject of flogging, but
embracing all the circumstances of a dispute of twenty years'
standing between Colonel Arthur and Colonel Bradley, which
originated at Honduras. That dispute had been four or five
times the subject of discussion in that House. The petition
• presented by the Hon. Member for Finsbury merely stated
that, in Colonel Bradley's opinion, Colonel Arthur, in the
infliction of punishment at Honduras, acted with cruelty and
inhumanity ; but lie mentioned no names, he stated no iac:s,
he went into no detail of circumstances, he did not even say
in what year it occurred. The officer in command of the ar-
tillery at the time the puniAinent was inflicted at Honduras,
and the gunners who witnessed the transaction, stated dis-
tinctly in their communications to the Noble Lord (Lord
flowick) that the punishment was inflicted in the usual way,
without any circumstance of aggravation or of peculiar se-
verity. From all he knew and heard of Colonel Arthur it
was his thorough conviction that no case could be made out
against him. With regard to the subject immediately before
the House, he had heard no sufficient reason stated for the
appointment of a Committee. The Report of the Commis-
sioners
upon the subject was as full as it could be, and he did
not see how any further information of the least importance
could be obtained by further inquiry. Seventy-one individuals
had given their evidence before the Commission, besides 60
or 70 military officers-130 altogether were ex.-mined. He
did not see after this, how cry further information was to be
obtained. The lion. Member for Barnstable and the Hon.
Member for Hull (Colonel Thompson) were the only two
witnesses who were of opicion th• t flogging in the army
might be done away with altogether. Even the Honourable
Member for Middlesex himself (Mr. Hume) gave it as his
opinion that corporal punishment must be retained in the
field. Was he right or not in this interpietation of the Hon.
Member's evidence? (Mr. Hume nodded assent.) Well, the
Hon. Member admitted the necessity of it in the field, but
still in the last session the Hon. Member voted for a total abo-
lition. lie did not see how the Hon. Member for Middlesex
could reconcile his evidence and his vote. As far as he could
collect from the discussion there were only three substitutes
proposed for corporal punishment—dismissal, penal compa-
nies, and shooting. It had been said that dismissal from
the service was found to answer in the police force, and it was
very properly observed that there is might answer well
enough, as the superior pay rendered dismissal a punishment
of considerable severity. But even in the police force with
such a check as this it had been found necessary to dismiss
four thousand men. With respect to penal companies, they
were found totally inefficient as a substitute for corporal
punishment, and this was fully proved from experience at
Sierra Leone. Marshal Soult did not approve of penal com-
panies. The only remaining substitute was death, and it was
admitted by the Member for Lincoln (Mr. Bulwer) that the
punishment of shooting must be considerably increased in the
army if corporal punishment was done away with. For his
part lie must confess that however painful, however revolting,
to the feelings flogging might be. he much preferred it as a
punishment to that of death. The distinguished poet, Mr.
Campbell, in his " Letters from the South," recently pub-
lished, made some observations upon this subject, which he
would recommend,to the attention of gentlemen who spoke so
lightly of the punishment of shooting. Mr. Campbell said he
found upon inquiry that there was more drunkenness in the
French than in the English army, and from what he ob-
served he came to the conclusion that, to avoid the neces-
sity of a more severe punishment, flogging might occa-
sionally be necessary. lle found that in the French army
at Algiers one man a month was shot. However l&nful
to his feelings he was inclined to sec one instance of the
punishment of death inflicted in this way. He had a.a op-
portunity of witnessing it in the case of a man who was
to be shot for desertion. Before the punishment was in-
flicted, his comrades being drawn up round him, he declared
that, in deserting, his object was not to go over to the enemy,
bet to go to Italy to see his father and mother. Mr. Campbell
described the horror of the scene in terms which he could not
now call to mind, and exclaimed against the hardship of giving
to men the power of depriving their fellow-man of life. He
conversed with the French General upon the subject, and ob-
served to him, that, however terrible it might appear to him,
perhaps it was riot more revolting to French soldiers than flog-
ging might be. " Alt I' said the distinguished officer whom he
addressed, " do not think so ; this man would very willingly
have his punishment commuted for the infliction of 300 lashes."
From this anecdote, he must conclude that the Gallant Officer
alluded to preferred the English system of corporal punishment
to that of shooting. He felt convinced that it would be im-
possible to preserve discipline in the army, if the power was
abolished.

Sir C. D A LBIAC was decidedly opposed to the motion.
as no good could possibly arise from it. The question was
one of the deepest interest to the empire, for upon the disci-
pline of the army depended its success in time of war. During
the Peninsular war, the British army afforded proof of the
highest state of discipline, and this he felt was mainly owing to
the power of corporal punishment. The most distinguished
officers in the service, examined by the Commission, were una-
nimous in opinion upon the subject. It was remarkable that,
in the discussion of this subject, the navy was excluded, and
it was confined solely to the army. Now, were not sailors
composed of the same flesh and blood--were they not equally
their countrymen as soldiers—were they less brave, less
loyal, less obedient? If the arguments put forward on
the subject of corporal punishment were good as regarded
the army, were they not equally good as regarded the navy ?
The Hon. and Gallant Member concluded by observing, that
he had commanded the 4th Dragoons, as gallant a regiment
as any in the service, and he challenged the Horse Guards as
to the general good conduct of that corps. At the same time
he must say, and he felt it to be a duty he owed to himself as
a soldier, and to the army, to state that he should ever have
trembled for the efficiency and discipline of the army, if com-
manding officers had not the power of inflicting that punish-
ment, to the abolition of which he trusted -the House would
pause before it gave its consent.
Captain PO L 1-1 IL L said that if corporal punishment were
abandoned, they would have to resort to a punishment of a far
severer nature, and one which would be found to be a bad and
cruel substitute. Much was said against corpral punish-
ment, but he was satisfied that a good soldier necd ',ever fear
the lash.
Sir John Elley was then called on by several Members on
the Opposition benches, but the House evincing im,ktience for
the division, strangers were ordered to withdraw.

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, APRIL 8, 1837

The House then divided, when the numbers were--
For the motion
Against it
Majority against the motion -95
The Bill, as well as the Marine Mutiny Bill, then passed
through the Committee.
NAVY ESTIMATES
On the motion of Mr. CHARLES WOOD, the House
iTtolved itself into a Committee of Supply on the Navy Es-
timates, when the following votes were agreed to.
109,195/. for the salaries of officers and the contingent ex-
penses of the Admiralty-office.
2,365/. for the salaries of officers and the incidental ex-
penses of registering merchant seamen.
33,270/. for the salaries of the officers of the scientific de-
partment of the Navy.
118,503/. for the salaries of officers, and the contingent ex-
penses of the naval establishments at home. And
19,6841. for naval establishments abroad.
On the motion that the sum of 359,827/. be granted to de-
fray the expenses of naval stores, for the building, repair, and
outfit of the fleet, &e.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG protested against this grant. He
complained of the wanton and lavish expenditure of the pub-
lic money in building new ships which were not wanted, and
which in fact were wholly unnecessary. He referred to the
case of the Scarborough, of 74 guns, which cost in building
and repairs the sum of 76,000/., and was sold for 6,000/., and
`yet he could state from his own knowledge that that ship was
at this moment perfectly sound.
Mr. C. WOOD denied that the Scarborough was in a
sound state when she was sold. He held in his hand the
report of the survey that had been made on that vessel. The
vessel had certainly cost a very large sum, but that was be-
cause it had been built on that plan which was so much a fa-
vourite with the Hon. Member for Tynemouth, namely, by
contract. The surveyor stated that the ship was rotten, that
there were twenty-two rotten timbers in the hold, and several
in other parts of the ship ; but it was stated that it would be
impossible to send her to sea without her undergoing repairs
the cost of which would be more than that of building a new
ship.

Mr. G. F. YOUNG would take upon himself to assert,
hat he had seen the ship within the last fortnight from stem
'o stern, for she was cut down so that every timber might be
seen, and he could state that there was not an unsound timber
in her.
Mr. C. WOOD said that the survey had been made by an
able and scientific shipwright.
Admiral ADAM said that the upper part of the ship might
be in a sound state, but he could state that the bottom of the
vessel was in the state described by his Hon. Friend (Mr. C.
Wood).
Captain PEC HE LL thought that in this particular case
the surveyor had certainly done his duty. The ship (the
Scarborough) was to all intents and purposes unfit for service.
He wished to know whether a certain document which he had
seen in the public prints was to be considered official ? It re-
lated to the Vernon, and was signed by several of the officers
of that vessel. Now, such statements as those contained in
that document were very unusual, and certainly officers ought
to be allowed to express their opinions in disapprobation as
well as in approbation of the sailing qualities of this vessel.
It appeared that the officers of the Vernon made the following
amongst other statements :—" In respect to expense, we as-
sert, without fear of contradiction, that the Vernon during her
commission has cost less than any other ship on the Mediter-
ranean station." This was signed by the lieutenants, two
masters, and six midshipmen. He assumed that it was an of-
ficial document; and he hoped, if he should ever again com-
mand such a ship as he once commanded, that he would be
authorised to signify his disapprobation of that class of ships
called donkeys' or jackasses' frigates.—( A laugh.)
Mr. C. WOOD had just as much knowledge of the docu-
ment as the Hon. and Gallant Member himself.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG said that it was quite clear that the
officers of the Barham could have given just the same opinion
of their ship if they had not been more discreet than the offi-
cers of the Vernon.
Captain GORDON hoped that the Government, without
further trial, would not adopt either the one plan of building or
the other. He should like to see a return of the trials that
had taken place between the two vessels.
Captain D UNDAS, adverting to the ships built in mer-
chants' yards, which had been eulogised by an Hon. Mem-
ber, observed that they were called in the navy " the forty
thieves."
Mr. HUME wished for more particular returns with respect
to the ships building in the dock-yards. He thought that the
measure which had been adopted by the Right Hon. Baronet
the Member for Cumberland, of doing away with the Naval
School of Architecture, most unwise. The school had ex-
isted for twenty-eight years, and had been productive of much
benefit. Those who came after us would blame the act of its
destruction, and would in all probability be compelled to re-
provide some similar means of instruction.
Sir J. GRAHAM defended the policy of abolishing the
Naval School of Architecture. If that were as unwise a step
as the Honourable Member for Middlesex apprehended, at
least the mischief vas distant , for there were at present in our
dock-yards many professional men of great ability and attain-
ments.. With respect to the number of ships at present in or-
dinary, it was smaller than it had been for many years, and he
trusted that it would not appear that -the number had been in-
juriously reduced. He wished to put a question to his Hon.
Friend opposite with respect to the suppression of the Naval
School—an institution calculated to produce those who, in fu-
ture times, would maintain the honour of the British flag, and
secure the safety of British seamen. If that college were
suppressed, it was of primary importance that some scheme
of naval education should be substituted for it. It ought to be
a se:7.mm that would unite theory with practice. In his opinion
the best place for the education of young naval officers was
the cockpit of a man-of-war. There ought to be on board of
every man-of-war, except small craft, a schoolmaster, paid
liberally, and liable to examination, in order that the system of
instruction might be uniform. Had the subject been taken
into consideration by his Majesty's Government ? He was
persuaded that his Honourable Friend's answer would be sa-
tisfactory.
Mr. C. WOOD said that there were at present building
in his Majesty's dock-yards seven sail of the line, seven fri-
gates, nine smaller vessels, and three armed steam vessels. In
answer to the question put to him by his Right Hon. Friend,
the Member for Oumberland, he had to state that his Ma-
jesty's Government had under consideration a plan for a better
mode of educating young gentlemen who entered the naval
service, by blending practical with scientific instruction. The
first step would be to provide for ships-of-tsar adequate
schoolmasters, with adequate salaries. Inquiries had been
made at the Universities for persons properly qualified ; and
there were at present twenty perfectly ready to take the office.
It was intended to raise the pay of all the schoolmasters to
the amount of the pay of the schoolmaster of a first-rate.
It was intended that five pounds a-year should be paid to the
schoolmaster by every young gentleman receiving instruction.
Tak:.ng the average, no schoolmaster would have a less annual
emolument than from one hundred and fifty pounds to three
hundred pounds a-year. The best mode of examining these
schoolmasters was alto under consideration ; and he hoped in
a short time to be able to make a satisfactory statement on that
point.
Sir J. GRAHAM observed, that upon the whole, his Hon.
Friend's statement was satisfactory. The scheme of educa-
tion ought to be uniform in its character ; and an additional al-
lowance of fifty pounds or sixty pounds a-year to a schoolmas-
ter was a consideration of no importance compared with the
benefit of obtaining a good instructor.
Admiral ADAM said that it was intended that the school-
masters should have separate cabins, and should mess with the
officers

Sir E. CODRINGTON observed, that during the eight
or nine years that he had been a midshipman, there had been
no schoolmaster in the ship. It had at a subsequent period
cost him about a hundred a-year to provide a schoolmaster for
his young gentlemen. It appeared to be highly important for
the future honour of the navy that respectable and well-qualified
schoolmasters should he provided.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG strongly recommended the Admiralty
to pay more attention to the building of armed steam-vessels,
as it could not be• known now soon they might be wanted. At
present, the Government steam-vessels were much inferior to
the private ones. It was also to be lamented that our naval
architects were in general so inferior to those of other coun-
tries. Sir William Symonds had printed a book upon the sub-
ject, of which he was now in all probability ashamed, as the
merest tyro in - hydrodynamics must see that he violated
in it every principle of that science.
Mr. HUME considered that they ought to have more steam-
vessels and less men-of-war.
The vote was agreed to.
Sir E. CODRINGTON replied that steam-vessels could
not carry coals and men.
The following votes were then agreed to :-
108,048/. for new works and repairs in the naval yards.
18,1601. for medicines,and medical stores, and
29,366/. for miscellaneous services.
Upon the vote of 810,7711. for half-pay of the officers of
the navy being proposed,
Sir E. CODRINGTON observed that there were no offi-
cers so badly paid as those in the navy. The full pay of an
admiral was 1,8251., which was by no means sufficient to de-
fray the expenses to which his high rank and station neces-
sarily exposed him. When he held the situation on a foreign
station, his table never cost him less than a thousand a year.
In case of a battle it was to be remembered that whatever
damage the admiral suffered he was never repaid. After a
battle he always found that he had lost a great deal of pro.
perty. The half-pay of an admiral was but 7661. a year, and
lie had none of the advantages which officers enjoyed in the
army: an admiral could not have a regiment. He con-
sidered that officers in the army were not as well
treated as they deserved, but still they had advan-
tages beyond those in the navy. Persons who held
civil situations had greater advantages than either. Officers
in the navy had formerly been subjected to a deduction of
threepence in the pound for a fund for the provision of widows
of naval officers. In the year 1830, this impost was taken off;
but why it had been levied, or why it had been abolished, no
man knew. Again, an officer who might have served forty
years, if he accepted a civil situation, all his previous services
at sea went for nothing, though he became entitled to a pen-
sion. Captains in the navy were placed in a most unfair posi-
tion, inasmuch as their scale of pay was most inadequate. A
captain in the navy had to keep up an expens►ve table, for
which no allowance was made; neither was any remuncratio::
made in cases where, during a battle, all his furniture, &e.,
might be broken to pieces. Having adverted to the pay of
lieutenants as being most inadequate, the Honourable and
Gallant Admiral observed, that a lieutenant on board ship,
who received 6s. 6d. a day only, wa:z the senior officer to a
ca tai: in the marines, who nevertheless received 10s. Both
services were ill paid. Another class of officers, namely,
the masters, were dealt most unfairly by. The expense of
their outfit was very great; and the only assistance which