The Sun.
London, England, 1853-02-22 00:00:00

•-• I r
• - r r r, • . 9 riT T /j/// ,
• :4 r - '
je. , e-N
rs : :10: I
* •
• .4
2- \
Li4.42;' 'lO ~,1P0",,V Zz.., • -
• 4-, or
11%*
,
'tom+a
LA.5...,A - 00. _ ,
'r4l :,Attlw .
I •
Vic •
''kt , ' ''~}
,1i- 0,4,
-40 . crt,
-rs. •A- .1.3 0.5
I'ol- , e$ I ill'firr.,,e

MANNING OF THE NAVY.

~~~,

[PRICE SD.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.)

( Continued from our Third Edition or' last Eveninri. )

for any man to risk publishing that which he oonsider
not to be against the law, it is also free to the Govern
went, and it is the duty f the Government, if they see
any one publishing that which they think and
are advised is against the law, and against the
interests of the country, to take steps that such
an offence may be punished. (Hear, hear.) In
the remarks I made the other evening, I did
not intend to say anything offensive to the Peace
Society. I look upon the Peaoe Society as a society of
very well intentioned fanatics—(hear, hear, and laugh-
ter)—much too good to be entrusted with any political
functions in this wicked and sinful world—(laughter)—
and I would urge and entreat my hon. friend who asked
the question to use his influence, as a nan of good Un-
derstanding and practically conversant with public
affairs, to induce his peace-preaching colleagues in the
society to be a little less pugnacious than they show
themselves. (Hear, hear, and great laughter.)

SUPPLY.

The Earl of EGMONT inquired whether the Govern-
ment would have any objection to lay on the table the
report of the commission on the manning of the navy.
The Earl ,of ABERDEEN—In answer to the
noble lord, I may inform him that it is our in-
tention to lay that report on the table of the house.
At the same time I must observe that the re-
port in question has only been received in the
course of last week ; that it embraces a vast number of
subjects besides the manning of the navy, and many of
them very important topics, some of which, at least, it
is quite necessary the Government should have time to
consider and form some opinion on before the report is
laid on the table ; but I can assure .the noble lord there
shall be no unnecessary delay.
The Duke of NORTHUMBERLAND said the report
must affect many other questions, as the committee was
appointed to inquire into the whole state of the seaman,
with-a view to its improvement, where it wanted im-
proving ; and as their inquiry embraced his entire life
from the day he entered their service as a boy; to the
time when he was received into Greenwich Hospital, it
had also investigated the condition of a very valuable
class—the warrant officers. He trusted the noble earl
would grant them the evidence as well as the 'report.
The Earl of ABERDEEN could easily conceive that,
though it might be expedient to publish the report, yet
in the variety of the opinions of the officers, to publish
the. evidence might not.
Th,; house then adjourned.

The house then went into a committee of supply upon
the navy estimates.
On the vote of 137,2451. for the Admiralty-office,
'Mr. STAPLETON said that he wished to calL the at-
tention of the house to the subject of the infliction of
corporal punishment in the navy. When on Friday
last, the hon. member for Lambeth (Mr. Williams) ex-
pressed a hope that the present Government would be
able to take such steps for the preservation of such
discipline in the navy as would enable them to dis-
pense with the infliction of corporal punishment, the
right honourable gentleman the First Lord of the
Admiralty stated, as a reason for believing that this
could not be done, that it appeared from the report
of the Secretary to the Admiralty of the United States,
that the substitution of other punishments in the Ame-
rican navy had not been attended with good effects.
Now, as he believed that those substituted punishments
consisted of attaching a rope to a sailor and dipping him
in the water, tying his knees up against his chin, and
making him drag about a cannon ball attached to his
leg, he did not wonder that the United States sailors
objected to their infliction, and that they were not suc-
cessful in promoting good discipline. He thought that
when the abolition of corporal punishment had been ac-
companied by the substitution of others so objectionable,
the experience thus gained could not be considered con-
clusive against the abolition of corporal punishment.
It was of the greatest importance that the attention of
~..the Pazernment,_ should be earnestly directed to this
que'stion;•'for'rentil the initiatiVt vSit'i(ti'lieir bk. the liatirY
no amelioration could be introduced into the discipline
of the merchant service. And he believed that there
never was a moment when it was more important
that the Government should take into consideration
the possibility of finding some mode of enforcing
discipline which should be less obnoxious to the feelings
of the working class of the country ; for the mer-
chant service had now great difficulty in obtaining
seamen, even at increased wages. . When this pun-
ishment was introduced, it was used extensively 01,9 e.
where than in the army and navy, but it was now te,^ly
retained in the two services ; and the opinion of many
eminent authorities was, that their discipline might be
preserved without it. The Government dared not en-
force the infliction of flogging upon a member of the
great middle elass of this country, who, having been
taken by conscription for the militia, had—in a moment
of excitement, perhaps of intoxication—committed an
act of insubordination. Were we then to have one law
for the poor man entrapped into the army, in the man-
ner described by the hon. member for Manchester (Mr.
Bright), and another for the respectable man upon
whom the ballot for the militia fell ? This was not a
purely military, but a highly social question ; for this
punishment not only degraded those on whom it was in-
flicted, but all those who were liable to it. It was most
important than we gave the labouring classes a large
share of political power, we should not have to deal
with a brutalised population. He did not see why dis-
cipline could not be preserved on board ship by the
punishment of solitary confinement, with bread and
water diet. He hoped that the attention of the Govern-
ment would be earnestly directed to this subject.
Sir J. GRAHAM would merely call the attention of
the committee to the vote they were then discussing.
He could assure the hon. member that he was in
favour of any mitigation in the punishments inflicted in
the navy that was possible, consistently with a due re-
gard to the discipline of the service. He earnestly de-
sired that every check that experience showed to be
, useful should be imposed on the use of corporal punish-
ment. Persons far more competent than himself, from
their professional knowledge, had given their most ear-
nest attention to this subject, and every check to the
infliction of this punishment which they could suggest
and advice had been introduced, and most rigidly acted
upon. Except in cases of mutiny, it could not be in-
flicted in hot blood, but only after an interval of twenty-
four hours. Only forty-eight lashes could be inflicted on
one day. A minute setting forth the circumstances un-
der which it was imposed must be sent by the command-
ing officer of the ship to the admiral or senior officer of
the station, who transmitted it, with any remarks he
might think fit to make, to the Board of Admiralty. It
was then revised by one of the officers of the board ;
every case which, in the opinion of the commanding
officer, or of the officer of the board, demanded their
attention, was brought specially before them. The re-
turn of the punishments inflicted was also brought perio-
dically before the Admiralty. In considering the merits
of any officer, the Admiralty had been for many years
very much guided by the amount of the corporal punish-
ment which he appeared to have found it necessary to use
in order to preserve discipline in his ship. And no ap-
pearance of good order in the ship was thought to com-
pensate for an excessive quantity of it. He must say
that the experience of America, where corporal punish-
ment had been entirely abolished, and other punishments
—minor in name, but more severe in their effects, had
been introduced—was not favourable to the measures
recommended by the hon. member. The punishment of
death was more frequently inflicted for mutinous con-
duct in the French than in our navy ; and with respect
to the punishment of solitary confinement, it must be
recollected that where the crew was not larger than was
necessary for the work to be done? the confinement of
men for misconduct would involve an increase of work
to those who had not misconducted themselves. The
infliction of corporal punishments was guarded by the
restrictions he had already described ; and if it was pos-
sible to impose additional restrictions, without injuring
the discipline of the service, no one would he more glad
than he should be ; but he must entreat the house to
weigh well the dangers—he believed the fatal effect—of
wholly abolishing the punishment. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. WILLIAMS diet not urge the right hon. baronet
to abolish this punishment immediately, but he wished
that it should only be inflicted in the navy, as was the
case in the army, upon the sentence of a court-martial.
The right hon. baronet said that successive boards of
Admiralty had laboured to reduce this punishment to a
minimum; but had they ever taken an officer's command
from him before the expiration of the usual period for
which a ship remained in commission, on account of his
having made an excessive use of it ? He hoped that the
right hon. baronet would afford to the men serving in
the Royal Navy every possible protection against the
improper infliction of the lash.
Sir G. PECHELL said that it was quite impossible
that courts-martial, as suggested by the hon. member
for Lambeth (Mr. Williams), could be held in small
vessels, where the number of officers was necessa-
rily limited. The Right Honourable First Lord of
the Admiralty might, if he thought, safely be trusted
to do all that was possible on this subject, when they
recollected the steps he took, during his former admi-
nistration of the naval affairs of the country,, to abolish
impressment and to induce a superior class of men to vo-
lunteer in the service. He believed that although offi-
cers had not been deprived of their command for an
excessive infliction of capital punishment, instances were
not wanting during the last ten or twelve years in which
this had been considered by the Admiralty a bar to re-
appointment. He congratulated the house in having the
right hon. gentleman once again at the Admiralty, where
he had before conducted the business in so popular a,
manner ; and he (Sir George Pechell) should be ready
to support him in all his reforms. He had often expressed
a wish to see a naval officer at the head of the board at
Charing-cross, but he found that he had made a great
mistake in thinking that such an arrangement would be
desirable. He complained of the mode in which the
patronage of the Admiralty had been exercised, and
that
thheefeAredmitzulty(tylpheaearerdr doiheewhadhat
heldhad
felt quite satisfied that it would appear, from the evi-
dence given before the Chatham election Committee,
thneevelratebeeSnecarettirYbutead
wn
fner perceivedcl-
that high and responsible office.
now hold
that there was a sum of 4311,41eax. p.uAtdindo.
these
iral of Great B
Admiral, and • 3421. for the
also the admirals of the fleet, for which fain. The officers who xi-
ese situations are
and he did not think it was fair that
the pay is 1,1491.,
monopolise the salaries of those
twoat
civil those ooffices.fficers s
Onehou should
the gallant officers was
which he received 1,000/331. ajor-general of Marines for
2,1491. a year. It
mightbetosahidim
the other payments made a year, which together with
'th
payable to those
gallant officers was not received
tharatiosende hisof thinecosalarime teos
but on looking to the return of sums repaid he did not
, that any sum of 4891. from the judicial department
had been received into the Exchequer. He had received
an assurance from the secretary of the late board that
the blockade for the prevention of the slave trade on the
coasts of Africa, Cuba, and Brazil would be carried on
with efficient vessels, and he was sure his right honour-
able friend below did not require any suggestion fr°l2l
him to induce him to employ proper steamers and vessels
in that service.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM would request of the honour-
able gentleman opposite (the late
Secretary of the Ad-
which had been
*niralty) not to follow up the subject
.•-• —d to in a portion of the speech of his hon. and
he were not mis-
referr.... .
,d behind him, because, if .
gallant friend referred
gallant file... `ter to which his , .
ton not yet
takeny the maxi,,
with a judicial investigation
c'tineeted - -- - not yet closed or re-
. was c *delice was
concluded. The evi
__ . was still pending affect-
" ALEXANDER SOMERVILLE. ferred to the hour ;attra.n lug
d it would be most inexpedient
"Charles Hindley, Esq., M.P." log all concernTol ;
ion at present. It was natural.
have any dwell
ss should take the earliest
the to entleman
Well, I think that that letter does great credit to
that the honourably
a charge of that kind ; but
writer. (Hear, hear.) The hon, gentleman who has
opportunity to rape
postpone it to a future occasion.
just sat down I understand began his remarks by findincg.
he hoped
he
wouldne of the appointments to which his
fault with me for having said something on a former
With respect to o
gallant friend had referred, the honour-
casion. which he considers to be offensive, or uncivil, t
I honourable and
Montrose would remember that the
stated what
member for
rude, to the Peace Society. Now I then
cannot retract, namely, that I think that th
pursued was a grave offence. (Cheers.)
was to obstruct the public service—(hear,
deprive the country of those means ofcourse they able n!tetee
Theeir intention committee
that the country
Parliament deliberately thought
°eosin= says
But, sir, the honourable g crovernraant were •
to have.
bytee late, .
the proceedings institutedssi ga: free
calculated to gag the press
and that a man may publish
'may p
\
law, tills • h what he likes, p
free
But if this coun • at th s i
what he likes. of the house which sat on the naval and
services reported, that whenever the office of
ilear)—ani,d;t°ll military services
of Marines should become vacant— and he
defence v/"'e ••• James Graham) hoped the day would be distant—
rovided it is not against. any
try is a ought (Sir
..
that no other officer should be appointed to it. When they
recollected the great services of the gallant officer (Sir
Cockburn)who fills the Mee that he was
country, G. now o
Well, he almost the only surviving officer of Nelson,
!good fortune to fight under his
country, and Ais free`his commendations
for his conduct—he and had the
observation, and receive
trusted they

HOUSE OF COMMONS=-(YESTERDAY):

(Continued from our Third Edition of last Evening.)
ENLISTMENT FOR THE MILITIA.

Mr. BRIGHT thought the noble lord the Secretary
for the Home Department would not have done wrong
if he had remained to answer the question, particularly
as on a former occasion, when his hon. friend (Mr.
Hindley) took the liberty of putting it, the noble lord
answered him in a tone not particularly civil, and seemed
inclined to treat certain persons out of the house as'if
they had been guilty of breaking some law, or of com-
mitting some very grievous offence. The charge against
the persons who had been lately held to bail was, he
presumed, that they had been guilty of something which
went by the name of sedition, in advising young men
to avoid enlisting in the militia. They had heard a
good deal lately about gagging the press, but it might be
a question in future whether gagging newspapers or gag-
ging the bill-posters, was meant. If means of the des-
cription he alluded to were taken to induce men to en-
list, it was fair for him or any other person who believed
that a young man by enlisting would do badly for him-
self as well as his parents or family, to persuade him to
give up his intention and remain at home in pursuit of
his industry. The placards in question gave a woodcut
of a scene which must have been witnessed by many
members of that house—a military flogging—with cer-
tain extracts from the New Testament, the United Ser-
vice Journal, and the "Autobiography of a Working
Man," written by Mr. Somerville, who had himself been
on one occasion most unjustly and cruelly subjected to
that punishment. Nobody could say that there was
anything in those placards that was untrue, and-seeing
that men were subjected by the vote of the house last
year to the punishment of flogging in the militia, he
said he should be wanting in his duty toward his neigh-
bour not to advise young persons against putting them-
selves in a situation where they might be subjected to
this brutal and degrading punishment. It was a mon-
strous, an infernal thing, that in a free country persons
who put those placards in their windows should be
liable to the undefinable charge of sedition, He was
informed by a correspondent at Christchurch, in
Hampshire, that houses there were arbitrarily entered
by the police in search of those placards, without their
producing the shadow of authority or warrant for their
proceedings. He was exceedingly glad to hear that the
prosecutions which had been commenced were not to be
continued, and in this respect he believed the present
Government would carry out the resolution already ar-
rived at by that which preceded them. Legal proceed-
ings, however, had been suspended over the heads of
individuals for a period of six weeks, and persons to
whom no moral guilt was imputable, been conse-
quently subjected to very serious expense. Nothing
could be more unfortunate than that Government should
strain a vague law, such as sedition, for ,the purpose of
implicating them in an offence on this ground. He wished
to kouvr If histruutiuns would be give.. that the persons
new in gaol on this charge should be forthwith set at
liberty ?
Viscount PALMERSTON (who had now returned
to his seat) said—l have to apologise to my hon. friend
who asked this question, for having been absent from
my place at the moment he put it, but I was called out to
look at an act of Parliament on another subject, and I
thOught from the course of the discussion on the Irish
Church question, that I should be back in time to give
an answer. It is true, as my honourable friend (Mr:
Fitzroy) stated, that it is not the intention of her Ma-
jesty's Government to proceed with those prosecutions,
and the reason is this—that whatever may have been
the intentions of the parties who have caused those
placards and pictorial descriptions to be printed and
circulated, those intentions have wholly failed. (Hear,
hear.) The good sense and patriotic spirit and feeling
of the English people have induced them to treat those
invitations to abandon the cause of their country with
the contempt they merit. (Cheers.) The attempt
to thwart the public service having failed, I thought
it would really have the appearance of vindictive-
ness to pursue the prosecutions which had been
instituted. I have, therefore, given notice that
those prosecutions should be entirely and absolutely
dropped. I shall not take the trouble of requiring
the parties to enter into their recognizances, and there-
fore of course anybody who is in prison on this charge
will be released. The hon. gentleman who has just sat
down alluded to the case of Mr. Somerville, which
formed the subject of one of the pictorial exhibitions on
the placards. He had received a letter from Mr, Somer-
ville on the subject, which he would read to the house.
The noble lord then read the following letter, inclosing a
copy of a letter to Mr. Hindley

" Militia—Peace Society.
" To the Right Hon. Lord Palmerston.
" 36, Limo-street, Liverpool, Feb. 17, 1853.
"My Lord,—l observe by the newspapers that Mr.
"Lindley is to put a question about the anti-militia placards
of the Peace Society. I have written by this post a letter
to Mr. 'Lindley, of which I annex a copy. Should that
gentleman not read or notice my letter, I trust your lord-
ship will do so, and set me right with the public. lam
more interested in that offensive placard than any other
person. I am a literary man, earning bread for self and
family by my pen, and eating it only by favour of the
public who buy my productions. As your lordship will
perceive, the Peace Society, who have placarded me all
over the kingdom, have placed me in a false and odious
position.
" I am, my lord, your lordship's obedient servant,
"ALEXANDER SOMERVILLE
" (` One who has Whistled at the Plough'), &c."

Copy of a letter to Mr. Hindley, 17th Feb., 1853.
" Sir,—Seeing in tho newspapers that you are to put a
question to Lord Palmerston on the subject of the anti-
militia placards posted throughout the kingdom by the
Peace Society, I beg your attention to the following facts,
and I think you should in fairness read this letter in the
house :—The placard in question contains an engraving of
a man tied up to be flogged. It contains also a description
by me (in a book entitled the ' Autobiography of a Work-
ing Man') of the punishment I received while a soldier in
the Scots Greys, on the 29th of May, 1832. I have reason
to complain of that offensive placard, and complained of it
to the Peace Society as soon as I knew of its existence,
and on the following grounds :
" 1. Because my own opinion has been decidedly in fa-
vour of the volunteering of recruits to the militia, in pre-
ference to a compulsory ballot (or invasion of the domestic
circle by a conscription) ; and because, if the battalions of
the militia were not filled by volunteers, the conscription
must have been resorted to.
"2. Because I do not believe that militiamen were or are,
likely to be flogged, unless they commit crimes which they
may easily avoid.
" 3. Because my book was intended to be, what every
page of it proves, a warning to young men in the army,
and to soldiers already there, not to connect themselves
--;th politics, and regimental politicians, as I unfortunately
to dissuade civilians from connecting themselves
' force movements..
-notation is prominently made frora my
• ,+vts placard without their naming
was flogged, but on the con-
--inted with
me to infer
-obably, of a vile
bir of before

did ;
With phveicz2- •
" 4. 13ecause a q.
book in the Peace
the book, or 6100i-fling wilY.se
traryr leading any one not At
that Was some malefactor, y,
moral
sup (Which' soldiers usually are gu„.
receiving such PliilighleAlt);
5. Because my name tVae the only one used in the
card as a soldier who had suffered that pitnithment which
was to deter men from volunteering into the tuilitht.
" 6. Because I was not asked if I should allow my tam' ,eF
to be used for such a purpose.
And, lastly, if I had, I should have emphatically said