The Sun.
London, England, 1833-04-03 00:00:00

ciety, Burned to recommend the practice of the Zooloziell
Gardens for the army. He did not agree with that Hon.
Member in taking a zoological view of the case.—(A
laugh.) The present system was a most degrading and
demoral'zing one ; the British soldiery might be dealt with
i❑ the same spirit with the Roman soldiers :—Facinus
est drew Roinatzum verberuri.

Sir R. DONKIN explained.
Colo❑ei G. LANGTON said, that if it were wished to
preserve a disciplined and effective army, they must retain
the power of inflicting corporal punishment. He was
strongly averse to inflicting it when it could he avoided,
hut the power of inflicting it ought to be maintained.

Sir. JOHN BYNG said he had tried for two years to
do without corporal punishment, but he had found it
would be utterly impossible to do without it. If an effi-
cient substitute for this system could be found, he was
ready to adopt it ; but he had heard none such suggested
hitherto. He would acid, th tt every year there was a di-
minwion of this punishment ; still he thought the power
f inflict.ng it should be retained.

Sir FRANCIS BURDETT said this was a paint which
he consiikreil of the highest importance, and which he
had frequently recommended the Government to take in
hand. Corporal punishment was an intolerable system ;
and lie was sure the English people would no longer sup-
port or endure it. He deni,d that it was only had recourse
to as an ultintum remediunt.—(No, no ; Hear.) It was
convantly practised. He knew nothing hut what appeared
in the public papers, but from them it was evident that
this punishment was not confined to cases of mutiny. If
it were so strongly asserted that the possession of this
power was ab,olutely necessary to the good government of
the army, why he would consent to let it be retained, hut
then it must be circumscribed within well defined limits.
When it was much wen se than it is now, there were offi-
cers found to defend the system as it then existed, yet it
was then almost a hundredfold worse than at present ; but
such vv.,s the effect of a bad system, that all m n, even
those of refined and enlightened minds, would he hardened
by the frequent eshibitton of moan suffering. A wise
in in li ui said that men ma ere find o' using force as their
right hand, and reason as th-ir left. He feared that the
existence of tnis practice, and the constant defence of it
by officers of the army, ,fforded a great proof of the sound-
ness of that remark. But the r objections to its abolition
were answered by one important tact, namely, that though
the practice bad so much diminished as to be, when com-
pared to what it was 30 years ago, almost as it were abet.
fished, still the character, conduct, and discipline of the
army had been materially improved. If, then, the power
of inflicting this punishment was to be retained, let it he
retained within well defined limits. Let mutiny, fairly
understood. be punished in this manner ; hut as the matter
stood now, there was one clause in ti e Mutiny Bill which,
by the introduction of the word " insubordination," would
justify any t city officer io inflicting the punishrn, nt for any
supposed all', ont.—(No, no.) Let those gentlemen who
cried " No," show that he was mistaken, and he should be
most happy to hear the truth that convicted him of his
error. It was said that in foreign armies men were shot
for offence•. He should almost say, then, shoot men ra-
ttier than keep up triis punishment of the lash, for none
could be shot but upon full investigation and solemn sen-
tence, and it was better that one man should be shot than
that the whole army should be disgraced.—(Hear, hear.)
In many regiments, the punishment had not been cro-
p oyed for years. One instance of this, and he mentioned
it to the honour of the Duke of Gloucester, was in the
Coldstream Guards, while that Illustrious Duke was its
cotton inder—(lleas, hear)—and that was occasioned by
the attention of the officers to the men, who were thus
retained in obedience by aff.ction rather than fear. Some
years ago, the infliction of 1,000 lashes was thought no
extraordinary punishment ; 1,500 had sometimes been or-
dered is a sentence, and a man was brought out three or
tour, or five times to receive his sentence. If the number
was considerable, he was brought out so often that they
might almost be said to live under the lash.—(Hear, hear.)
These were things past—(Hear, hear)—and gone, and he
had no doubt, that if the matter was fairly considered, not
these enormities alone, but the whole system might be
abolished without the least danger to the good conduct and
discipline of the army. The practice of flogging ought
not to be kept up for the purpose of continuing in the
army men who ought to be turned out of it. They
had better be turned out of the army. The motion
of the Honourable Member for Middlesex was for the
abolition of this system in England, and surely the ex-
periment might be tried to that extent. He had the
authority of officers for saying this, for when he him-
self had brought forward motions on this subject to
abolish the system altogether, they had said that thateould
not be done, but that it might be abolished in England,
though it could not be abolished with regard to troops in
foreign service. Lord Hutchinson had expressed his
opinion Vat discipline could be kept up without it, anti
with his feelings and with that authority he could not but
vote in favour of the motion. He was confident that if his
Hon. Friend hail continued in the office connected with
the army, the clauses of it would have been framed with a
view to abolish the punishment of flogging, and at the
same time to substitute something that should have secured
the safety of the politic and the discipline of the army.
If there was a difference of opinion on the facts, he
thought that a Committee ought to be appointed to in-
quire into theta and to lay the report before the House.

Lord PALMERSTON observed, that the Hon. Baronet
had the advantage of speaking on this subject from feelings
that were natural to all men, and, therefore, was sure
to obtain a willing audience. If the House were disposed
to consult their feelings alone, there could he no doubt as
to the conclusion at which they would arrive. But this
was a question not to be disposed of on feeling and senti-
ment alone, for it involved grave considerations of public
interest, and the safety of the public, as well as the com-
fort of the soldier, and must be decided upon the reason of
the case. There was no man who would venture to con-
tend that a large army could be governed without the
power of inflicting upon the men composing it severe
punishment. None had ever been governed without such
a power. But then Flon..Gentlemen said that they had
special objection to this particular punishment. He did
not stand there as the advocate for capital punishments,
nor to say that they were good in themselves ; for he
c.iuld not but admit that their tendency was in some
degree to degrade the minds of the men; and the mind it
was that was principally affected by this system of punish-
ment. Hon. Gentlemen who objected to this punish-
ment did not, however, offer any substitute for it, but
paid the Government the compliment of relying on their
wisdom to find a substitute. He would rather they should
have undertaken the duty than paid the compliment. He
repe ited, that the discipline of the army was a subject
that did not concern the army alone, but the public
Now, what av,s proposed to be substituted for this
punishment? First of all solitary confinement ; and one
instance was given in which that punishment had pro-
duced its full effect upon a whole garrison. The Govern-
ment had not the means of always inflicting solitary
confinement. He would give an instance of this difficulty
in a regiment of Guards. In that regiment sixteen men
were ordered into solitary confinement, and how was the
order executed ? Why, they were confined altogether in
the cabin of a hulk on the Thames, sixteen feet long by
six wide.—(Hear, hear.) He denied that the punishment
of flogging was resorted to in the first instance. It was
only %Ohre other expedients had tailed that it was resorted
to. (Joe mode of punishment had been suggested, which,
he had no doubt, met with the appro atom of the Hon.
Member for Middlesex—A laugh)—it was one which had
the merit of uniting economy with humanity—it was the
punishment by starvation.—(Hear, and a laugh.) Those
men who wished to see the British army in a state of
efficiency, would hardly recommend long abstinence and
last. Then they were told, aid "fits eat cab hoste
doceri," that they were to look to the punishments in
foreign armies. Why in the French army, not flogging,
indeed, but corporal punishments were common, and that
too without a courtuoartial, and numerous were the cases
in which a man might be shot. But, even to say nothing
of the suit of punishments there inflicted, he must say
that the comparison of the French with the English army
did not redound to the honour of the former in point oh
discipline.—(Hear, hear.) The contrast, for such indeed
it was, observed by tilt• French people themselves to the
advantage of the English troops, whom, though invaders,
they found to treat them better than tie natural defenders
of their soil.—(Hear, hear.) Tue Prussian army, again,
was governed with great severity. One of the punish-
ments was to put a soldier in a room not high enough to
stand in, and with sharp spars in the floor, so that he
could not lie down without pain; and this punishment
was so dreadfully severe, that the ma❑ who was compelled
to endure it many hours, seldom survived. The amend-
ment proposed by the Hon. Member was most impolitic
in another respect, for it would have the effect of making
that which was at present the most irksome part of the
soldier's service still more irksome. He would rather
consent to abolish flogging altogether than abolish it
at home, arid still inflict it on those who were on
ftreign service. The cases which had been quoted to
show that this punishment might sometimes be dispensed
with, did not justify them in assuming that regi-
ments could have been so easily governed if the power
to inflict the punishment had not existed. But what was
the result even in some of them? Why that the men, at
last, began to knock down the non-commissioned officers
like nine pins, and the punishment was obliged to be re-
sorted to to stop the disorder. He called on the House to
pause before they agreed to the amendment ; to recollect,