The Sun.
London, England, 1836-03-19 00:00:00

SHIPWRECKS.

Mr. BETHEL gave notice of his intention to move for a
Select Committee to inquire into the cause of the frequency
of shipwreck on the south-western coast.
MILITARY PUNISHMENTS.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL having brought up a report on
the subject of military punishments,
Major FANCOURT said it was his intention to move, in
Committee, a resolution for the entire abolition of corporal
punishments in the army.
SUPPLY.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said—There being no House on
Wednesday, and no important business having been proceeded
with yesterday, he would move that the dropped Order for a
Committee of Supply be now read.
Sir ROBERT PEEL thought it would be wrong to esta-
blish the inconvenient precedent proposed by the Noble Lord
of going into a Committee of Supply without previous notice.
'Mondays and Fridays were the order days.
Lord J. RUSSELL recollected several cases of dropped
orders being brought on in the way which he now proposci to
the House.
Sir R. PEEL doubted very much if there were several cases
in which dropped orders were resumed; certainly not unless
by general consent.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY had no wish to interfere with the
business of the Government, or the arrangements they might
have made for the progress of business But he had a motion
fur the appointment of a Committee, and unless some arrange-
ment were made by the Government to enable him to bring it
forward, he should the first time the Order of the Day was
read, either to go into Committee of Supply, or on the Irish

Corporation Bill, move as an amendment the appointment of
his Committee.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL was ready to meet the motion ;
and as the postponement of the motion had proceeded from the
cause it had, he certainly had no right to adopt the course
which he had just intimated his intention to do. Should the
Hon. Gentleman persist in doing so, he ( Lord John Russell)
should not make any attempt to prevent the Hon. Member
from proceeding with his opening statement ; but lie should
feel it his duty, instead of going into the question, to move (as
we understood the Noble Lord) the previous question The
question was certainly not of such paramount importance as to
require precedence of the tithe question and some others, or
to be brought forward at this early period of the Session. And
certainly the Hon. Member, after giving way upon the same
question on a former occasion, need scarcely be so importunate
with it now. However, he should endeavour to let the Hon.
Member know, in the course of the evening, what course it
would be convenient to pursue upon this question, or what day
it might be possible to bring it forward.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY said, in reference to what had fallen
from the NoLle Lord respecting his (Mr. Harvey's) having
given way upon this question before, the Noble Lord might
certainly have spared the observation, had he called to mind
that he had so given way at the earliest solicitation of the
Government, of which that Noble Lord was then a member,
and which he considered had not then struck root sufficiently
deep to withstand the issue of a question upon which there
might have been an inconvenient division of opinion.—(Hear,
hear.) If the question were again postponed, the Noble Lord
might rest assured the blame should not be attributable to him
(Mr. Harvey.)
REGISTRATION OF VOTERS BILL.

In reply to a question from an Hon. Member, the ATTOR-
NEY-GEN ER AL said that he should, if possible, move the
second reading of the Registration of Voters Bill that evening.

POOR LAWS (IRELAND.)
In reply to a question from Sir R. MUSGRAVE,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the report of the Irish
Poor Law Commissioners had only just arrived, and he be-
lieved had not been as yet sent to the Home-office. He could
not, therefore, in reply to the Hon. Member's question, state
if any Government measure for the relief of the Poor of Ire-
land would be brought forward this session. But certainly it
could not be brought forward before Easter.
Mr. WALLACE inquired of the Lord Advocate for Scot-
land if anything had been done by his Majesty's Government
on behalf of the eighteen unfortunate men convicted in Scot-
land in 1820, of what was called in those times treasonable
practices, whose names were as follow :—John Barr, Wil-
liam Clarkson, James Clelland, Andrew Dawson, Robert
Gray, Alexander Hart, Alexander Johnston, Alexander La-
timer, Thomas M'Cullock, Thomas M'Farlane, John
M‘Millan, Benjamin Moir, Allan Murchie, Thomas Pike,
William Smith, David Thomson, Andrew White, and
James Wright.

The LORD ADVOCATE was happy to inform the Hon.
Member for Greenock, that his Majesty had been graciously
pleased to pardon the whole of these men, and instructions to
that effect had been sent out to New South Wales.
OCCUPATION OF CRACOW.

On the question beingput that the House go into a Commit-
tee of Supply,
Sir STRATFORD CANNING rose and said, that aware
as he was that the subject to which lie was about to call the atten-
tion of the House was one of deep interest to many Hon. Mem-
bers besides himself, he could not but regret the delay which
had taken place in bringing it forward—a delay which had
proceeded from unavoidable circumstances which had pre-
vented him from following up his notice. He was sensible,
however, that the interval which had elapsed had brought
countervailing advantages. His Noble Friend had had op-
portunities of receiving communications from his Majesty's
representatives abroad--of having communications too with
the foreign ambassadors here, and of taking the opinion of
the law officers of the Crown upon those parts of the question
upon which there were certainly some doubtful points.—
( Hear.) He felt confident, therefore, that his Noble Friend
was prepared at all points to enter into the question—going
into the real merits of the case. His only object in bringing
this question forward was, to show that a free and independent
State—for upon however small a scale, it was so—was the
subject of a military occupation, attended with circumstances
calculated to give rise to suspicion, and which certainly chal-
lenged inquiry. Nothing could—and he said so in perfect
sincerity—give him greater pleasure than that the explana-
tions of the Noble Lord might be satisfactory to the House ;
and that it should appear that our allies of the North had not
stepped beyond the limits of a just and necessary duty. The
first document to which he would refer, was the note of the
plenipotentiary of the three Powers—Austria, Russia, and
Prussia—to the President of the Republic of Cracow, dated
9th Feb. That note called upon the President to remove from
the territory of Cracow, within eight days, all the Polish fugi-
tives now there. " Such of the fugitives," it said, "as can
prove that one of the Governments has assented to their being
admitted, will be provided with the necessary means of
proceeding to their destination ; but the others" what
did the House,. he should pause to ask, think was the con-
clusion ?—" but the others will be sent (' transported' was
a more appropriate word) to America"—(Hear, hear)—a
compliment, by the way, for which that country would no
doubt be indebted. The note continued to say, that it would
be for the President to apply to the plenipotentiaries, if he
should want the support of an armed force to carry the com-
mand into effect. He then continued :—" So long as the
present state of things continues, every subject of the free city
of Cracow who intends to pass the frontiers of one of the three
neighbouring states cannot be admitted without exhibiting a
regular passport, signed by the respective residents. The
three protecting powers flatter themselves that the required
clearing of the territory of Cracow will, in consequence of
these facilities afforded to the Government of the Republic,
be effected without further difficulty. Should they, however,
be disappointed in their expectations on this subject, and
should the period above fixed pass over without the entire
and complete execution of the measures in question, the three
Courts will feel themselves b)und to effect by their own
means what the Government of Cracow may have wanted the
inclination or the power to carry into execution." He should
now proceed to the next document, which was the answer of
the senate ; from which he should trouble the House with the
following extract :—" Immediately on the receipt of the note
dated this day, by which the ambassadors of the three pro-
tecting powers have declared that it was the will of these
powers that all Polish refugees, whether military or civil, who
in any manner whatever took part in the Polish revolution in
1830 and 1831, who may be within the territories of the free
Republic of Cracow, should depart within eight days, and re-
pair to Podgorze, where they will be informed of their ulterior
destination, the senate has hastened to publish the following
Proclamation, in order to make known to all persons who may
come under the above denomination the intentions of the high
protecting powers, and have commanded them at the same
time to obey these injunctions without delay, abridging the
term of grace by two days. For the rest the Government
will neglect no means in its power to carry into effect the
will of the supreme powers." Notwithstanding this pro-
mise on the part of the senate, and a representation of the
circumstances of unfortunate difficulty in which those were
placed who had been for some years resident in Cracow,
and were unable to settle their affairs in so short a period,
no additional time was given, and at the expiration of the
eight days the troops of the three powers marched beyond
the frontier into the capital of the State. He should only
direct the attention of the House to a third document,
which was a proclamation of the Austrian general,. issued
on the 17th of last month. There was, in addition to
the giving up of 400 persons under the order of the note
to which he had referred, a disbanding of the militia of
the state.—(Hear, hear.) Having laid before the House
the principal circumstances connected with the occupation of
Cracow, lie should call attention to the situation of the state
itself. Hon. Members were aware that it was perhaps the
smallest upon the map—not larger than a square described on
a line from this to Windsor, some four or five hundred square
miles in area. For its existence as a free and independent
state, he need hardly say it was indebted to treaty, concluded
perhaps as a compensation for the ruin of that independence
which the powers who were parties to it had failed to secure
for Poland.—( Hear, hear.) First, the 6th article of the treaty
of Vienna declared Cracow " a free and independent, and
strictly independent city." The 9th article of that treaty
guaranteed that no armed force could be introduced into the
territory of Cracow on any pretext whatsoever. It was true
that the same article of the treaty prohibited the city from
affording an asylum to deserters, or any subjects of the three
protecting powers prosecuted by law. His object in referring
to the treaty was to show that the complete independence of
Cracow was guaranteed by it, and that every precaution had
been taken to prevent it from the invasion of a military force.
But it was not alone the external protection of the republic that
was guaranteed, but the protecting powers took its internal
affairs under their guardianship, for they expressly declared
that they would secure the constitution which had been granted
to the free state of Cracow. Their protection was extended
even further than this, for they promised to secure the youth
of the state the advantages of liberal education. This fully
proved the paternal interest which the three protecting
powers manifested for this offspring of the Congress of Vienna.
It would appear by the treaty that the principal powers ac-
knowledged in principle the re-establishment of the independ-
ence of the country, but on such a scale that it should not be
any loss of territory to themselves. It would appear that they
cheerfully entered into the more enlightened views of this
country, and offered a sort of moral retribution to the people
of Poland.—(Hear, hear.) It was impossible for this House
to look at the situation of this small state, without feeling the
deepest interest for it.—(Hear, hear.) What was the position
of this state—inferior in size as it was--surrounded by three of
the greatest military powers in Europe, and having in its con-
stitution a germ of liberty, while it was encircled with a fron-
tier of despotism ?—(Cheers.) It was impossible for England,
in looking to the relative situation of this power and Russia,
not to feel the deepest sympathy for the former.—( Hear,
hear.) This was not all, but this country was a party to the
treaty by which the independence of Cracow was guaranteed,'
and in which We declared that it should have a permanent and
separate existence.--( Hear, hear.) He was old enough to
remember the state of Europe previous to this treaty being
entered into, and the feelings that then prevailed, and he
should say that the hopes of Europe, and more especially of
this country, were not sufficiently fulfilled by this treaty—.
(Hear, hear.) Still, however, the House recognised the
treaty, and had admittdd it as part of the engagements im-
posed on it ; with reference to other countries, it became the
duty of the Government to see that its provisions were carried
out and strictly fulfilled.—( Hear, hear.) This state was ac-
knowledged as really independent by this country as well as
by the other European Governments, and we were bound to
look at all the circumstances of the case and see whether there
was any violation of the agreement between Cracow and the
surrounding Powers, which would justify the interference of
the latter.---( Hear, hear.) This country should regard atten-
tively the situation of Russia, and the relation we stood in

-------
towards that Power. The Government and the Legislature
should attentively look to the means by which we could best
maintain a contest with that Power so as to be alreadY pre-
pared in case such an unfortunate event takes place.— (-Hear'
hear.) This country should not forget attentively to look to
the smaller States, which though not apparently large in the'
scale of Europe, were still of great importance. In what
lie was stating, he did not intend to convey any disrespect to
the Government, but he wished to caution them as to their
conduct in this respect, and it was only a strong sense of duty
which induced him to bring the subject forward. What
would other Powers say, if they saw this country neglecting
the interests of the smaller States, whose independence We
had guaranteed, and allow them to be invaded by their power-
ful neighbours ?—( Hear, hear.) What would be the feel-
ings of Sweden and Denmark, as well as other Powers, if
this country suffered such proceedings to pass over unno-
ticed ?—( Hear, hear.) Were we in time of peace to ley
the foundation of suspicion in those Powers ?—(Hears
hear.) He was satisfied that it was by attending to these
circumstances that the encroachments of the greater powers
would be prevented. Let any Hon. Gentleman look at the
figure Russia made in the map of Europe, extending as it did
from the Baltic to the Black Sea, and from the Danube to the
frontier of China, in one unbroken line of territory, and con-
sider of what that great empire was composed. What was the
situation of that country in former times, before it was under a
settled government, and when the inhabitants were a set of
wild hordes, scattered over the country, and living uncomfor-
tably in an ungenial climate ? At that period these persons
had impressed on their minds some vague notions of prophe-
cies, of their being able to find riches and some pleasant dwel-
lings in the South, and being urged by ambitious chiefs, they
set out, and bore down on the different parts of Europe, de-
vastating all before them, and for a time checked civiliza-
tion.--( Hear, hear, hear.) They were then barbarians—
they were now under a civilized Government ; but stilt they
same national feelings prevailed which operated formerlft
and induced them to seek in a more agreeable climate enjoy-
ments they could not obtain at home. The military events,
of the last thirty years had brought the Russian troops into'
the more civilized parts of Europe, where they formed habits,
and became accustomed to enjoyments, which they could not
obtain in their own country, and which made them less de-
sirous to return.—( Hear.) From what he could gather from
the papers that he had seen on this subject, the three Powers
justified themselves on the interpretation of the ninth article
of the treaty of Vienna, in which it was declared that the state
of Cracow should not afford protection to deserters from the
three adjoining Powers. He had looked in vain for any cir-
cumstance which had taken place which would make it appear
that they had taken a just view of the case. It was perfectly
clear that the State of Cracow was bound to keep out of its
territory deserters from the three Powers, or to give them up
on demand. The question then arose whether a refusal to do,
this went to the extent of allowing the military occupation el
the place. He could not admit that a power of this kind
should be left to the mercy of the great Powers with which it
was surrounded. It had been said by the agents of these great
Powers that discord was at its height in the place, but it ap-
peared from the Gazette published at Cracow, and no doubt
more or less- under the authority of the Government, that
there was no truth in the statement, and no disturbances had
taken place which required the interference of the military.
He did not presume that the chief Powers wished to divide
the small State of Cracow, but no doubt other reasons ope-
rated with them. They probably found the neighbourhood a
Cracow inconvenient, not from any discord or disturbance
that might arise in the place, but because, firstly, the in-
habitants of that small country were brought into strong
contrast with those of the surrounding States.—(Hear, hear.)
And secondly, because there was a strong contrast between
the situation of the population of this small fragment of Po-
land and the wretchei condition of the inhabitants, conjoined
with the hardships they had to endure, of the neighbouring
districts.—( Hear.) He did not wish to indulge in the use d
strong language on this or any other occasion, but it was not
possible to refrain from doing so on the present occasion.---
( Hear.) At a very early period of the proceeding, 400 per-
sons were marched from Cracow, and given up at the Prussian
frontier. Surely all these did not come within the meaning of
the provisions of the treaty of Vienna? A great many of
them had married citizens of Cracow—had establishments in
trade there—or were in the service of the state. It was 'tat
to be supposed that such as these were likely persons to con-
spire against the peace of that or any other country. These
were not deserters or fugitives assembled for the purpose °f
sowing seditious dissension. But there was another point °
to
be considered. A great many of the expelled were to be se
outright to America. How was it known that many of these
were not our own countrymen ? In such a case as this, till
question of interposition was not a mere matter of abstfac
sympathy, but they had a right to our protection. Further!:
there was reason to believe that these proceedings were not
got up at the moment, but were the result of an engagement
entered into between the three powers so far back as 1833 i;
It was upon a matured plan that the late military occupation
of Cracow was founded.—( Hear, hear.) Was notice of this
r
pre-determined proceeding officially given to the republic .o
to this country ; and if not, what was the reason of the omis-
sion? As a sincere lover of peace, he wished this matter not
to be lost sight of. Nothing was farther from his intention
than any desire to embarrass the Ministry in bringing forward
this subject ; he did so only from a feeling that it was a ques'
tion of very great general importance, and one which naturally
presented itself to the attention of Parliament.—( Hear.)
Lord PAL ME RSTO N said the independence of Cracow
being secured by a treaty to which England was an influential
party, any real or aarent violation of that independence was
undoubtedly a matter deserving of the grave consideration
the British Parliament.—( Hear, hear) He might, in tII
first place, state that his Majesty's Government had not as ),,el
received, from any of the three powers in question, any efileilva„
explanation of the circumstances of their military ocenP!tt.
of Cracow, or the motives which they considered as authorising
f
them to it. They had not, in fact, received any account of
it, except what they had had represented to themby the 1‘11,_;,0
ters abroad, and those facts which had aeared in the c?L'"
to
journals. The Right Hon. Gentleman had called upon bimbo
state to the House the views which the Government took upon
subject, according to the information it at present poss underu
The House would see that as a Minister of the Crown,,o
the circumstances he had stated, his situation in refereneei,;
the Right Hon. Member's appeal, was one of considerable cl.l:_
1..,
culty. Had he been furnished officially from the th
powers with such explanations as they thought fit to putfc
ward, as to the motives upon which they had acted, he should
have been able to state to the House what that explanation..
was, and to have given the opinion of the English Goya it
ment as to its sufficiency or insufficiency.—( Hear, hear.) ,at
was quite true, as the Right Hon. Gentleman had said, tut_
the treaty of Vienna stipulated that upon no pretence wg,ehe
ever should foreign troops enter the state of Cracow.
ate
treaty also contained a reciprocal condition that that s'
..5
should not harbour any persons (of whom the description 11';
given in the treaty), or should, upon application, give
either of the three powers such persons. It was wider v_l.,
assigned terms of this treaty that the three residents at Cr!__
cow founded their demand for the expulsion of the Polish ru;;"
fugees. The demand was not that the parties involved i"
should be given up to the respective powers, but that tlleie
should be expelled from the territory of Cracow. Now
sih,
question was, whether the statement given out as a illti
out
fication of the extreme violence used was fully borne oa
by the facts of the case.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") It 170 r
been represented that there were assembled at Cracow
some time previous a number of persons, natives of Poland, viii`i;
by means of communications systematically kept up with !r.
Poles in Russia and Prussian Poland, had been endeact-so
ing to excite sedition, and to disturb the peace of t"eow
countries. Now, undoubtedly if such were the cases Crse
was not justified in giving shelter to such " seditious desertvo
and refugees." But though the three powers might be .ies,
to
titled in calling upon the Republic to order those person! ;it
depot, it did not follow that these powers were justified
eiy
g recourse to the violence of military occupation, inertbe
on account of the short delay which transpired between
demand being made and its being carried into effect.---("eatbo
Though it would be difficult to deny the strict right of
powers, under the circumstances assumed, to require that Ice;
sons so offending should be deprived of the shelter of
made
far
cow, he should say that as it appeared, the demand illaetote
s
exceeded the terms of the treaty.—( Hear, hear.) The f ire
of Cracow was ordered to expel a very great number the
dividuals,_ many of whom were known to have settled in fa..
city, to have become the husbands of its citizens, to have 0.-
willies there, to have acquired property in it, or to haveaes,
tered into the service of the state ,• under these circurnstan
th4l'
the extent of the demand certainly appeared far greater to
necessity required.—( Hear, hear.) It was, however, thitebeir
the powers to say that the original sweeping extent of
stye
sequently had since been mitigated. In the communication:to
sequently made to the senate, he had observed that under to
treaty of Vienna he thought the three powers were entitled be
require that certain persons—supposing those persons
named, and their offence shown—should be sent from re.
existed,
cow. Even if no such treaty if one state rerobo
serited to another that there were in its territory pers°4! and
availed themselves of its shelter to plot sedition ag lain'
the subversion of the peace of the Government of the comp log
ing State, he thought that by the ordinary internationalod,
of Europe, and by the obligations of good neighbour froul
that State should take measures for rescuing the other l 00
the danger with which it was threatened.—( Hear, hear.) lieu
tification however, thought that in this case no sufficleoateu
tification had been offered for the violent measures It„slons
towards the State of Cracow. Supposing just appreb;ssia,
of the Poles in Cracow to have existed in the minds of lotild
Prussia, and Austria, every species of friendly
have been exhausted to procure their removal, before re'n pat
means %toe
was had to the violent military dictation which had bee_e_t
in force. Under any circumstances, seeing that Grlvught
tain was a party to the treaty of Vienna, he certainly. they
it had been the duty of the three Powers,
made the demand upon Cracow, and before they hader%et of
to its military occupation, to have communicated th_t'ry, to'
cwitnoris.ug
their future intentions to the Government of this
at the tiol_u_ourse.
gather with the grounds which they looked upon as au was
their proceedings. The Right Hon. Member, howe_vbee' twee?
mistaken in supposing that there was any conventiofon_ntied,"l
the three Powers, upon which this proceeding was "
in the be;
1833 ; there was something of the kind entered into . was
ginning of the present year, regulating the course wmuobservi
to be taken.—( Hear, hear.) He could not help of
ing, that the selection of Austrian troops foßrutshseia,P
ue
or der'
occupying Cracow in preference to those of
ing all that had passed between the troops
discretiol:hoat
Poles, was an instance of much good feeling and
state • be
the part of the three Powers. He would eget
tten to t
he had wri
upon learning what had taken place,
the subject.
al!
English Ministers abroad for information on
bulk 01 the
ebeaen
was only within the few last days that the
had rot - be
swers had been received, and consequently he
14 thought
upon the subject. .-e b. 00'
enabled to take any steps
duty u
said as much as was consistent with his P
of Russia an

stat_ s10°•,( Hear
,h) There was no question but that every
wale, however comparatively powerless and limited in extent,
peu-na‘ entitled to have justice done to it, and to have the inde-
the aence guaranteed to it by treaties maintained equally with
de-
pen considerable states—( Hear, hear)—that the inde-
ts'uederice of the petty republic of Cracow ought to be held as
sacred
as that of the great kingdom of Prussia. He felt sure
olil
thaf the three Powers would be wise enough to reflect that
Power' by acting on such a principle as this could their own
old and independence be permanently secured. It was
hadY_DY respecting the engagements and treaties which they
f:ontracted with other, even the smallest States, that they
roylift be entitled, if their own security were menaced, to call
the co-operation and assistance of those other States with
itin
adg they were parties in those engagements in which they
such an interest.
Sir H, VERNEY said that no circumstance had excited his
haTfoiseration so much as the fall of that noble people, who
made, he trusted, not their last struggle Tor their inde-
Pendeo
ee He called on the Government to secure the
friendshipcalled of those nations which surrounded Russia; he
n,:ed on them to secure the interests of Turkey, Persia, and
; he called on them to obtain permission of the
o'4llll Government to send a fleet to the Black Sea. Russia
it acquired influence in all the nations surrounding- her, and
of %I," the duty of this country to seek to obtain the confidence
t
'ePorrers threatened with Russian aggression. He hoped
there would be such an expression of feeling by the House
obtaining
tnight as would inform Russia that she must despair of
the sympathy of any party.
las Lord SAN.DON trusted that that occupation would not
e t 1"g, and that the other nations of Europe would not re-
einise the principle on which the three protecting powers
bad acted:
M
they
(2) 'CONNELL said that the three protecting powers
as were called—the three plundering powers was their
fttrper title--(Cheers)—had been guilty of the grossest vio-
ex!°ll, of an undisguised and unmitigated violation of the
Justified
treaties. They did not pretend even that they were
;tified in the course they had taken. Without any case to
ter'r'itory
such a step, they marched troops into this neutral
and took possession of it. They had been guilty of
;violation which, if committed on a small scale, would be a
I.,'"Y or a land piracy. It had been suggested by the Noble
ercl as a circumstance in mitigation, that Austrian troops
d been marched into Cracow instead of Russian. This re-
"nfl
be e d im of the story of a Spanish nobleman who, havi
8_ ea senthenced to be hanged, complained that to carry such g a
"fence into execution on his person would be a violation of
the rights of nobility, whereupon it was decreed that he should
be hung by a silk rope instead of a hempen one.—( A laugh.)
It
vio-
lated, not merely the letter of the treaty which had been vio-
Ced, it had been violated in its spirit. He should be glad to
1011 if any body would assert that the Queen of Spain had a
''tightt"i to make war upon Great Britain because there were
on. Gentlemen in that House who were making earnest
efforts in favour of Don Carlos ?—( Hear, hear.) The
three Powers bad treated this country with contempt; we
ere a party to the treaty of Vienna, and in violating it as they
had done, they had treated both this country and France with
Positive contempt. It was a great mistake to suppose that
18 country did not feel deeply with respect to Poland.—
Wear, hear.) A feeling for the sufferings of Poland was
orking in the mind of the public all over Europe, and the
despots with their armed power little knew what might be the
co
knaequences of te wrongs they were perpetrating. —( Cheers.
tnoral effect wasin operation from city to city and town to
tQtro, and it would be found that this Power of Russia, which
resembled a monster with its arms of steel, and its front of
brass,,,. but its feet of clay, along with the other despotic powers
were attached to it, would meet with a fate which would
,re as an example to the rest of the world. Their violation
; toe treaty of Vienna was the most glaring that ever yet oc-
erred- Poland had been the general spoil of Europe for
llAvards of fifty years; this was not a matter of to-day or
Yesterday,P 1
but had been going on since 1771. And the rights
and were founded not on the treaty of Vienna, but ex-
isted before ; the effect of that treaty was only to commit this
country and France to the criminality of standing by and al-
-11r414g Poland to be treated as she had, been. It was the
of this country to call on the King's Ministers to speak
"to Russia on this occasion. He trusted that the time was
hot
remote when he should be able, with the aid of France, to
Insist not only on the re-establishment of Poland, but the re-
Itforation of Finland to Sweden—when we should be able to
Le,eP the Russian barbarians within their proper limits. He
Cgged to ask was the Russian Dutch loan unpaid ?—(Hcar,
pea,r hear.) He believed that 100,000/. of that loan was un
44 Yet, and it ought to be stopped. There was against
Cr
ofcow notoing out assertion—it was the wolf against the
h•—the vulture against the chicken. He hoped the voice
England would put a stop to all these outrages against
everything human and divine.—( Cheers.)
Lord PALMERSTON explained.
Sir R. INGLIS said that the country was indebted to his
Right Hon. Friend for having brought this subject forward.
I Mr. HUME observed that England was undoubtedly bound
by
treaties'; but if anything could show the absurdity of such
treaties, it certainly was the mode in which the treaty to which
reference had been made was violated. Let them, however,
iiseltiember, that the treaty of Frankfort had been violated in
the same gross manner.—(blear.) But the Noble Lord
"ould, it appeared, allow the treaty of Vienna to be violated
iithe same manner that the treaty of Frankfort had been.
„,;!le Noble Lord, however, was waiting for information. Of
.._hat use were the Ministers at Berlin and Vienna, if the mo-
t Tent they had heard of this transaction they had not apprised
~° Noble Lord ? The Noble Lord had to send from this
Vantry for information. Why, he would ask, had they not a
nisterial resident at Cracow ? It seemed to him that their
hPlornatic establishments were utterly useless, and certainly
tle information was communicated by them. He hoped
at the Commons of England would, when the documents
Were laid on the table, declare in the plainest manner what
Was
the guilt of those who had violated treaties. But he
NOW,
told he could not do this without risking a war.
-„?sv, he certainly did not wish to see the country plunged
it"„L° war ; he thought that the country had often been brought
t" the verge of ruin by engaging in war, in which its real in-
rests were not concerned. They should, however, get rid
(I stipulations, if by them they could not secure the indepen-
114ee of the smaller states. Now, although Cracow was not
hger than the parish of Mary-la-bonne, still its independence
been secured by treaty.—( Hear, hear.) Now, if they
;re by treaty bound to pay Russia, they should, before they
iti
oeated any such sum of money, see whether it could not be
I,:re properly given to the unfortunate individuals whose pro-
tOO was destroyed, and liberty interfered with—and that,
this' by a gross violation of a solemn treaty. Unless they did
(of they would have to submit to still further indignities.—
Hear, hear. )
°"d JOHN RUSSELL was much more disposed to coin-
cide in the opinion expressed by the Hon. Baronet the Mem-
ber
for the University of Oxford, than to agree in the senti-
Itets of the Hon. Member for Middlesex.—( Hear, hear.)
titoWould, he considered, be very unwise in that House to come
a strong resolution, unless it was prepared for worse.—
10iear, hear.) They had seen, for example, in a neighbour-
°„, country, a public Chamber giving expression to a strong
it 41" upon the nationality of Poland; but not following
astlP by any further proceedings. He must confess that the
Prot''
of an opinion, not followed up by any distinct
Fre') could neither increase the reputation of the Chamber
'vitt Which it emanated, nor add so the dignity of the country.
Oerefore it was that he could not agree to the proposal made
the Hon. Member for Middlesex. They could not with
iepPriety come to a resolution strongly expressive of their in-
hiagdoation, unless they were prepared to take such a step as
.been referred to by the Gallant Admiral the Member for
loti/"Port, and have a very large force to support their reso-
Vtili°,ll----(Hear, hear.) With respect to the question itself,
it had been put by the Right Hon. Gentleman, he thought
bef as exceedingly right that such a question should be brought
th °l;e the House. He thought it very proper that the House
ev°,ll„d not allow an occurrence of the kind adverted to that
Gen": 1: gto pass without notice.—( Hear.) The Right Hon.
cret-aeman was therefore quite right in calling upon the Se-
ill for Foreign Affairs to give some explanation respect-
' ses'ii,"'• That explanation had been given, and up to the pre-
thiatlonsent the Noble Lord had, he considered, shown that
action Hour of England had not been committel in this trans-
toof°ll. As the Right Hon. Gentleman had not proposed any
t'l and as there was nothing before the House but a mo-
till; of mere form, he wished that, as there was a very impor-
42_' question to come before the House, the subject would
be allowed to drop.
to b°"u DUDLEY STUART could not permit the subject
de disposed disposed of in this manner. He had heard with a great
Frie °f Pleasure a portion of what had fallen from his Noble
Why
the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. In a great part of
IQ 'lad fallen from his Noble Friend, a portion of what his
ta„, Friend had said did him honour • but he was bound to
entirely
there were other parts of the min' e speech from which
did disagreed—he could not but consider :those parts
1,0 tra discredit. As to what had fallen from the Noble
entid the Secretary of State for the Home Department, he
direee,'Y disagreed with it. He thought that speech was in
tor,' contradiction to the sentiments expressed by the Noble
401;4 sitting beside him, and which was likely to produce an
froiste,s,sion directly the reverse of what was likely to arise
Ae,„‘Aue language used by the Secretary for Foreign Affairs.
bahruing to the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Home
rgrtra
ita exit, the three Northern Courts had a right to commit
teas grant , .
violation of a treaty—of a treaty to which England
Porei party, and in which the Noble Lord the Secretary for
coolnlgn Affairs told them that the honour of England was
then Ate& Was it not, then, an affront upon them, that
Vie; should be a violation of so important a treaty as that of
arid 114---a treaty which had settled the affairs of all Europe,
Are,.e" which the possessions of every state in the world
based
treat ? Was it nothing, he would ask, that such a
LaeritYlishould be violated and infringed ? Was it not incum-
autripo them to resent such an insult ? Or should they
arid Patiently to see that treaty trampled upon by arrogant
cmuest,rbearing Northern Courts ?—( Hear, hear.) This was
ee dban which involved the laws of nations ; and what had
ralgllncTe he considered involved the honour and interests of
us---(Hear, hear.) How, he would ask, had it hap-
allianc?inen the three Northern Powers were bound up in
court; with them, they did not go even through the mere
do? of informing this country what they were going to
Plaint how, he would ask, had it happened that no corn-
eleati "ad been made of this omission ? Even if it could be
right Yt,,Proved, which he denied, that these Powers had a
`-ra,-;0; make the demand which led to the occupation of
hot , still the outrage and insult offered to England could
Neh‘len that account be deemed the less.—( Hear, hear.) His
,give ettPriend had been obliged to tell them he would not
he had
not
to his Right Honourable Friend, because
%tie, not official information upon the subject : that reply
had ‘l.l, additional condeinnation on this Government. Why
QraceßeY not official information from the Resident at
of WIZ? It was his duty to transmit the intelligence
BPeech h they were now in want. He trusted tln!t the
of his Noble Friend was a prelude to an alteration in

his policy—that it indicated a serious intention thenceforward
to prevent a recurrence of events, such as those now referred
to. He trusted that, with regard to Cracow, the Government
would not remonstrate in the same feeble and unworthy man-
ner which it had done with respect to Poland.—( Hear, hear.)
He could not help observing upon the feeble and vacillating:
course pursued by the Government in its foreign policy. He
was not insensible to its merits in other respects. He ap-
plauded the members of the Government for what they had
done for this country ; he supported, and should continue to
support them, but that should not prevent his speaking out
boldly, manfully, and plainly, nor from reprobating them
upon those points where he considered they deserved reproba-
tion. He rejoiced that the Government were becoming
stronger every day ; the strength which the Ministry derived
from the country, and the favour with which they were re-
garded, would induce them, he hoped, to satisfy the people,
not only in their domestic policy, but also as regarded their
foreign policy.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL then moved the adjournment of
the House till Monday.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Mr. GOU LB URN observed, that there were notices of the
Noble Lord with respect to the Tithe Commutation Bill, and
the Birth and Marriage Registration Bill ; and if the Irish Muni-
cipal Bill should not be disposed of that evening, it would
also, he supposed, come on with those Bills on Monday
evening. It would be a great convenience to know what
course was intended to be pursued with respect to these dif-
ferent measures. _ _ . _

Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied it was his intention to
proceed with the Tithe Commutation Bill on Monday. With
respect to the Registration of Marriage Bill he was not so well
prepared to fix a time ; but as regarded the Irish Corpora-
tions Bill, he hoped to proceed with it immediately, and that
they might get it through in committee that evening.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND) BILL.

The House went into committee on this Bill.
Clauses 43 to 47 were agreed to without opposition.
On clause 48 being proposed,
Sir R. PEEL objected to the proposal for giving the com-
mission of the peace to the mayors, on account of their popu-
lar election, and their precarious tenure of office.
Lord MORPETH defended the principle of the Bill,
which he said was similar to that of the English Bill, only not
carried to the same extent.

Mr. ROEBUCK also supported the principle of popular
elections.
Mr. O'CONNELL would caution Hon. Gentlemen oppo-
site from throwing out insinuations against elected judges, for
there happened just now to be sitting next to the Right Hon.
Member for Tamworth an elected judge—elected not by the
people at large, but by a small section of the community. The
Hon. and Learned Member then contended that the principle

of the election of justices Was in accordance with the ancient

common law of this country.
Mr. SHAW—Although he had been elected to his office by
a particular corporate body, he believed his sentiments were
in unison with those of the majority of the community of the
place in question. The Hon. and Learned Member then com-
plained of the vast powers proposed to be given to the mayor
and town-councils. If this Bill first framed by-laws at dis-
cretion, and afterwards enforced them by fines, recoverable by
summary process before the mayors, and payable into the com-
mon funds of the respective corporations ; this he thought
might lead to a system of oppression and tyranny throughout
the corporate towns of the country.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL supported the principle of the
clause.
Mr. ROEBUCK conteded that the majority or minority
must govern in the management of local affairs, and he should
certainly prefer that the majority should prevail, because they
were the most likely to be identified with the community in
moral and social interest. —( Hear.)
Sir R. PEEL was willing to admit that in the management
of municipal concerns generally popular election was the best
mode of proceeding ; but with respect to the administration of
justice, that was .a matter which stood upon distinct ground.
By the 99th clause of the Bill, the Crown was invested with
the power of appointing justices, and he considered that the
right of nomination of the mayor to the magistracy should be
also confined to the Crown, as much more likely to give sa-
tisfaction to the whole of the inhabitants of a country in which
religious animosities were superadded to political dissension.
Mr. LYNCH felt persuaded that the Roman Catholics
would use the power which was bestowed upon them by this
Bill, with the strictest impartiality and toleration.
Sir R. PEEL did not allude to the Roman Catholics in
particular, when he expressed a hope that the administration
of justice would not be suffered to depend upon the opinion of
' the majority. He was equally opposed to stich a principle in
the north of Ireland, where the Protestants preponderated.
Mr. O'L OGHLEN could not help thinking that the powers
to be conferred on the mayor as a justice, were supposed to
be much more extensive than the clause directed. The
mayor would be merely empowered to act with another jus-
tice, on a summons issued under the bye-laws ; but from their
decision on such a matter there was an appeal in the larger
towns to the recorder, who had jurisdiction over almost all
questions of a civil or criminal nature. In the smaller towns
the justices of the county had a concurrent jurisdiction with
the mayor ; and from their decision there was an appeal to the
assistant-barrister.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. W. ROCHE thought that the proposed change of af-
fixing the dignity of a justice to the office of mayor would give
great satisfaction in Ireland.
After a few words from Mr. FINCH and Mr. YOUNG,
The clause was agreed to.
Clauses 48 and 49 were then agreed to.
On the 50th clause, which provided for the appointment of
town clerks beinc, proposed,
Mr. SHAW observed, that this clause was a very material
one, as it changed the tenure of the office of town clerk.
Hitherto it had been held for life ; but by this clause the town
clerk was removable annually, on the representation of the
council.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL remarked, that the principle of
this clause had been already so fully discussed, that it was un-
necessary for him to detain the House by saying anything in
favour of it.
The clause was then agreed to.
Clause 51 was struck out, on Mr. O'Loghlen's suggestion.
Clause 52 was agreed to with some verbal amendments.

On clause 53 (relating to the elections of sheriffs) being

read,
Mr. O'LOGHLEN proposed an amendment to the clause,
with the view of carrying into effect the alteration announced
on a former evening, on the part of the Government, by the
Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland—namely, that the nomi-
nation of sheriffs of cities should vest in the Crown, instead
of, as originally contemplated, in the town-council.
Mr. O'CONNELL would have preferred the clause as it
originally stood ; but as it appeared to be the opinion of the
Government that the alteration was advisable, he would not
offer it any opposition.
Mr. SH EI L also expressed himself favourable to the clause
as originally framed, and regretted that it should have been
altered.
Sir R. PEEL expressed his satisfaction at perceiving that
the Government had yielded to the force of reasoning in re-
gard to this clause. The amendment he looked upon, not
merely as an alteration, but a vast improvement.—( Hear.)
The clause, as amended, was then agreed to.
Clause 54 was struck out, being rendered unnecessary by
the preceding clause, as amended.
Clauses from 55 to 70 inclusive, were agreed to without
discussion.
Clauses 71 to 11 were agreed to.
On clause 82 being proposed,
Lord COLE (several ineffectual attempts having been
made to adjourn the House) moved that the Chairman report
progress ; and, notwithstanding the entreaties of several Mem-
bers, persisted in having the gallery cleared for a division.
The gallery was cleared, but no division took place. The
House resumed : the Chairman reported progress, and ob-
tained leave to sit again.
The Orders of the Day were disposed of, and the House
adjourned at a Quarter to Two o'Clock.

award, and as to the offences to which it may be applied ;
whether those offences may not be more clearly defined than
they now are, and, also, whether the power of inflicting that
punishment may not be limited to cases where the culprit
has, for some previous misconduct, been in some way publicly
degraded.
5. Whether some system of rewards to the good and well-
behaved soldier, either by promotion to commissions, or by the
prospect of sonic civil advantages combined with pension,
might not have the effect of inducing the parents and friends
of young men, of a better and more educated class of life
than that of which the army is now composed, to encourage
their enlistment, and of thus improving the moral character
of the army so as to render the use of corporal punishment un-
necessary.
The first great distinction between the British and the other
European armies is, in the manner in which its ranks are filled.
The British army is entirely composed of persons who enter
voluntarily into the service, for life or until discharged under
certain regulations.
On the other hand, the Continental armies are filled by
conscription, not indeed excluding voluntary enlistment, but
admitting it under certain regulations as one mode of perform-
ing a duty required of all the subjects of the state. The law
in France is stated to be " That every Frenchman shall be
called to serve his country at the age of 20 ; nevertheless, any
one who wishes to enter the service may enlist at the age of
18, and, having satisfied what the law requires, he is exempt
from future conscription."
The service thus required by the law lasts for seven years,
whether under conscription or enlistment, but it may be volun-
tarily prolonged for a certain time, and under certain condi-
tions : the conscript may, if he thinks fit, find a substitute,
but he remains responsible for that substitute in case of deser-
tion during a year. This manner of filling up the ranks of
the army brings into it a considerable number of persons of
good education ; and it is stated that that circumstance enables
so many commissions to be given to the non-commissioned
officers. _

In Prussia " all the subjects are called into the service of
the state at the age of twenty years, and serve for three years
in what is called the disposable force." They are then sent
home until they have attained the age of twenty-five years,
and constitute the army of reserve. At the age of 25 they are
exempted from active employment, and become incorporated
into the landwehr of the first ban till they are 32, and in that
of the second ban till they are 35, the landwehr being a sort of
militia ; the first ban being brought together for a short time
every year for exercise, and the second only liable to service
within the interior, in the event, during war, of an invasion of
the country by an enemy.
Under different regulations, the same principle of the right
of the state to the service of every one of its subjects is en-
forced in every country in Europe. The adoption of this prin-
ciple must have the effect of creating a strong feeling in favour
of the military service. It becomes the favourite profession in
those countries where every man has either been, or actually
is, a soldier. If a young man is called from his home to serve
his prescribed time, his father has been so before him, and it
is not considered a hardship.
None of the great powers of Europe, excepting France,
have colonies, and she does not employ her regular army in
the few colonies which she possesses. Excepting, therefore,
in the case of some active service, the foreign soldier is never
called upon to quit his native country, while the British sol-
dier, besides being subject to the hardships, privations, and
dangers of actual service when necessary, cannot avoid tte
long separation from his family and friends, consequent upon
the order to embark for the colonies, nor the wear and tear of
life and constitution which await him when arrived there.
The natural consequence of these disadvantages on the part
of the British army is, that those persons of a better class
who are to be found in the ranks of the other armies, are rarely
found in ours, except in instances where a young man has been
induced by misfortunes, brought on most commonly by his
own folly or intemperance, to escape from them by enlistment.
The great body of our recruits consists of the inhabitants of
the large towns and manufacturing districts, and of agricultu-
ral labourers, which last appear generally to enter the army in
consequence of some family difficulty, or some scrape in which
they are involved, and become the best and most trustworthy
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 in-
dulged.
A standing army always has been an object of jealousy in
this country, and nothing can reconcile the feelings of an
Englishman, who prizes his own personal liberty so highly, to
its existence, but the fact of its being in such a state of discip-
line and restraint, as shall secure the absence of that tone of
superiority which the armies of foreign powers arc apt to as-
sume in their own countries.
In considering the subject of the punishments by which the
discipline of the British army has been created and maintained
up to this time, it is well to see how far they have answered
their purpose. To the superior discipline of the British army,
when on service in foreign countries, and even in an enemy's
country, strong testimony will be found in the evidence, and
more especially that of the Duke of Wellington, Sir Henry
False, and Sir Henry Hardinge. It cannot be denied, then,
that whatever other objections may be made to the present
system of discipline in the British army, it has had the effect
of rendering that army eminently fit for, and capable of, any
service to which it may be called.
In the year 1819 a general order was issued by his Royal
Highness the Duke of York, requiring the transmission of re-
turns of regimental courts-martial, the extent of corporal pu-
nishment to be awarded by a regimental court-martial, having
been previously, in the year 1812, limited to 300 lashes. This
limitation was in force until the passing of the Mutiny Act in
1822, when the award was farther limited to 200 lashes, and it
so continues. In 1829 the award of a district or garrison
court-martial was confined to 300 lashes, and it so remains.
In the year 1830 a circular letter was issued by Sir Herbert
Taylor, then Adjutant-General, by Lord Hill's orders, which
will be found in Lord Hill's evidence, and contains a full de-
tail of the system under which the army is now conducted. Its
application is by a circular from the Horse Guards, dated 24th
of August, 1833, limited to certain offences, viz :-
1. For mutiny, insubordination and violence, or using, or
offering to use violence, to superior officers.
2. Drunkenness on duty.
3. Sale or making away with arms, ammunition accoutre-
ments, or necessaries; stealing from comrades, or other dis-
graceful conduct.
Previously to the issuing of that circular, there was scarcely
an offence committed by a soldier which did not subject him to
corporal punishment at the discretion of- the court-martial be-
fore which he was tried.
With regard to the inefficiency of corporal punishment for
its object, there can indeed be no doubt that if the entire pre-
vention of all crime and offence has been expected from it, it
may be predicated of this, as of every sort of punishment
hitherto thought of, that it has not attained that object. But
if the object is taken to be the repression of crime by the
means of example, it appears from the evidence that, in many
cases, where every other punishment has failed, it has had
that effect, and even by those who speak of its infliction in-
spiring disgust in the bystanders who witness it, it is admitted
to have great effect in deterring other soldiers, and especially
the younger ones, from committing offences which will subject
them to it.
We observe that, throughout the evidence, great doubt is
thrown upon the fact of flogging being considered by the sol-
diers, at all events, a degrading punishment, if applied in the
case of a military offence only. Almost the universal answer
to the question of whether a man who has been punished at
the halberds is considered by his comrades as degraded by that
punishment, and consequently shunned by them, has been in the
negative, and that the nature of the crime led to degradation
and not he punishment. And with regard to its effect as har-
dening, and not reforming the individual, it will be found, upon
looking at the evidence, that such is by no means the universal
consequence. Many instances are given of men who have
undergone this punishment having become good soldiers, and
having reached the rank of non-commissioned officers, and even
of officers in some instances.
It must be remembered also, that it is frequently thought
necessary to inflict this punishment in a military body, when the
moral reformation of the individual is in no degree its object ;
instances of insubordination which cannot be passed over may,
and very often do occur, where the offender is any thing but
an immoral or vicious person. The prompt infliction of cor-
poral punishment may be necessary in such a case, for the sake
of example, and to prevent the spreading of a disorderly or
mutinous spirit ; but it cannot be said that its object is the mo-
ral reform of the individual ; and we cannot help thinking that
this constitutes a great difference between offenders against
the military and the civil law.
The next objection is, that it excites disgust and sympathy
in the bystanders in favour of the sufferer.
It will undoubtedly be found by the evidence, that the sight
of corporal punishment has a great effect upon those present,
and that with the young soldier that effect is sometimes so
powerful, as to produce physical weakness and fainting. It is
difficult to say whether this is disgust or terror, but we must
observe that such circumstances cannot arise without a very
strong impression having been made upon the mind, and that,
from that impression, must be derived a confident hope of the
efficacy of the example presented to the eyes. But with re-
gard to the sympathy of the bystanders, we can collect nothing
from the evidence to show that such a feeling is aroused by
this punishment in the minds of the comrades of the culprit ;
on the contrary, the feeling seems to be almost universal
among them that no man is punished in that manner, in these
days, who has not deserved it.
Another objection to this punishment is that made by Lieut.-
Colonel Peyronnet Thompson, who says that it fails in the
field and before the enemy, and in support of this opinion that
officer gives two instances, one in the 95th Regiment, at Buenos
Ayres, and the other in the 14th Light Dragoons, in the Pe-
ninsula.
But, we find in the evidence of Lieutenant Blood an in-
stance in which the corporal punishment of a soldier for insolence
and insubordination, inflicted, as it were, in sight of the ene-
my, and when his regiment might at any moment be engaged,
had the immediate effect of restoring order.
We cannot, therefore, attach much weight to this objection,
which, if founded at all, would equally apply to every other
punishment.
The last objection to corporal punishment is undoubtedly
one which calls for the most anxious inquiry into the grounds
upon which it rests. Nothing can be more certain than that
in this country, and with the ample means afforded to every
man in it for the free discussion of any subject in Parlia-
ment, in the courts of law, in public meetings, and through
the press, no practice can be long maintained which is really
contrary to the well-considered judgment and settled feelings
of the country. Upon the extent of this feeling, it is difficult
to form any very correct judgment, and persons who are them-
selves impressed with any strong opinion upon any subject are
apt to overrate what they consider symptoms of a general con-
currence with that opinion.

versa

It is said that it cannot be necessary to retain the power of
punishing the soldiers of the British army by the lash, when
we have before us the example of some of the armies of
Europe, and more especially that of France, in which no cor-
poral punishment whatever is permitted.
Whatever objections there may be to this punishment when
inflicted upon persons of the description and habits of those
who are likely voluntarily to enter on an indefinite term of
military service in a free country, there can be no doubt that
those objections have immeasurably greater force when per-
sons of all classes and habits are torn by an overruling power
from their homes, their families, and from the profession of
their choice, to perform a paramount duty to the State. A
conscription, such as exists in France, would be intolerable in
this country ; but if such were the law, it might perhaps be
unnecessary, and, if so, would certainly be unjustifiable, to re-
tain this power of corporal punishment.
Still confining ourselves to the French army (for in most of
the other armies of Europe some sort of corporal punishment
is in use), it is worth while to consider what the punishments
are in their military code, a list of which will be found in the
evidence of Sir Willoughby Gordon, the Quartermaster-Ge-
neral. It will be seen that no less than forty-five offences are,
by that code, punishable by death. In our Mutiny Act and
Articles of War, authority to pass sentence of death is always
coupled with the word—" or such other punishment as a gene-
ral courtmartial may award." In fact, an execution of such a
sentence in time of peace in the British army, may be said to
be unknown in these islands. On actual service, although
sometimes resorted to, it is by many degrees less common than
in the French service, in which, under such circumstances,
death by shooting is the hinge upon which the whole system
of discipline turns. Twenty-six other military offences arc
punishable with imprisonment for periods from five to twelve
years, with or without what is called the boulet, which is a
cannon ball attached to the leg or body. Nineteen are punish-
able by periods of imprisonment, or what are called travaux
forces, or galleys, of from one to three years ; and there are
among the offences enumerated in these categories many which
in our service would subject the offender at the most to be tried
by a district courtmartial, the limit of whose power of sentence,
in respect to corporal punishment, is 300 lashes ; for instance,
the sale of arms, dress, or equipment, would be so dealt
with in our army, and is punished in the French army by the
galleys, from two to five years ; threatening language, also, is
punished in that army by five years' imprisonment. We can-
not help thinking that it is matter of doubt whether, if the
option were given to the British soldier between the two
codes, he would not infinitely prefer that of our service, even
taking into consideration the degree of degradation which is
said to follow from the punishment at the halberts. But, after
all, it would appear from the evidence, that the French code
does not produce even in time of peace a discipline in any de-
gree equal to that which is enforced in the British army.
Of late years, recourse has been had by the military autho-
rities to several punishments, by way of substitutes, and in the
hope of rendering the use of the lash, to a great degree, un-
necessary. In the sentences of general courts-martial trans-
portation as a felon for life, or years, has taken place of those
severe awards of corporal punishment so usual in former times.
We confAs it appears to us to have been a wise course to en-
deavour to get rid of those extreme corporal punishments,
which, after all, were generally inflicted, in time of peace,
upon men not worth keeping in the service.
The other punishments which have been resorted to as sub-
stitutes are imprisonment, with or without hard labour, and
solitary confinement ; and we regret to say that the greatly
predominant result of our inquiry is to satisfy us that, as
hitherto inflicted, they have not so operated as to be depended
upon as efficient substitutes. One great reason for their
failure in this respect is the uncertainty with regard to-the
degree of severity with which they are enforced. In one
prison imprisonment may be a real punishment ; in the prison
of a 6 adjoining county, it may be anything but a real punish-
ment.
To make these punishments such as they ought to be for
the military, efficient and proper means of carrying them into
execution in the several barracks should be provided, and
military prisons, of sufficient capacity for the probable num-
bers, should be built. The complaints of the practice of
confining soldiers, for military offences, with felons and con-
victs, will be found, on reference to the appendix, almost uni-
A soldier, although under punishment, should not
lose sight of the profession against the rules of which he has
offended; nor should he be placed where he is in contact
with men whose notions of crime are not very strict, and
who have none whatever of the nature of a military offence.
But even if the means we have alluded to be provided, we
are not satisfied that these punishments can be depended upon
as perfect substitutes for corporal punishment, although we
are far from undervaluing them. However improved, they
will still be deficient in one important requisite in military
punishments upon certain occasions—a striking and prompt
example. A man sentenced to a corporal punishment is
brought out before the whole regiment; the preparations for
his punishment are made ; the sentence is read, he is stripped,
and receives his punishment. All this passes before the eyes
of his comrades. In the other case, the offender is equally
brought out before the assembled regiment, but there are no
preparations for punishment to be seen ; his sentence is read,
he returns to his confinement, and is entirely lost sight of by
his comrades until the period of that confinement has expired.
There will be found in Lord William Bentinck's evidence
the mention of a minute laid by him before the Council of
India, proposing the establishment of penal companies in each
presidency, to whose ranks that punishment should be limited,
and that all hardened offenders in the Company's European regi
ments, and those of your Majesty in India, for whose correction all
other punishments have proved insufficient, should be sent by
sentence of a general court-martial to those companies. That
minute, which contains the whole detail of the proposed esta-
blishment, is also annexed to the evidence. His Lordship
says, that however anxious lie may be for the abolition of cor-
poral ?Punishment, he is of opinion that such a step would not
be safe unless some efficient substitute should previously have
been discovered. This expedient of penal companies, or con-
demned corps, is also suggested by several others of the wit-
nesses, and it is therefore desirable that we should consider it.
As a military corps, and for the purposes of military ser-
vice, we doubt whether a corps consisting of the most har-
dened and unmanageable description of men, collected from
different regiments, can be useful, or to be depended upon
under any circumstances. Such a corps would require the
most careful selection, both of commissioned and non-com-
missioned officers, to serve in it, and the real efficient part of
the army would thus be deprived of their services. It would
be dangerous to leave those corps without the presence of
some other troops to watch and restrain them, if necessary ;
and, after all, these inconveniences would be encountered, and
all the consequent expense incurred, for the purpose of retain-
ing in the service men who have been previously found not to
be trustworthy, and to be incapable of being made useful sol-
diers. There have been more than one experiment of this
sort made already in our army, and they have failed. The
history of that corps, which was established at Sierra Leone
some years ago, is a fatal one. If it be thought necessary to
keep such men at all, we cannot help thinking that it should
not be in any respect as soldiers, but in penal or convict gangs,
such as those on board the hulks, and in Australia, for the
mere purposes of labour at the public works, for such periods
as may be thought fit. Such a plan might possibly be tried
with advantage, as the means of disposing of such men as shall
have been found utterly incorrigible, and who arc a burden
and disgrace to their regiments.
After a careful examination into the result of the several
substitutes for corporal punishment now in use, we regret to
say that none of them, as at present enforced, appear to have
answered, or to be likely to answer, the purpose of rendering
that punishment entirely unnecessary, nor have any others
been suggested to us which appear to promise to effect that
purpose.
Hitherto, our remarks have been applied to the entire and
immediate abolition of corporal punishment; we now pro-
ceed to consider it with a view to its restriction within nar-
rower limits than at present, both as respects its severity and
frequency.
With regard to the offences for which the soldier should be
liable to corporal punishment, we beg to suggest whether they
might not be more clearly defined than at present. Insubor-
dination, for instance, has many shapes in which it appears,
and it probably would not be impossible to describe more ex-
actly which should be so punishable.
We have stated the prevalence of an opinion among all ranks
of officers and non-commissioned officers that the powers of
commanding officers are too limited, and we recommend a re-
consideration of the regulations upon that point.
We have already stated, that the disposition to drunken-
ness is the most fruitful source of crimes and breaches of
discipline
in our army, and, unfortunately, it is difficult to
impress, even upon the good soldier, that drunkenness off
duty is, in itself, reprehensible. In order, however, to check
this practice, the soldier is punishable under the articles of
war, by the sentence of a court-martial, for habitual drunken-
ness, to constitute which offence certain particulars are re-
quired, and for drunkenness on duty by forfeiture of his beer-
money and a portion of his pay, to a certain amount and for
a limited period. The consequence is, that it too often hap-
pens that the habitual drunkard, in order to avoid these for-
feitures, does not return, or is prevented, for a time, from
returning to his barracks by those in whose society he is,
although he is,
for the absence without leave, equally subject
to punishments of another description. During this absence
his comrades have to perform his duty. We are aware that
any interference with the pay of a soldier should be well con-
sidered, but we think that the principle of no work, no pay,
might safely be-applied to such a case ; and that, without the
sentence
of it which would otherwise have been paid to himself, should
of a court-martial, the pay of the soldier, or that part
be stopped by his commanding officer as a matter of course,
for every day upon which he has been absent, unless upon in-
quiry his absence is satisfactorily accounted for.
We are now arrived at the last point to which our attention
has been directed—namely, whether the effect of increased
rewards and advantages to the soldier might not be such as to
bring into the ranks a better description of persons, and by so
doing render the retention of the power of corporal punish-
ment unnecessary.
There will be found in the evidence suggestions with re-
gard to increased attention and encouragement to regimental
schools for the men, and to the providing libraries and a
reading-room in every barrack, to (enable them usefully to
occupy their idle hours, which in this country, and more espe-
cially in the warm climates of some of our foreign stations,
hang heavily upon them. It appears from the regulation!,
which are published in the Appendix, that the East India
Company have created establishments of this sort at the prin-
cipal European stations of their army, and we cannot help
recommending this subject for consideration.
enjoy given in bar-
rack-yards for the ment of manly games by the soldiers,
We think, too, that every facility should be
such as fives'-courts and rackets, and by providing additional
spaces of ground, where necessary, for cricket and foot-ball,
and that those games should be encouraged as much as pos-
sible by the officers. The public exercise of these and similar
amusements might also give additional attraction to the service,

The evidence of almost all the witnesses we have examined
tends to encourage a hope that the establishment of an order
of merit, with a medal or some distinction of dress, bestowed
in front of the assembled regiment, would have a considerable
effect upon the discipline of the army, and that the taking from
the soldier that distinction with the same ceremony, under the
sentence of a court-martial, would operate as a heavy punish-
ment. Without entering into any details upon this subject,
we cannot help earnestly recommending its adoption with suf-
ficient securities against its being bestowed too indiscrimi-
nately, or too frequently, and with different decorations for
gallant conduct in the field, and upon other occasions, from
that which is given for mere good behaviour.
The real and substantial reward to which every soldier looks
with the utmost anxiety is a pension after his service. That
pension, however, should not be too easily attained, and as a
powerful assistant in enforcing discipline, good conduct should
be made necessary to establish :the claim, and bad conduct
should render it liable to forfeiture, even up to the last moment
of service. In the grant of a pension for disability, also, the
greatest care should be taken that it is not converted into a
provision for men, who, by their own vices and irregularities,
have brought that disability upon themselves. These appear
to us to be the main principles upon which a system of pensions
ought to be founded, and if the system be a good one, no con-
sideration of economy should stand in the way of making that
pension such a one in amount as would be a real object to the
soldier to attain, and the loss of it a real misfortune.
We come now to the alterations of the most vital nature,
which have been, in part, at least, alluded to by other witnesses,
but more fully stated by Mr. Hume, in his evidence, "as the
means of inducing the educated sons of individuals in com-
fortable situations of life to enter the army, provided corporal
punishment was also abolished." The first of these-alterations
is, "that a portion of either one-third, one-half, or two-thirds
of the first commissions, as may be determined upon, should
be granted to men, who have gone through with credit the
gradations of private, corporal, and non-commissioned officer."
With reference to this point, we have examined most of the
officers of experience, whom we have had before us, and we
have also bad the opportunity of examining two gentlemen
who have themselves served in the ranks, and obtained com-
missions. Mr. Blood, one of those gentlemen, now a lieute-
nant upon retired full pay, obtained his commission in the
Peninsula, as a reward for gallant conduct ; and the other,
Mr. Winterbottom, the commissions of lieutenant and of pay-
master, for excellent conduct in every respect, and he is still
in active service.
From the evidence, more especially of the Duke of Wel-
lington and Lord Hill, we collect, that the giving commissions
to deserving non-commissioned officers is by no means unfre-
quent, and that, in some instances, those officers have risen to
considerable rank in the army.
The other suggestion made by Mr. Hume is, that a large
proportion of the officers of Customs and Excise, of police,
and messengers in public departments, should be taken from
the ranks of the army, and he refers to Prussia as an example
of the good effects of such a system. There can be no doubt,
that if here, as in Prussia, the army were as the high road to
all offices, such an effect as he supposes might be produced ;
but we are far from believing that the feeling of this country is
military enough to admit of its being so.
There now only remains for us to submit to your Majesty
the conclusions which, in our judgment, are the results of the
whole evidence :

1. That the opinion of almost every witness whom we have
examined is, that the substitution of other punishments for
corporal punishment in the British army, upon actual service,
and in the field, is impracticable; and if practicable, would be
insufficient for the maintenance of proper discipline in your
Majesty's army;
2. That the abolition of the power of awarding corporal
punishment, by sentence of court martin in the British islands
and the colonies, and during peace, and the retention of the
power of inflicting that punishment when the army is on ser-
vice and in the field, appears to us, for the reasons we have
stated, manifestly unjust.
3. That it does not appear to us, that the punishments
which have been resorted to as substitutes have hitherto
had such an effect as to render it safe to abolish altogether
that power in Great Britain or the colonies, nor have any other
punishments been suggested to us that appear to promise
more favourable result.
4. That it appears to us, that even supposing that some
effectual substitute might be devised, or that those now in use
might be made more effectual, so as to render corporal punish-
ment ultinuitely unnecessary, it would be unsafe to proceed at
once to abolish it entirely, and that even in that case its aboli-
tion should be gradual.
5. That in order to give full effect to the punishments now
in use as substitutes for corporal punishment, considerable alte-
rations must be made in the means of rendering solitary con-
finement in the several barracks more effective, and that a cer-
tain number of prisons, exclusively for military offenders, should
be provided as soon as possible.
6. That, although we have been unwillingly convinced of
the necessity of still retaining the power of corporal punish-
ment, and in proportion to our conviction of that necessity, we
earnestly recommend that no pains may be spared to endeavour
to make its infliction less frequent.
7. That, with the view of diminishing the frequency of this
punishment, the offences to which it is limited, and the occa-
sions upon which it should be resorted to, should be more
clearly defined. _
8. That, with the same view, more discretion should be
vested in commanding officers as to the power of making use
of minor punishments, and in determining on the offences
which shall, under their orders, be tried by a regimental court-
martial.
9. That it appears to us that the extent of the sentences in
the power of the several descriptions of courts-martial to award
may, without danger, be more limited than at present.
10. That encouragement should be given in the way of
honorary reward and distinction, both to the gallant and to the
well-conducted soldier.
11. That no consideration of expense within reasonable
bounds should be allowed to stand in the way of attending to
the comforts of the soldier while in the service, and of a suffi-
cient pension for the good and deserving man after that ser-
vice has been performed.
We cannot close our report without assuring your Majesty
that we find ample evidence of the earnest desire, and the most
strenuous efforts upon the part, not only of the superior offi-
cers, but of officers of all ranks, so as to conduct the disci-
pline of, the army as to render corporal punishment as rare as
possible.; and more especially we observe that the command-
ing officers are fully aware of your Majesty's gracious wishes
in that respect, and we are satisfied that they will pdrsevere in
giving the fullest effect, by the strictest attention to the moral
discipline of their regiments, to those wishes.
Finally, we feel it to be eur duty to your Majesty to state
our conviction, that if it were possible to introduce such a sys-
tem of discipline as that of France into your Majesty's 'army
(a system which in its effects we believe to be far from being
as successful as that of Great Britain), it could only be by the
establishment of such a rigorous conscription of all ranks as
we believe would not be endured, and by a change in the whole
tone of this country, as to the military service, such as we have
no expectation of seeing effected.
We humbly submit this our unanimous Report to your Ma-
jesty's Royal consideration.
WHARNCLIFFE.
JAMES KEMPT.
SANDON.
E. HYDE EAST.
R. C. FERGUSSON.
E. BARNES, Lieutenant-General.
T. REYNELL.
India Board, March 15, 1836.