The Sun.
London, England, 1841-04-20 00:00:00

THE ELEVENTH HUSSARS.

(From the Naval and Military Gazette of Saturday. )
The Morning Chronicle has this week, with its usual
good taste, renewed its virulent attacks on the Earl of
Cardigan, in consequence of a corporal punishment having
been inflicted on a soldier last Sunday.
We shall briefly state the facts of the case. A
soldier bad been tried by District Court-martial and
by order of the General Commanding-in-Chief. Lord
Cardigan had nothing whatsoever to do with the
trial. The man had been in prison eleven days,
and had been marched a prisoner from Brighton.
The sentence of the Court-martial, approved by
the Horse-Guards, arrived at the head-quarters
of the regiment by Sunday morning's post ; and
Lord Cardigan, who was present, conceiving that it was
his duty not to allow a parade to pass, without it being
carried into execution, ordered the man to receive his
punishment in the course of that morning, and then to be
released from confinement.

After Divine Service had been performed in the Riding
School,* the troops were marched out, and the detach-
ment of the 14th Light Dragoons dismissed. Within the
following half hour the 11th Hussars were remarched
into the Riding School, and the corporal punishment took
place. j-
It should here be noticed that, so far from Lord Car-
digan being an advocate for corporal punishment, no case
has before occurred in his regiment since the end of 1839 ;
and which punishment, we believe, was inflicted during
Lord Cardigan's absence from the corps. The present
punishment, it is also to be recollected, was ordered by the
General Commanding-in-Chief.
We think it is to be regretted that the punishment took
place on a Sunday. Lord Cardigan may or may not have
been in error as to the necessity of not allowing a parade
to pass without carrying the orders from the Horse Guards
into effect, or as to the necessity and propriety of taking
the earliest opportunity of releasing a prisoner from con-
finement, even under the circumstances, as in this case, of
an extended confinemenr. There are, however, abundant
precedents both in the army and navy of corporal punish.
ment having been inflicted on Sundays. On board one of
her Majesty's ships lying in port a case occurred within a
few weeks. We know that punishments on Sundays are by
no means uncommon in our British colonies ; and it is the
custom in a great number of regiments to have the pro-
ceeding of Courts-martial read on Sunday parades, either
previous to or immediately after divine service.
With regard to what has been said to the punEahment
having taken place in the riding-school, where divine
worship had been previously performed, we may observe
1 that various duties are performed in the riding-school on
a Sunday ; for instance, had it been the last day of the
month and unfavourable weather, it would have been the
commanding cflicer's duty, according to the custom of the
service, to have must red the regiment in the riding-school.
A circumstance has come to our knowledge which should
also be mentioned. On the line of march of the 11th
Hussars last neck from Brighton to Hounslow a man was
tried for drunkenness, and sentenced by a regimental
Court-martial to rece,ve 100 lashes, but Lord Cardigan,
in consequence of the previous good conduct of the uul-
ciLr, remitted the whole of the sentence.

The Radical press will not allow the opportunity to
pass for further endeavours to excite the public mind
against Lord Cardigan, although it is well known that his
Lordship is considered by the soldiers of the 11th Hussars
as a most kind and indulgent commanding officer.
Individually we wish the punishment had been post•
poned, notwithstanding there are many precedents for the
cour:e that was adopted. However, whether right or
wrong, no man who knows anything of Lord Cardigan
will attribute this act to an unkind feeling towards the
priva'e soldier. And as to the present state of the 11th
Hussars, c e can report most satisfactorily :—there are not
half a ti,:zen iron cm the defaulter's list.

The prop il,ty or impropriety cf his Lordship's conduct
in this matter we must leave to the judgment of military
mea.

The Morniag Chronicle says :—" To add to the in-
decency, there were 140 men of the 14th Regiment present in
the 1;:n racks along with the 11th when the flogging took place."
The indecency consists in the exaggeration of our worthy Con-
temporary, the detachment of the 14th having been dis-
missed. —En.

t The Morning Chronicle says :—° His Lordship had not
the decency to dismiss the men to their quarters and to re-
asernble !hem to witness the punishment, but, as if the flogging
was a continuation of the Divine Service, kept them in the
place till it had taken place." We challenge our Contemperary
to substantiate this statement, which we pronounce to be un-
till?. from beginning to end.—En.

COMMODORE NAPIER.
(From the Liverpool .Albion of yesterday.)

Coinino:lore Sir Charles Napier, whose exploits on
Lod anti field linv-3 filled the werLl with his fame, will be
e nto:.tained this evening by the inhabitants of Liverpool,
of ill shades of politics, at a public dinner in the Amphi-
theatre. Au account will be found, in another column,
of the spnatanccus spirit in which the invitation to the
galiaht officer originated, as we:l as of the preliminary
prepari;tions for the festival in honour of the presence
in " the good old loyal town" of one of England's bravest
sons. The Banquet wil;, we have no doubt, be a
most splendid affair, creditable alike to the second
seaport in the world and to the hero whom its mer-
chants delight to honour. Party feuds and political
differences will, for this evening at least, be forgotten,
and Tory, end Whig, and Radical join, heartily and
cordially, in striving who shall do most honour to the
hero who favours them with his company.
The .following is a list of the principal parties who
have come forward to do honour to the distinguished
hero :--

STEWARDS.

Sir John Tobin
Sir Gc,rge Drinkwater
Sir Thomas BraLcker
Sir Joshua Wdinsley
T. Booth, Esq.
T. Case, E•q.
D. Neilson, Esq.
Wm. Rathbonc, Esq.
John GarneU, Esq.
John Taylor, Eql.
Nicholas Roskell, Esq.
Wm. Brown, Esq.
Wm. Earle, Esq.
Richard Dawson, Esq.
Hugh Horuby, Esq.
Thomas Todd, Esq.
Thomas Tinicy, Esq.
Will;arn Potter, Esq.
T. B. Barclay, Esq.
R. H. Jones, Esq.
Elias Arnaud, Esq.
W. H. Dobie, Esq.
Duncan SLcwart, Esq.
James Aiken,. Esq.
C. Tay lcur, Esq.
J. S. Leigh, Esq.
Chas. Rawdon. Esq.
J. C. Evart, Esq.

IG. H. Lawrence, Esq.
J. N. Walker, Esq.
I,:obertson Gladstone, EEq.
F. Hay wood, Esq.
Samuel Turner, Esq.
Thomas Ripley, Esq.
Joseph Largton, Esq.
William Dixon, Esq.
Hardman EArl,, Esq.
John Marriatt, Esq.
IJostph Iloruby, Esq.
A. Smith, Esq.
Eyre Evans, Esq.
Rich-ad Leyland, Esq.
Geo. Armstrong, Esq.
A. itielley. Esq.
R. B. B. H. Blundell, Esq.
R. E. Harvey, Esq.
James Aspinall, Esq.
W. Rotherham, Esq.
Samuel Sandbach, Esq.
Charles Horsfall, Esq.
Edward Rushton, Esq.
George Holt, Esq.,
John Jerdain, Esq.
Robert Dudgeon, Esq.
T. S. Gladstone, Esq.

Wm. Stuart, Esq.
C. T. Dontoile, Esq.
Geo. R. Woodward, Esq.
W. P. Bushby, Esq.
Jaques Myers, Esq.
Th:)mas Sands, Esq.
Charles Turner, Esq.
Harrold Littledale, Esq.
John :dyers, Esq.
Cotting'uam Moss, Esq.
Tnomas Moss, Esq.
Thos. B. Molyneux, Esq.
James Tyrcr, Esq.
John B. Neilson, Esq.
IL Harrison, Esq.
Elias Mocatta, Esq.
John Greenshields, Esq.
Edward Parry, Esq.
Captain Bevis
Ellis Yates, Esq.
William Wood, Esq.
Ambrose Lace, Esq.
C. M. M‘Murdo, Esq.
W. Tayleur, Esq.
R. Edwards, Esq.
G. Malcolme, Esq.
W. Fosberry, Esq.
F. Maxwell, Esq.
J. B. Yates, Esq.
1. 0. Bold, Esq.
Jas. Rawdon, Esq.
Nicholas Robinson, Esq.