The Sun.
London, England, 1832-07-04 00:00:00

RANK CHARTER.

Mr. GISBORNE presented a petition from 850 owners
and occupiers of land in the vicinity of York, on the sub.
ject of the currency. The Hon. Member had several other
petitions more particularly referring to the Bank Charter,
and upon that subject he wished to put a question to the
Noble Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether it was
l!kely that any measure founded on the report of die Com-
mittee now sitting on the Bank Charter would be intro-
duced in the present session ? If the Noble Lord
replied satisfactorily, it would he necessary for him (Mr.
Gisborne) to bring forward the Resolution of which he
hail given notice
Lord ALT HORP had made the motion for a Com-
mittee on the Bank Chart-r, in the sanguine expectation
that the repnrt might he made, and the subject fully dis-
cussed, and fin fly decided in the present Session ; he bad
not relinquished the desire that such should be the case ;
but he must observe that the course the examination had
taken before the Committee, did not lead him to believe
that he could accomplish the object lie had in view. It
was certainly of great importance that the question should
be set at rest as rally as possible, but it was of still more
importance that it should be satisfactorily determined, and
a settlement of it would be too dearly purchased if ob-
tained at the expense of a full and fair discussion.—
( Hear, Lear.) Therefore, whatever inconvenience might
arise from the postponement of the decision, it would be
much better nut to decide at all at present, than to decide
too hastily.
Mr. GISBORNE did not seem to think that the reply
of the Noose Lot d rendered it unnecessary for him to bring
forward his resolution.

Lord ALTHORP should not like to stand pledged not
to bring forward the subj••ct under any possible circum-
stances, but the Hon. Member must be aware, in the pre-
sent state of business, it was not probable that the discus-
sion could be commenced, much lee. concluded. The im-
portance of settling the question, as he had already re-
marked, was much below the importance of settling it
satisfactorily.
Mr. GISBORNE asked if the Noble Lord would un-
dertake to Ove him an opportunity of presenting his peti-
tions before the question of the Bark Charter was dis-
cussed ?

Lord ALTHORP had not the slightest objection to give
the Hon Member that assurance.
Mr. GISBORNE, therefore, withdrew his notice for
submitting a resolution to the House.
PENSIONS AND SUPERANNUATIONS.
After a remark from Lord ALTHORP and Mr. T.
COURTENAY,

Mr. HUME consented to withdraw his motion for the
repeal of the Acts enabling Ministers to grant pensions
and superannuatirms to certain persons and civil officers.
The Hon. Member gave notice, that if he should have a
sett in the next Parliament, this subject should be one of
the very earliest he would bring under the attention of the
House and country.

SCOTCII GREYS.
Mr. HUME rose in order to submit to the House a
motion of much importance, involving this great ques-
tion—whether an Englishman, by becoming a soldier, for-
feited his right as a citizen? It related to the severe and
unjustifiable punishment of a private in the Scotch Greys,
of the name of Somerville, who had been treated with the
y, merely because he had written a letter to
a newspaper called the Weekly Dispatch, of the senti-
mentsutmost severity,
of which letter every man in the country might be
proud. It was true that other reasons had been assigned
for the punishment of Somerville, but the fact was unde-
niably evident that it had been inflicted in consequence ():
the transmission of the letter containing the writer's opi-
nions on public affairs. The fact was, that very soon after
it was known that Somerville was the author of the letter,
he, who was a raw recruit of only four months standing,
was compelled to ride a horse which he was incapable of
managing, and in refusing to mount it a second time, he
had certainly been guilty' of a breach of discipline.
.It
was usual that the regiment should be drawn up in linewhen the punishment ordered by the court-martial was
about to be inflicted, and that the commanding officer
should harangue the soldiers—explaining the nature of
the crime for which the offending soldier was to be pc-

en, and the impropriety of a soldier's expressing political
pinions, and giving encouragement to the mob; but lie
ild little or nothing about the heinousness of the offence
which was nominally the cause of the punishment which
the regiment was called out to witness.—(Hear, bear.)
Now, when the House took into consideration, not only
,hat the political offence, or what was said to be a political
ffence, was the theme of the Commanding Officer's ad-
keys to the regiment ; and that in a conversation, which
'hat Officer (211,ijor Wyndham) held with Somerville pre
vinus to the court-martial, related altogether to the "libel"

excepting only the one allusion to the situation to which
the soldier had got himself, and which also was connected
with the political offence, by the Major's adding, " that
it would make him repent of what he had done"--that is
of writing the letter.—(Hear, hear, hear.) From all
these facts it was impceisible not to see that the man was,
in reality, punished for the expression of his political
opinion, and not fix the alleged breach of dicipline. But
there were still other facts which proved beyond all ques
tion, that the breach of discipline was laid hold of as a
pretence for punishing Somerville.—( Hear, hear,
hear.) On the very day after the flagging of that
man, a private called Andrew Scott flatly refused to go to
the school. Well. was he flogged ? No such thing. The
only punishment was consnement to the yard for twenty-
four hours, and the being kept to the barracks for another
day.—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Hume) begged the HI4LISP
consider the difference between the two cases. Here

was Scott refusing, in defiance of all discipline, to go to
the school at all, or attempt to perform his regular ex-
i,rcise, on ihe day after Somerville had been flogged for
refusing to do what he had vainlyattempted to do; the l Ater
being a recruit, and his removal in,o a higher class, and
his being ordered to ride an untrained horse, having all
taken place within a few hours a ter he acknowledged
himself to be the writer of the letter to the Dispatch.—
( Hear, hear.) If his refusal was so deserving of punish-
ment. why was the more culpable refusal of the other man
(who had the example of the previous day's punishment
before him) passed over with comparatively no punish•
ment ? If Scott believed that the punishment of Somer-
ville was really inflicted for his refusal to do what be had

attempted to ao, and found to be impossible, would be
(Scott) venture to refuse making any attempt or even go-
ing to the school? Assuredly not.—(Hear.) It was
plain from his conduct that the regiment very well under-
stood that the letter was the real offence. A strong cor-
roboration of this was, that on a f-w days after the flog-
ging, some officers of the regiment attended the
theatre, and received some marks of disapprobation
from a part of the and ence ; and in the course of
that evening some of the privates got into a squabble
with the townspeople, in consequence (as we un-
derstood) of what took place in the theatre. The
soldiers being intoxicated, returned at a late hour to the
barrack, with their clothes torn, and in such a condition
as would in a strict, or at least in a very severely disci-
plined regiment, subject them to punishment. However,
although their conduct was much more disorderly than
Somerville's, they were not punished.---(Hear.) Yet
such was the severity with which that man was flogged,
that although the punishment was inflicted so long as
seven weeks ago, and he had received only 100 lashes, he
was still confined in the host-deal, and was in a bad way.
The treatment which he had experienced since the flogging

was a great eggravation of the punishment.—(Hear,
hear.) His removal from Birmingham to Coventry, on
account of the feeling expressed towards him iu the former
town,.had (we understood the Hon. Member to say) re-
tarded his recovery. Was such a case to be passed over
by that House? - Was it to be allowed that a man should
be treated in such a way for the expression of his politi-
cal opinions? He (Mr. Hume) bad always under-
stood the constitutional doctrine to be, that a private
soldier was not only to think for himself on such
questions, but that he was actually bound to know
the law, and to refuse to obey his officer in doing an
illegal act. He had known many instances in which
privates were tried for their lives, for baying
acted upon the illegal orders of their officers. But
it would be absurd to say that a private could be responsi •
ble in such cases, if it was to be held that he should take
his political opinions from his officers, and that he was
liable to be punished for thinking for himself on matters
in no way connected with military discipline.—(Hear,
hear.) The Hon. Member then read a passage from
Blackstone, to show that, in free States, a man, so far
from losing the rights of citizenship by becoming a sol-
dier, he was to be considered as having become a soldier,
" that he might continue to be a citizen," and protect the
rights of himself and his fellow citizens. But, he would
ask, in what was the conduct of Major Wyndham to this
soldier Somerville consistent with that doctrine ? If such
conduct was to be tolerated by the executive, and passed
ova r by that House without reprobation, then the British
soldier must henceforth be considered, not as a citizen, but
a slave.—(Hear.) What the consequence was to be, he
should leave to the Secretary at War to consider.—( Hear,
hear.) But if the doctrine was to be admitted in respect
to privates, wby should not the same rule be applied to
officers ? But he knew many officers in that House, who
were in the habit of expressing their political opinions
very freely, and not only in that House, but in pl ►ces where
their privilege of Parliament could not be pleaded to pro.
tect them, and he would put it to the Secretary at War,
whether, if it was to be the law that privates should be
punished for political opinions, certain officers—Hon. and
Gallant Members of that House—should not be flogged for
xpressing their political opinions in the strong languag-

inwhich:they sometimes indulgAy—(Hear, hear, and

. -
laughter.) He wished some Hon. Member connected with
the law or the army, would inform him whether such was
to be the law, or Blackstone was right ? If Blackstone
was wrong, then he would say, th it it was most dan-
gerous to the liberties of the British people that there
should be in this country so many thousands of armed
men entirely subject to the tyranny of their officers, and
bound to obey their commands implicitly, and to talc,.
their political opinions from them. That was a state of
things which ought not to be allowed.
Sir C. WETHERELL—Hear, bear.

Mr. HUME would tell the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man, upon the authority of B.ackstone, that a standing
army, ruled under such doctrine, could only be suffered
under a despotic Government ; and if the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman would assure him that ouch was th•
received doctrine at present, he (Mr. Hume) trusted that
the next Parliament would place the law upon such
footing that, if there was to be a standing arms, the soldier
should not cease to he a citizen.—( Hear.) When ha last
spoke in that House upon the case of Somerville, he
abstained from pressing any motion at that time, be-
cause he understood that the Right Honourable the
Secretary at War had not yet received any infor-
mation ; and he hoped that, by postponing the mo
tion, the Right Hon. Gentleman would be enabled to
explain the circumstances, and to state what were tin
views of his Majesty's Government upon the whole trans-
action. There were now courses open for him (Mr.
Hume) to pursue. One was to move for the appointment 0:
a Committee of the whole Iliuse, to inquire respecting
the legality of punishment inflicted on a soldier by set'
tence of court-martial for the expression of a political
opinion ; and that evidence should be heard at the bar
of the House : for, although this was but a solitary case,
yet it involved a question which concerned the rights or
the whole people, and affected the liberties of every indi-
vidual.—(Hear, hear.) But that was a course which ii
might not be necessary to adopt ; and there was another.
which he thought might answer the purpose. He should
move for a copy of the accusation against Somerville, of
the minutes of the court-martial, and of the sentence;
and true report of the commanding officer as to whetter
the whole sentence was carried into effect. This motion
would enable Hon. Gentleman opposite, connected with
the War Department of his Majesty's Government, to ex
plain the real nature of the circumstances connected with
the punishment of Somerville, and to show whether or
not that soldier's statement of his own case was correct.
From this explanation he should he able to determine wb,-
ther it might be necessary for him to found any other mo-
tion up•in the papers for which he now moved. But he
should reserve to himself to consider whether or not li -
should not take some ulterior step to ascertain what i
the opinion of the Government respecting the interference
o fa soldier's military duties with his political rights. 11
concluded by moving fur the return of papers (which L.
had already described) relating to the trial and punish
rant of private Somerville, of the 2d Dragoons.
Mr. HUNT seconded the motion.
Sir JOHN C. HOI3HOUSE never had been more
taken by wurpise in his lite than be was by the motion
with which the speech of his Hon. Friend the Member

.
chat it was usual, even between opponents -at House,
much more between Gentlemen who had been in the habit
of acting together upon many great questions, to give no-
tice of a motion of such importance as the lion. Mem-
ber for Middlesex attached to the present motion. As hie
Hon. Friend had abandoned the motion for a Committee
to inqiure respecting the general question of the civil
ridlts of soldiers, it was not recessary for him (Sir J. C.
Flobhouse) to go further into that question then to say,
that he did not think it had ever been questioned that a
soldier could not be punished by a court-martial for the
expression of his opinion on a political questins. The
motion which the Hon. Gentleman bad made wa sno
funded upon anything of which the House had Parlia•
mentary cognisance, but only upon a private document,
in the possession of the Hon. Member himself. But hie
Hon. Friend thought that, on the authority of that docu-
ment, he was justified in calling upon him (Sir J. Hob-
house) without motion, for an answer to the assertions
contained in it. If that were once admitted, then any
gentleman might come forward with any number of
charges, and call upon the Government for explanation
without previous notice, and might even say with
his Honourable Friend, that the Government ought
to be glad to have the opportunity. But the
fact was, that all that he (Sir J. Hohhouse) knew
of the case was derived from the minutes of the
court-martial; and from them he could not auptote what
h. would be as much shocked as any mem), could he to
suppose, that punishment was alleged to have been inflict-
e I upon tne man for one crime, when it was in reality
inflicted upon him for another, for which he had not heen
tried, or even formally accused —(Hear, hear.) Under
such circumstances, he could not take it for granted that
an officer high in command had contrived to get up a
charge against a man, so as to bring it within the power
o his officers to punish, nominally for a breach of disci-
pline, but really for the expression of his political ()pini-
ons. He could not, then, feel himself justified in acced-
ing to the motion, not having had notice of it. He could
not Just then say whether there was any prec-dent fir the
laying of the minutes of regimental courte-martial hef ire
Parliament; altheagh he knew that the minutes of a dis-
trict court-martial might he produced. At least the M et-
her for Middlesex e ight have allowed him an opportunity
of consulting the other Members of his Majesty's Goeern •
ment. He could not say wheth• r there might he eventu-
ally any objection to the granting of those papers. He
knew at present of only one objection, and that was. this
House had always been exceedingly chary in inter feting
with the discipline of the army, except in cages in which
erounds had been made out for a ch tree of oppression.
—(Hear, hear.) B he would ask, had any gentleman
in that House ever heard of a case in which an officer had
procured the punishment of a private for a political offence?
Mr. HUNT—Yes,—(Hear. hear.)
An Hon. Mitatsze said—Sever il—many, many; and
added some allusion to the writings of the Rieht Hon.
Secretary at War, which was not heard in the gallery.
Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE did not recollect to Lave herd
of such c lees, and that the grounds upon which he had al-
ways opposed flogging in the army were quite independent
of any oppression that might be committed on account of
political opinions.—(Hear.) He had only to repeat, that
he could not accede to the motion, as he had not had notice
of his Hon. Friend's intention to make it,

Sir CHARLES WETHERELL would support the
Right Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary at War, in hi. oppo-
sition to the motion. He thought that the Hon. Member
for Midrib sex had broached a meat extraordinary and tin-
constitutional doctrine.—(Hear, hear.) He knew nothing
of the case, but what he had picked up from the speech
of the Hon. Mem'ter (Mr Hume) himself. The private,
Somerville, had been tried for a military off nee by the
competent tribunal ; and the complaint made was, that
that tribunal was influenced by the circumstance of his
having previously done something which was suppo,d to
amount to a political offence. But if there had been
anything improper in the conduet of the court martial,
the proper mode of appealing against the decision of
that court was by an application either to the King
himself directly, or indirectly through the Commander-in-
Chief.—(Hear, hear.) But if that House were to con-
stitute itself into a court of appeal from the military
courts, it would, in fact, place itself in the posit'on taken
by the douse of Commons in the time of Charles the
First, when it assumed the command of the army._..
(Hear, hear.) At the same time, no man would deny that
the House had the power of interfering, if a case of abuse
should have been clearly established against a Milit try
court, or against any other court.—(Hear, hear.) But
as no case had been made out by the Hon. Member for
Middlesex, he hoped that Gentleman would see the pro-
priety of withdrawing his motion.
Mr. TENNYSON had not received any intimation of
the course which his Hon. Friend the Member for Mid-
dlesex was determined to pursue, until he beard Lim make
the present motion. He was not prepared, therefore, to
say whether the course which he had adopted was or was
not the best, by which be might have brought the ease
before Parliament. But he would say this, that he never
heard a case which more urgently called for investigation
in that House than that which hail been made nut in the
statement of his Hon. Frien l.—(Hear.) His Hon. and
Learned Friend, who had just sat down, bad stated that

the House would be authorized only by a case of great
abuse in interfering with the proceedings of courts.mtr.
tial, or of any other courts. But that statement implied
an admission that the Honourable and Le irned a-ntle-
tnan himself was opposing the motion upon insufficient
grounds; for surely there never could be a ca•e of
grosser abuse than that which his Honourable Friend
had stated.—(Hear, hear.) Whether or not the statement
could be substantiated, it was of such a nature that the
House ought to institute some inquiry, although he could
not say in what form that inquiry was to be made.—

(Hear, hear.) The House ought. to be informed, by the
ttight Hon. the Secretary at War, whether or not he had
examined into the circumstances. For, although his lion.
Friend (Mr. Hutne) had not given notice of the precise
form of the motion, yet he had already drawn the atten-
tiou of the Government of the case, and the attention of
the whole country has been drawn to it—nor had any case
ever created a stronger feeling of surprise and indignation
amongst the people. If the statement of the Hon. 111-rn-
ber for Aliddlesex was correct, there could be no doubt
that the man had really been flogged for hi+ political opi,.
oion, and he (Mr. T.) was glad to hear his Right Hon.
Fr end deny that the statement was correct.
Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE—What I said was, th it there
ippeared nothing in the minus a of the court-martial to
justify me in supposing that there was any truth in the
statement that the man was punisheh for a political offence.
Mr. TENNYSON was glad hisß4ghtHoti. Filen(' (Sir
J. 11-bhouse) had stated his opinion, that a soldier could
not be punished by a court-martial for the expresssiou of
his opinion on a political question. If such a punishment
to flogging was to be continued, he trusted that the Hattie
would at least take care that the po ver to inflict it could
not be abused as in this case. He would supp ,rt the
:notion.

Lord ALTHORP complained that the Honour-

able Gentleman had not given notice of hi, inten-
tion to ht ing forward a motion co 111111 Utlie way
aid a man had been punist,sd for an ff•nee which
iid not subject him to a military court. under the pre-
tepee of hit having committed a mditsry oti•nce. He
(Lord Altirorp) agreed, that if that was trip., the trans.
tetion called for the severest reprehelosion.—(lier, hear,
hear.) But this was a case in which the Hou-z, (wait
riot to proceed, unle•s very strong ground should have
been made out ; nor ought it to interfer, with the pro..
eeedings of a court martial upon the unsopp-rtel st .te.
flent made by his Hon. Friend (NIG Homo). on the au.
rhority of the individual himself who complained of tieing
iggrieved. He entirely concurred wi h his Hun. Fri nd,

hat a soldier hid a right, in cowl ~,,, n with eve!), oiher
Engli,liman, to exprrss hii opinions upon q po.i.
lives. But there must be a line drawn Irepo,i; which that

thin
right shouldy rgoirt beeat de xe
leireciacs; d
u; n n,
di
itffii
ut g
(lit a q
to e
te
mina
where the line should be drawn in the ea‘e of a either.
(here wis at present no reason for going into the
-ion, and he should therefore merely put it to his H .n.
Friend and to the House, whether the motion ought to be
agreed to, notice not having been .riven of the lion. G..n.
leman's intention to make it.

Mr. O'CONNELL said, ill,- qustion way this—a man
;)ad been puniqled for one offence under the ch irge of
having committed another, and beyond all that, h., Itsd

,een entrapped into the commission or the ..treti e tor
Jvhich he vo as punished. It was stated that SomerviLe
had been actually promoted a grade in order to tiring him
within the reach of the commanding officer, and that lie
ri id been ordered to mount a restive tiorse—a horse known
to be unbroken—in order that be might be subj-cted to
punishment for disobedience. No One ivord of this had
r) en denied, and the only answer he had heyard give. Was
that of the Right Hun. Baronet (Hobhini.e,) uau,•ly, that
is did not appear in the proceedings of the c iort.cartial.
It did nut appear certainly. He knew not bow it could ;
.ut then that was one among the manyea.ms hir further
,liquiry; and he contended that the minutes Of the. cpitti t-
nartial should should be produced, in jus ice to the officer
t he was innocent, and in justice to the public service
.whether be was guilty or innocent.
in the .aMr. ROBERT GRANT knee nothing of this cane
leuesPe. t
whHe agreed
what
was
sce7l tainedinttt'e petition presented to the
teinz,nt of the case rna,,st
by the lion. and Learned Gentle..nan ; but he contonthd