The Sun.
London, England, 1836-04-19 00:00:00

MILITARY FLOGGING.

As we stated in Friday's paper, we had prepared
the following remarks for insertion, but were unable to
find room for them till to-day.
Mr. Cutlar Fergusson is probably not aware that
he has been anticipated by that evening organ of the
Government, which is opposed to the abolition of mi-
litary flogging, in the following arguments. The
Learned_. Judge-Advocate, referring to the degrading
nature of corporal punishment, is reported to have said,
" All punishments were intended and enforced for the
sake of example, and would any man say that the de-
gradation attending their infliction was a reason why
they should be abolished ? Was the ignominy of a
death on the gallows a reason why that mode of cri-
minal punishment should be set aside ?" If Mr. Fer-
gusson will show that military crimes, punished by the
degrading lash, are in any degree comparable to those
expiated by the degrading gallows, then his argument
will have weight with reflecting men. It is but poor
- trifling to say, that because murder and all the most
violent outrages against society pay the extreme penalty
of a disgraceful death, that therefore venial or even
grave offences against military discipline are to be
visited by an ignominious and barbarous cruelty. Lord
Howick also, mistaking a flippant caper for a trium-
phant movement, exclaimed—" Now, what was the
nature of the punishment of the boulet, They were
never condemned to this punishment for a shorter pe-
riod than five years, and sometimes for as many as ten
years. They had to work ten hours a-day in summer,
and something less in winter, and that in a convict
dress. Call flogging a degradation I Why, the boulet
was ten times more degrading, not merely from the
sense of shame and humiliation felt at the moment, but,
because it was calculated to deteriorate the feelings of
the man, concentrating in one spot all the bad charac-
ters in the army, and collecting, as it were, a focus of
moral corruption." It is a pity that the Noble Lord,
instead of soaring to such sublimities as " focus of mo-
ral corruption," and the like, should not limit himself
to considering such a matter as the present " like a man
of this world.' Great, indeed, is the degradation of
the boulet—greater, if you will, than that of the lash.
But why did not the Noble Lord inform himself of
the important fact, that the French soldier, so de-
graded by an infamous punishment (peine infamante)
is never restored to his military rank, or to his social
position, but is by that one infliction condemned to
be an outcast for life ? What analogy is there between
the bozdet and the lash, considered as a degrading
punishment ? The last degrades, not only the indi-
vidual offenders, but the 'whole service subject to it.
The delinquent is not banished as unworthy to asso-
ciate with his comrades, after such a degradation,
hearing as he does traces as ineffaceable on his moral
character as those on his physical frame ; for our
readers may, perhaps, have yet to learn that the marks
left by the lash. are never entirely removed. • So far
from its being a degradation to the French army that
a scoundrel should be expelled from among them, and
sentenced to a shameful punishment, it is honourable
to that gallant body of men that an infamous inflic-
tion disqualifies the victim for again belonging to the
service. And it would be as well for Lord Howick
to consider this point before he again indulges in ex-
ciam-atory comparisons between the effects of the Lozdet
and the lash. As we anticipated, and indeed sug-
gested, the Noble Lord used so much of the speech of
Mr. Edward Ellice, quoted by U 3 on Wednesday, as
might cajole the House, without compromising the
Government. The Secretary at War said, " With re-
spect to what had fallen from the Hon. Member on
the subject of additional rewards and incentives to
~00d conduct been held out to the army, he could as-
sure him and the House that the attention of Go-
vernmmt should be directed to that subject, and that
v.hatever could be done in the way of rewards should
be done." Any man who can find a meaning in such
promise as this is welcome to make the most of it.
Fur our part, we think such full-mouthed nonsenne
unworthy of even the most sucking statesmen.
Another analogy which these gentlemen attempted
to establish was between flogging in the army and
whipping in the civil prisons. In the first place,
Nvhippinfr in the civil prisons is only adjudged for in-
famous offences. But, without dwelling on this point,
let any man who has witnessed the laceration and tor-
ture following the lash say how far the whippings of
a civil prison partake of its atrocious barbarity. And
here we may notice a question put to Lord Howick by
Major Fancourt after the division, immediately before
the House resolved itself into a Committee on the
Mutiny Bill. The Hon. Member expressed an anx-
iety, after the decision the House had come to, to
know from the Noble Lord under what restrictions
corporal punishment was to be inflicted on the soldier.
The Secretary at War answered, that general courts-
martial were to be restricted to 300 lashes, district
courts-martial to 150, and regimental to 100. This
being so, the district and the regimental courts-martial
being both reduced one half of their former powers,
we wish to impress upon the public mind the possi-
bility of even this instalment of mercy being wholly
frustrated. The number of lashes may be reduced
and the torture of the sufferers by no means dimi-
nished. Surgeon Henry Parkin, in his evidence be-
fore the Commissioners, is asked the following ques-
tion :—" Is the punishment inflicted in the naval
service more or less severe than this ?" " Much more
severe ; the cat is heavier, the blow •is heavier, but
the stripes are fewer." This we think worthy of
deep attention. We have no wish to charge cruelty, or
neglect, or a disposition to evade the restriction of the
punishment ; but in all public matters it is fit that
there should be no chance left for cruelty, neglect, or
evasion, without a corresponding responsibility. On
application at the Horse Guards the regulation pattern
of all matters of military equipment may be inspected
by persons entitled to make the request. And we can
see :no objection to our proposal, that a regimental
pattern of what is technically termed a " cat" should
be likewise kept, and accessible to all, in order that
there should be no doubt left of the practical effect of
the restriction which has been described. It would
then be incumbent on every commanding officer to see
that the instrument of torture was strictly according to
the army pattern, any deviation from which he
would be held responsible for. Should there appear
any thing like mistrust of the authorities in this
suggestion, the Whigs must attribute it to the sub-
terfuges resorted to by them in considering a question
which we have throughout grappled with in a nervous
and open manner.
_

The only speech of the evening in support of the
Government, calculated to strengthen their view, was
delivered by one of their most uncompromising political
opponents. In that gallant officer, opposition to Major
Fancourt's motion was consistent with the avowed
convictions of his whole military and political life. Sir
Henry Hardinge, judging from his evidence, is only
so far in favour of the system of corporal punishments
as he conceives the power of inflicting them neces-
sary for the enforcement of secondary punishments.
But when he, speaking of the gallant conduct of the
57th Regiment at the battle of Albuera, told the House
that they were, from thoughtlessness and plunder, so
subjected to the lash that they were known under the
nickname of the " steel-backs," we think he in some
degree led his hearers to an unjust conclusion. To
use a somewhat trite expression, these brave men were
fearless, not because of the lash, but in spite of it.
The following sentence from the Gallant Generals
peech will be read with pride by every Englishman:—
" Out of 25 officers on that occasion (the battle of
Albuera), no less than 23 were killed or wounded ;
and of 520 men, no less than 387 were killed and
wounded ; and it was observed that all the men fell
in the ranks as they had fought, and every wound was
in front." But surely Sir H. Hardinge does not attri-
bute this national valour to military flogging ? Mr.
Poulter, we think, comes nearer the truth, when saying
of the army, " their discipline and valour are owing to
the energy and firmness of the British character." In
a like manner, while anleeinc, with chat fact so thril-
lingly stated by the Duke of Wellington—namely, that
" he could have gone anywhere or done anythino• with
that army, that itimpossible to have a mac 3111 C
was
more highly mounted or in a better state of discipline than
that army was, and that when he quitted it on the GaA
ronne there was a total diseoninuance of all punish-
ments," we would wish to appeal to 'the illustrious
chief himself as to whether the pride and martial
he, by a long career of'
a rdour which glory, in-

fused into the forces under his command was not the
true secret of the soldier's discipline? When Colonel
Napier briefly dedicates his history of the Peninsular
war to the Duke of Wellington in the following
sentence :—" This history I dedicate to your Grace,
because I have served long enough under your com-
mand to feel why the soldiers of the 10th Legion
were attached to Caesar, " he undoubtedly referred
to the higher considerations of which we have been
speaking, and not to any coercive discipline. Nor
does it appear to us that Sir Henry Hardinge quoted
a case in point, when alluding to the corporal punish-
ment inflicted on the troops under Colonel Evans.
No man, we think, would regret more than Sir Henry
Hardinge himself, the identifying the British army
with the class of persons composing the Palmerston
forces in Spain. This is a point on which we could
say much, but we shall refrain, from a disposition to
leave Colonel Evans the full benefit of the mitigating
circumstances which his friends might urge in his
favour.

We were on the point of closing these remarks,
when the debate of Thursday evening on the motion of
Mr. Lennard suggested a word or two in addition. The
motion of the Hon. Member was, that the following
clause should form part of the report on the Mutiny
Bill :

" Provided nevertheless, that notwithstanding any thing
hereinbefore mentioned, no court-martial whatsoever which
shall be held in any part of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland (except during such time as the country
shall be at war with .any foreign State or Power) shall be
authorized to award the infliction of flogging on any
soldier."'

This motion having been negatived by about the
same proportion of votes as that of Wednesday night,
we are not aware that it presents the views and feeling;
of Government in any other light than that under
which.We have been considering them. Two circum-
stances, however, occurred to justify a passing notice.
Firstly, Lord William Bentinck was present. This
presence at the debate on Wednesday evening sur-
prised us, even more than that indolent Whiggery
which enabled him to be a passive spectator where he
ought to have been one of the most active debaters,
and to give a silent vote on a subject peculiarly calling
for an exposition of his Parliamentary views. The
question of military flogging, as considered on Wednes-
day night, was not thought worthy of a single syllable.
from the Noble Lord ; but when Mr. Barlow Hov
brought the personal charge against Lord William Ben-
tinek, of having acted incautiously in his partial repeal
of the punishment in India, without instructions from
the Horse-Guards, the Noble Member for Glasgow
thought proper to address the House. That he dill so
to any purpose we cannot conscientiously say. But
that is a matter interesting only to the constituency
who selected his Lordship as a fit and proper person to
serve in Parliament. As will be seen by a reference to
the debate, the Noble Lord threw the responsibility on
his Council. The second circumstance calling for se-
mark in Thursday night's debate is, that the leader of the
Government, Mr. Daniel O'Connell, who had given a si-
lent vote on Wednesday, from an unwillingness to embar-
rass his Majesty's Ministers, found it necessary for the
preservation of his influence among the Radical mem-
bers to say something ; and he very consistently de-
voted himself to a defence of Col. Evans, and to a de-
clamation against the general cruelty of corporal pi; •
nisliments. It is not difficult to conjecture the fervent
nature of the appeal which would have been made to
the sympathies of the House had the Hon. and
Learned Member been advocating this question
against the views of a Conservative Administration. It
is to he hoped that next session he will be relieved
from the trammels which have, this year, interfered
with the customary pathos of his liberal harangues.—
Times.