The Sun.
London, England, 1812-04-16 00:00:00

Mr. LACY HART agreed,w ith the Hon. Bart. that

the present motion was virivally for total aboli-
tion of the punishment ; he should therefore vote
against it. If all the disorders and crimes of an
army could be put down, and contrasted with the
punishments inflicted on those disorders and crio.es,
such a strong feeling would not exist in the mind of
any one against the present mode of punishment.—
It had been resorted to by the Romans, than whom
no nation ever arrived to a, higher military renown.
It had formerly, though in a more sesere way,
namely, by runningiti,e gauntlet, been the military
punishment of the-French. For it they had substi-
tuted imprisonment of various degrees of severity,
labour at fortifications in irons, the galleys, and
death. It was no exaggeration to say, that for one
British soldier on whom the punishment of death
was-inflicted, there mere 1000 French soldiers by
whom it was suffered. It was generally admitted, that
Were the punishment of flogging abolished, that of
death must be more frequently inflicted. But he
knew no right-that any Government had to resort to
the latter punishment, if the former were found sof-
ficient. Although he would not support, the nick-
, tion, he admitted that the military code required re-
vision, and that the' nature both of the offences and
of the punishments, ought to be more stridly de-
fined. It was too loose a phraseology in such cases
to delare, that the punishment should be inflicted
" according to the custom of war." He agreed
with the Hon. Baronet, that the utmost attention
should be paid to the interests of the British soldier;
but he could by no means agree with him, that the
pumshtnent in question degraded t he country, Or tier!,
to use the Hon. Baronet's words, England was a
flogged nation. The punishment was not for the
nation, but for those by whom it was deserved—the
guilty. The tendency of agreeing to the present
motion, would be to relax thai disciplirte which had
raised our army to such a height of excellence, and
to give to the soldiers an idea that they were exist-
ing under circumstances of injustice arid disgrace.--
In. the Militia particularly, there could, be uo dao-
ger of any abuse, for the officers of that corps had
most of ,them been Magistrates, or accustomed to
'serve on grand juries, and were too familiar with
the principles of the British Constitution, not to
know,_ that in their* infliction of punishment, jus-
tice ought to be terripered with mercy. He should
decidedly oppose the motion.
Mr. W. WYNNE was not prepared to say the pre-
sent system of punishment ought to be torally.abo-
lished ; b/ut he believed the frequent discussions on
this subjed had caused the number of, corporal pu-
nishments to be diminished with the happiest etfeet.
He thought it might be well if corporal punishments
were to be seldom inflitled, without a reference to
the Commanding Officers.
Mr. WILBERFORCE, when.he considered what an
army was, declared himself afraid to give way to his
feelings on the subjetl'ot corporal punish.nent,which
might prompt him to speak in favour of putting an
end to the system at-once. He, however, came to
this conclusion, that as the punishment of flogging
had been used less and less for some years.past, till
at length it was only now resorted to in partienlJr
cases, and only exercised in particular- regiments, it
would be proper to, guard against the effct of in.

tervationa on the infinite tliffituity procising the
die rge of a soldier, and lamented that merit was
not . perticularly n-warded in otir army. It
was his decide.' intention to vote against this mo-
tion, as he drearied the effeels of teaching the army
to 'he: House 'tor redress in such matters.
Sir a. ROMILLY contended, that the resistance
made t . this &notion would be more mischievous.
then any thing that had been anticipated, as the con-
sequence of granting the Returns called. for ; as
when it was staied,(as it bad been) that to produce
it would be
,to abolish corporal punishment, it would .
go wall to the world that that which it would dis-
close was so enormous, that once made public, it
would, nrs longer be endured. ile.did not mean to
gay this was +he ta&, but such it would appear to
the. world. It was necessary that the return should
be eieen, that military officers might know what
were theefferas of severe corporal punishment. At
present, Military Court Martials had it in their
power to sentence men, it they pleased, to receive
five thousand lashes—to sentence men to punish-
ments which human nature had not the capacity to
endure. It was then desirable that the persons of
whom they were composed should be put in pos-
session of those fads which the Heuse of Commons
could supply. In reply to wha, had been advanced by
a Gentleman opposite with respect to the Militia,
the Honourable and Learned Gentleman contended
that :he greasesi severity was prattised in the Militia
regiments. The punishment there inflieled was
greater ban in regiments of the line, and it had beed
calculated that if the same severity were praElised in
ell ale regiments, which was common in some, the
whole 70,000 men would be flogged in six years.—
It was the boast of an Englishman that the laws
sanctioned no cruel punishments; that the tortures.
the wheel, and the knout, -were unknown • but in
the army a horrible punishment was
no one would wish inflicted even n a murderer.—
What could be more dreadful than the practice of
flogging a man so long as his strength would enable
him to bear the torture, -while a' surgeon stood
over the wretch to see that his life was not
endangered ? When he could bear no more
he was taken down to the Hospital, to ruminate
ivith anguish of heart on the torture he had yet to
rirdergo as soon as he. regained sufficient vigour w
enchee its In this deplorable situation was he
doomed to remain while his wounds were healed,
only to be torn open again, and till his strength was
restored, only to be agehe eel-ranged. The whip-
pings inflicted by the criminal law allowed the par-
ties punished to be able to go about their business in
a div r two; buothepunishments-in the army were
such, that if he was not misinformed, they frequently
confined the, sufferer to • the hospital for several
weeks. He concluded, strongly supporting the
motion, and earnestly calling for the returns.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER desired to
be understood,: as imputing no motives but those
arising from-the purest humanity to the Honourable
and Learned Gentleman who had just sat down,
and the other Gentlemen who had spoken on the
same side, while he thought that advancing what
they hadadvanced, they might be in the wrong, and
that what, had fallen from them, might produce great
national and military evils, though they conscien-
tiously thought they did• but their duty in thus
stating their sentiments on this subject. To him (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer) it appeared, that, if
be were to make such a statement, it would not only
be mischievous, but criminal on his part : nor did
he; with the sentiments he had, •know of any thing
that would be more unprincipled than to hold
out such moving descriptions of the effees• of
the present system, when, if that 'complain-
ed of was- an -evil, he could not but feel it
to be a necessary ceel. Such descriptions were most
dangetous, as, exaggerating the evil, they brought
forward instances unparalleled for-years, 'and rep'e-
sented such cases not as being those to which the
soldier might possible be exposed, but as those which
daily occurred in the•army from- the present admi-
nis:ration of punishment. He admitted that there
bad been iustances of persons being punished two
or three times for the same offence, but as far as he
was informed on the subjeCt, he believed this to
havebaen done in no recent case. (Here Sir S. Ba-
nally said " that the returns will tell us.") The
800. and Learned Gentleman said, " that the re-
turns will tell us." But ought not some return to
have told him so before lie came down to the House
to give such a description of the effects of the pre-
sent system, as they had heard from hie. that even-
ing ? Such punishments hail trfraieriy been indiCted,
but he knew that the Officer, under- w horn these sub-
ieets now tome, had right or wrone declared, that
attei a man had receised as many lashes as he was
able to heat at ore time, to punise him again for
same offence was illegal, and sight 01 wrong, under
biro, the punishment was adinieistered. This be-
ing the ease, he week! say, that giving the army
Each exaggeraled representations of the evils of the
present, tar exceeding what his experience furnish-
ed; e en to make the soldier fear evils to which he
was_not exposed. But supposing this pradice sill
to•exist, was it no.hlug, that it should be not only
exaggerated its deateeetton, but represented as unne-
ceseey, as that which ought to be got rid of, as that
which was not required by the service ? They had
be told that those regiments where corporal pu-
-eashinents were most used, were the worst. Why
was it ,not lair to suppose, that it was the circum-
stance of their being the worst that csused
the punishment; to be so frequent ? Allud-
lag to certain cases of extreme' suffering which had
been mentioned by the Hon. Baeetiet opposite, he
ridiculed the statement made in: the newspapers, of
ea.. experiments made on a man who counterfeited
ti ter insenebility, and who, it was said, ,had pins
t rust under his nails, and even had his skull tre-
'mooed without exhibiting any symptom of pain-till
tees came to'scrape his braid, when he at last cried
" Oh I" This story lie did not believe, and was
eati,fied that it was a fabrication altogether. Was
it tome to this, that when such-a story appeared in
-tile newspapers, an inquiry was to be called for in
that House, into the present syeem of military pu-
aii•hinCtir, and (Tat a refusal to comply with such a
call was to be taken as a proof that the story was
well tunr.dt d,' because the papers any Honoarable
I'vlember might require were not produced to con;
tradiet it What contradiction could the papers
now required give to the story to which he had
alluded ? ' He contended that it would be most un-

just to tkee the rettitM.tailecl for, on to pici.66,l
contrast the conduct of the Colonel of one regiment
with that of the Colonel of another; without first
giving those Gentlemen notice that they were to be
put on their trial in the House of Commons. If
there were cases,in which it had been decided that
corporal punishment might, ought, and should be
infliaed, they (night to be prepared to meet such
cases. This subjed had been not less than three
times before Parliament in- the present Session, and
as the Hon. Baronet had said he would vote for it, as
it went to the abolishing of corporal punishment,
that surely was a sufficient ground for resisting it, as
the House had twice already decided that theaboli-
tion•was inexpedient: The Hon.,and Learned Gen-
tleman too had spoken in such a manner that he
thought any person who heard the greßter part of
his speech, would have understood'him to be speak -
hag, not for the production of papers, but for the
abolition of flogging. Persons of the greatest expe-
rience in.the army bad declared it to be necessary.
As to. what had been said by' the Hon; Waronet of
this country being a flogged nation', bedause so
large a portion of the population was atleaed by the
military system, it might as well be said that it was
a hanged nation, because all were subject' to the
criminal laws. The Hon. Baronet might possibly
know some persons who would think it would be a
very good thing if hanging could be done without,
but he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was ne--
vertheless of opinion that there were many good
people in the community who were of opinion, that
to preserve their lives and property, the infliction of
such a punishment was necessary. -
Sir S. ROMILLY explained.'
_ __ _

Mr. BROUGHAM said, that the mode of argument
adopted, particularly by the Member for Yorkshire,
against the motion, was so- extraordinary, 'that he
felt himself called upon to-make a few observations
beforo the, House went to a vote. They were told
that they could not allude to the punisinnenta fiog-
ging withoutwtting up a watch word of discontent
in-the army. They were charged with interfering
with its management, and upon those grounds the
motion was resisted. But what consistency was
there in such statements ? Did not the Member for
Yorkshire pronounce an eulogium on the late Mr.,
Windham, for his plans for ameliorating the con-
dition of that army-? Was there, in tact, a- single
Session, in which the House did not interfere in
military matters ? 'And as an Honourable Friend of
his had said, to whom was the army to look, if not
to that House which paid them, and which should
regulate them—not indeed in the important article
of the device of a button, that was lett to graver
heads, but on the minor points of subsistence and
supply Were not such subjects considered in the
Committees on the Walcheren expedition ? Never,
indeed, did the planner of that expedition or his Co-
adjutor, who resolved that the inquiry should be.
conducted wi:h shut doors, tell the House; that
they. ought not to interfere with such topics, nor
had be ever heard it asserted before this night. If
such a ground of objection was tenable, there must
be an end to nine-tenths of the discussions in which
they were heretofore accustomed to indulge. If
such a ground Was admissible, the Slave Trade could'
never have been carried, for it could never have been
discussed. He, for one, felt no alarm at the ten-
dency of the motion, which was intended to put
an end to the present gross and needless extent of
cruelty- The question before the House was,
whether Courts iVlarrial had abused the power en:
trusted to them-at present; and it was not enough
for the- Chancellor of the Exchequer to say, do
not inquire, for I know all is well. What would be
the impression on the minds of the people out of
doors, if this motion was not agreed to ? Would
they be disposed to trust to the assertion of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, as he might be, at the
very moment that he was refusing the proof,
defeating the ends of inquiry ? He then alluded to
a case which had happened lately in Canada,
where a Major-General, a German, had ordered a
man to be punished with 700 lashes. He should
not mention names, nor did he blame the officer as
'having acted contrary to law, but the case exempli •
tied the cruelty of the system at the present mo-
ment. It was a punishment which ne Man could
deserve : death he could deserve, or less than death;
bird even if there were men in our army Who could
consider flogging, even as a substitute for death, a
mercy, he would not be one of those to gratify the
degrading choice. It was dangerous to draw such
a distinction between the military and civic part of
the community, and impolitic to continue a puniSh-
ment which must debase those who infliaed,and those
who witnessed still more than those who suffered it.
He believed, if the soldiers of our army were .not
familiar with such inflictions, they never would have
been brought to lend themselves to such practices as
'were adopted in the neighbotiring kingdom of Ire-
land. This was a delicate stabled, and therefore he
should dismiss it immediately, not butt that lie hoped
the moment of inquiry and of retribution would ar-
rive. He next alluded to the book of punishments
belonging to a certain ship, by which it appeared
that between fourteen and fifteen thousand lashes
were inflicted in the course of six months. In one
instance, a man brought up for punishinent had
leaped overboard, and was drowned. If, Open in-
quiry it appeared that he wa's wrong, he would not
only 'be ready to retract hit error, but would rejoice
to find that be was mistaken.

WirAssr,Fo.acs explained. •
Mr: ROBINSON censured the prat ice of making
loose statements' to the House, without mentioning
the names of the parties, or giving any clue by
which inquiry could be instituted into the hard Ships
complained of. It was little short of a libel on the
navy. He then proceeded to vindicate the conduct
of the Admiralty, who had shewn a particular at-
tention to this subject, and,were Most anxious that
lenity should be praelised as far as was consistent
with the preservation of discipline.
Mr. LONG bore testimony to the lenity of the
Commander in Chief, and contradiEted the assertion
of Sir F. Burdett, that orders issued against pen-
sioning soldiers afflicted with blindness.

Mr. LAMB disapproved of the abolition of corpo-
ral punishment altogether, but supported the mo-
tion as the only means of supporting the case of the
Right Honourable Gentleman opposite, by iheW-
ing that theylhad not been unnecessarily resorted to.
After some conversation across the table, between

. .
,
Sir E. BvitiiETT, Mr. Id EN Ott r, and Mr. Nina NERS
StrrtONi the House divided

Fdr the motion - r 7
Against it - -
Majority I-93z
The Hot Vie went into a Committee on the Irikh
tobacco Bill.

Sir Jot#ty NEWPORT ObjetSied to two of the Clauses,
which he said weot to establish a Maximum on the
price of ttibaCco. Ere contended, that it was most
unjust to prevent the trader fr6m selling his com-
modity if lie pleased, and therefore he moved to
leave out the Clauses in question.
Mr. W. POLE said, that theie Claims were not
now introduced for the first tithe ; they had been
inserted in every Tobacco Bill iu Ireland since the
3ist,of the King. So fir from operating as a hard-
shiP upon the faktrader, these clauses were intro-
duced, at their request, to protea them against the
struggler, The whole western coast of Ireland was
• ut• fine harbours, into which vessels might, and
did come from America, with Tobacco; winch
was smuggled on shore in. small quantities, it was,
•therefore necessary to adopt ,stron; measures ;o pro-
tect the revenue and the fair trader: The price of
tobacco was about sd. a pound without the duties,
and these clauses merely prohibited the siding of
it ,at a less sum than Id. above the duties, a prehi
bitiOn that could hot by possibility injure the fair
trader.

After a few words from Mr. SHAW and Sir.J.
New PORT, it was agreed that the Chairman should
report progress; and ask leave to sit again.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed
of. Adjourned till to-tnorrow.

From the LONDON GAZ4rTE, April 14, 181 z.

MILITARY PROMOTIONS.

tl'ar-Office, ilps;l 34, 3832.

sth Regiment of Dragoon Guards—Cornet Frederick Ham-
inersley to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Gordon, pro.
rooted. James Spence, Gent. to be Cornet, without pur.
chase, vice Brooke, promoted.
Ist Regiment of Foot Guards—Ensign Robert Thoroton to
be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Bishopp, promoted in the
9th Foot. Captain lames Gunthorpe, to be Adjutant,
vice Miller, appointed Brigade Major.
BREVET. —Captain Alexander Thompson, of the 74th
Foot, to be Major in the Army.
BA R RACKS.— William Jephson, Esq. to be Deputy Bar.
rack-Master-General to the Forces ►n Nova Scotia, vice
Major-General Vesey, deceased. C. F. Raitt, Gent. to
be a Barrack-Master to the Forces in Great Britain,