The Sun.
London, England, 1836-03-22 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

To ADVERTISERS.—NEWSPAPER STAMPS.--
A Return of the number of Stamps issued for all the London
Newspapers, by order of the House of Commons, on the mo-
tion of Mr. Charles Buller, was issued sth October, 1835, in
which official document Mr. Clement, the Proprietor of the
Observer, had used in one year (the 30th of June, 1834, to
the 30th of June, 1835), for his two Weekly Journals only,
nearly One Million of Stamps, namely, 971,125, averaging
18,675 each Sunday. Advertisers are interested in bearing
this statement in mind, inasmuch as the sale, and consequently
the number of readers, of the Observer, are more than equal
to half a dozen added together of soma of the Sunday Papers.
—Office of the Observer, 170, Strand.
Mr. O'Connell has not yet fixed the day for his visit
to Nottingham. Preparations are making—the Mayor has
granted the use of the Exchange-rooms, which are to be
fitted up to dine 400 gentlemen. On each side spacious and
subkantial galleries will be erected for the accommodation of
300 ladies, and the rooms will be tastefully decorated, so as to
make this the most splendid entertainment ever given in the
town of Nottingham.—Review.
The hurricane which raged for 48 hours has done
great damage in the city and neighbourhood of Brussels. The
accounts from the seaports likewise mention many accidents.

At the close of some few remarks with which we-
yesterday entered on the subject of military flogging,
as it is represented in the report of the Military Com-
mission, we expressed
,our thorough conviction that the
punishment was more likely to degrade than to reclaim,
not only the soldiers subjected to it, but every man belong-
ing to a body liable to such debasement. We could not
refrain from expressing our dissatisfaction, approaching
to disgust, at the dereliction of all consistency manifested
by the Whigs in reference to this question, and while ap-
proving of the issuing of a commission by Sir R. Peel,
after the course his predecessors had taken, we stated
plainly that such a commission, to give entire satisfac-
tion to the country, should have been constituted so as
to include at least a fair proportion of individuals
favourable to the abolition of the punishment. A
Ministerial print of yesterday evening assures us, with
reference to the first point of our complaint, that one
eminent Whig, namely, Sir Ronald Ferguson, has
undergone no alteration in respect to his horror of
flogging, but that there is distinct and positive proof
that this gallant officer has very recently exerted him-
self to get rid of this punishment. The Ministerial
print goes on to say, that it " doubts not that the rest
of the gentlemen on whom the Times casts a slur are
equally misrepresented." In this last remark we are
inclined to agree, for all the names we yesterday men-
tioned are in one and the same predicament, andwe have
to apologize to Mr. Spring Rice for not having given
him his due place in that list of consistent politicians.
But our Ministerial contemporary states that Sir Ro-
nald Ferguson has very recently exerted himself to get
rid of this punishment. When and where were these
exertions made ? Certainly not on the occasion of the
last division in 1834, by his vote. If it be by his pen,
in some pamphlet addressed to the public, or memorial
submitted to the Government, how shamefully neg-
lectful have the morning and evening organs of Whig-
gery been, to allow the humane exertions of the Gal-
lant General in the cause for which he has thus re-
cently " exerted himself " to remain unnoticed ! How-
ever, as we are given to understand that the Whigs
" will be found, when the day of trial comes, the steady
advocates of their former opinions," we will not be too
inquisitive as to any perplexity of opinion under which
they may be now labouring. To return to the Report
of the Commission. In the following extract we agree,
though not from the same reasons which have, to all
appearance, influenced the Commissioners :
" There is, however, one suggestion which has been
made by those who have a strong feeling against the use of
corporal punishment, to which we must advert—namely,
that the power of inflicting it should be confined to the
army upon actual service, and entirely taken away as re-
spects the regiments quartered in these islands and the
colonies. We cannot recommend the adoption of this sug-
gestion. If this power be taken away at all, the rule must
be universal, and applied to all circumstances equally. The
soldier must not be told that that power cannot be per-
mitted to exist while he remains in a situation where he is
called upon for comparatively easy duty without risk, but
that from the moment he is required hourly and daily to
to undergo the severest hardships and privations, and to
risk his life in the service, he is to be subject to that
punishment, which you have declared. to be degrading,
and calculated to impair and to destroy those moral feel-
ings upon which you have to depend for the energy and
exertions which are the foundations of the military glory of
his country, and the success or its arms. To place him in
such a position would be both inconsistent and unjust, and
cannot be defended."
With reference to all such partial schemes of aboli-
tion as that just indicated, it may be generally remarked
that they were proposed by gentlemen who, unable to
carry a final repeal of the existing law, were anxious
from time to time to weaken the system now in force,
in the hope of gradually effecting their original object.
Of the policy of' such a line of proceeding we shall here
say nothing. But as regards the particular modifica-
tion noticed by the Commissioners, we must say, that
they do not appear to have put their own case so
strongly as by the evidence of the Duke of Wellington,
taken before them, they might have done. At page
328 of the evidence, as printed by command of his
Majesty, the following question is put' to the Noble
Duke :
" Would it not be exceedingly prejudicial to the discipline
of a regiment, if it was known to the soldiers of that regi-
ment, that during their remaining in Great Britain and Ire-
land they were not subject to corporal punishment, but,
from the moment they set their foot on board ship to proceed
either to the colonies or actual service, they would then
become subject to a punishment considered so degrading in
England as to be abolished ?"
His Grace answers—
' I should think so. But there is one thing which
should always be borne in mind, that is that in reality the
army think little of this punishment. If it was abolished
entirely in England, and kept up in the colonies, the effect
would be very injurious. Going to the colonies, say what
we will, is never very agreeable. We consider and repre-
sent it a matter of honour—we are going abroad ; and there
is among the commanding and other officers of the regiment
a desire that it should be reckoned a good thing. But if it
was attended by corporal punishment being revived, having
been put down in England and in Ireland, I do not mean to
say that there might not be an additional motive for feeling
an objection to go, and that there might not be some in-
stances of mutiny and difficulty in getting the soldier abroad
from the fear of having, or under the pretext of the fear of
having, this punishment inflicted."
This answer contains matter to which, in a future
stage of this subject, we may perhaps have occasion to
recur. Here we only wish to observe, that the Duke
of Wellington is of opinion that the retaining the
punishment in the colonies or on actual service after its
abolition at home, might lead to instances of mutiny
and difficulty in getting the soldier abroad. The argu-
ment is certainly good against a modified abolition of
the punishment, and as such we gratefully accept it ;
but it does not bear on the only point which the public
mind will now entertain—the entire abolition of flog-
ging in the army. The Commissioners denounce what
they term one of the most " common arguments" for
the total abolition of flogging—namely, that so long as
it is permitted, the officers of the army will not be in-
duced to use their best exertions to avoid its use.
They tell us that the whole tenour of the evidence is
contrary to any such hypothesis, and that officers of
all ranks speak of it as an evil rendered necessary by
the description and- prevailing habits of our soldiers,
and more especially the vice of drunkenness. On this
point we shall simply say, that we are as incapable of
believing that a British officer would from disposition
resort to this punishment, as we are from believing
that the British soldier should be subjected to it. But
if officers in the army entertain; as we are willing
to think they do, a strong repugnance to the exer-
cise of this savage authority—if they have of late
years, as we liave all reason to know, so far de-
ferred to public opinion as to afford practical
evidence that, as compared with other times, it
may be in a great degree discontinued,—if thus
the feelings of all ranks in the service would be con-
sulted by removing this custom, can it be reasonably
retained on the mere ground of the tendency of the
soldier to an indulgence, which, as the Commissioners
say, pervades the population of the country to a great
extent—namely, drunkenness ? That this vice, in the
instance of the soldier, as in that of the citizen, is the
fruitful source of misconduct of various kinds, no one
will be disposed to deny; but we have been given to
understand from good authority that a man offending
in this respect is often so treated as to lead him to
aggravate the circumstances of his original offence.
At page 35 of the evidence we find the following
question put to an officer examined :—" Are you aware
that by far the greater part of the punishments in-
flicted in the British army arises from offences com-
mitted by soldiers in a state of drunkenness ?" An-
swer—" Yes. Insubordination, insolence, and so forth,
in nine cases out of ten arise from drunkenness. On
this point, I should wish to mention a very salutary
regulation of the French army. Among us, non-
commissioned officers are not sufficiently cautious
about speaking to a man while under the influence
of liquor. Nov, in France no one is allowed to speak
a word to a man who is drunk, and whatever he him-
self may say is passed over." But under any view of
the case, whether this last expedient be practised or
not, surely the insubordination, or, in other words, in-
solent bearing, of a drunken ,man towards his supe-
riors, could be adequately punished by confining him
under circumstances of severity with reference to diet
and labour. And to us it appears that this latter mode
of punishment, rigorously enforced, would be the most
likely to reclaim the man from his vicious indulgence.
Sir Octavius Carey so treated the offence, as we learn

it was well-known in the regiment that in certain cases
punishment (flogging) would be inflicted?"
Answer—" No, Ido not think it was. I made a point
to persuade the men, as far as possible, that I would not
punish. The men always knew that I had the power of
punishment, but the general principle on which I endea-
voured to maintain discipline was as much as possible to
persuade them that I would not punish—that I did not like
the punishment."
In the evidence of the Duke of Wellington we have a
remarkable instance of the effect of discriminating
leniency. A non-commissioned officer had been guilty
of a very grave offence, Vut on the ground of his ge-
neral good character the Duke remitted his sentence,
and was subsequently enabled, by the conduct of the
man, to give him gradual promotion till at length he
became a field-officer. We have no wish to determine
so important a question as this upon individual in-
stances, but when they are so constantly resorted to on
the one side, we think ourselves entitled to a similar
advantage on the other. Should our space permit, we
shall go at length into the whole question of the
crimes and punishments in the French service, and in
our own, and we hope to show that the result of the
comparison is favourable to the abolition of flogging in
the army. It is with sincere gratification that we
announce that the Sheriffs of the city of London ap-
peared last evening at the bar of the House of Com-
mons with a petition from the Mayor and Common
Council, praying for the entire abolition of Bogging in
the army. As the Easter recess will intervene before
this question can be brought forward, on going into
committee on the Mutiny Bill, there will be time for
very extensive manifestations of the feeling of the
country in petitions to Parliament. We hope the op-
portunity will not be lost.—Times.
The Report from the Commissioners for inquiring
into the system of Punishments in the Army, will not,
we think, give satisfaction to the country. We admit
that the question is by no means of such easy solution
as many persons seem to think. But the Commis-
sioners have unnecessarily narrowed it, by assuming
that soldiers must always be raised in a certain manner
in this country, and that men so raised can only be
kept in order by the present system of punishment.
" The great body of the recruits (we are told), consists
of the inhabitants of the large towns and manufacturing
districts, and of agricultural labourers ; which last appear
generally to enter the army in consequence of some family
difficulty, or some scrape in which they are involved, or
from some temporary difficulty of obtaining work, and be-
come the best and most trust-worthy soldiers, when they
have undergone the necessary preparation of the drill.
Those who come from the manufacturing districts and large
towns, are too frequently the most idle and dissolute, and
require all the means in the power of their officers to cor-
rect the intemperate and vicious habits in which they have
indulged, and to teach them that subordination is the first
duty of the profession into which they have entered."
It bad been suggested by Mr. HUME, in his evi-
dence, " as the means of inducing the educated sons
of individuals, in comfortable situations of life, to enter
the army, provided corporal punishment was also abo-
lished," " that a portion of either one-third, one-half,
or two-thirds of the first commissions, as may be de-
termined upon, should be granted to men who have
gone through with credit the gradations of private,
corporal, and non-commissioned officer." What do the
Commissioners say to this ? That the giving commis-
sons to non-commissioned officers is by no means un-
frequent—that the Duke of Wellington, in the
Peninsula, was in the habit of frequently ap-
pointing non-commissioned officers to the vacant
commissions ; but that neither the Duke nor Lord
Hill give a very favourable account of the
success of these appointments. We are then told
that one of the essential requisites hitherto in the army
has been that its officers should be of a station and
education to fit them for any society in which they
may be placed—that all officers in our service are
upon an equal footing—that they all meet daily toge-
ther at the mess table, and that the frequent admission
to it " of persons who are of an age to have contracted
habits from their former modes of life and the so-
ciety in which they have lived, would be very likely to
destroy the present system of social intercourse alto-
gether. Now if the object be to draw the line be-
tween the officer and the soldier so strict that the offi-
cers and soldiers shall constitute two castes, there may
be some force in what the Commissioners say. But
the question, as we take it, is not what would be most
gratifying to the aristocracy, but whether an efficient
army could be maintained without degrading punish-
ments ? It may be of more importance to gratify
the feelings of the Aristocracy than to put an end
to degrading punishments. This is a question which
we are not now called upon to discuss ; but we
contend that the objections of the Commissioners
ate wide of the point under consideration. The Com-
missioners first draw a strict line between the Officers
and the common soldiers, which leads necessarily to
the confining the latter to the lowest class in society.
The habits of an individual accustomed to move in
such a class to the middle of life, are certainly not
such as to allow him to enter a mess with satisfaction
either to the higher bred or to himself. But why may
not respectable and well-instructed young men enter
the British army as well as other employments ? Were
it once understood that the soldier could rise to the
highest grades, instead of the low and vicious classes
of which our army is now formed, and which, perhaps,
being without higher motives of action, must be re-
strained by severity of punishment, we should see
spirited, ambitious, and well-educated young men
eagerly entering the army as common soldiers. The
habits of these men not being low, they would
enter the mess on terms of equality with the others.
We never heard that in the army of the Common-
wealth, one of the most effective that England
ever possessed, there was any strict line drawn be-
tween the Officers and privates. In fact, almost
all the Officers of any note were men who bad
risen from the ranks. Let us not be misunderstood.
We are not discussing the relative advantages of an
army officered by an Aristocracy, with the tanks com-
posed of what the Commissioners term the sweepings
of our manufactung towns—and of an army in which
the distinction between the officer and soldier should
not be impassable, and consequently in which honour
would pervade all ranks. All we mean to say .is, that
the Commissioners have not put the case fairly, by
arguing as an objection to the raising men from the
ranks, that the habits of the men now in the ranks un-
fit them for associating with gentlemen. Only let it
be understood that no degradation attaches to entering
the army, and the best description of young men will
be eager to join its ranks. The military spirit in
young men is generally strong, and the disgrace alone
of joining a body in which there is little or no hope of
promotion, and associating with people of low habits,
is often hardly sufficient to repress the spirit. But
elsewhere, will fail.
half-measures in the army, as
If
it be wished to dispense with corporal punishments,
there must be i
a revolution the whole of our mili-
tart' systein.—i
liornino Chronicle.
bantduort ei'
Notwithstanding. the confidence with which the pro-
jectors speak of their success, and the Joca paltry ped-
we never can
wilt ever so
tilin; of the Corporations
f' i
of to
rsuade ourlat the Lecr '
Pe
insanely lostse toves allth sense otsis duty as to admitb,e for
the present, at least the entry of railroads and loco-
motive engines within ,the. streets of the metropolis.
Though our objections to such schemes are permanent
and exclusive, It is
sufficient for the present to resist
them on temporary grounds. As yet the railroad