The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-13 00:00:00

ON MILITARY PUNISHMENTS.
(Abridged from an article on Military Hygiene, in the
London Medical Gazette for October.)
To maintain due control in the British army, to
check military delinquencies, and enforce obedience,
it has been deemed expedient to employ terror-striking
punishments of various kinds.
When we look at the returns of punishments in-
flicted, it can hardly be concluded that the means
hitherto adopted to promote discipline in the army
have been very successful. On an average, about 20
per cent. of the troops serving in the colonies and
fureign dependencies are annually convicted by the
sentence of a court .martial, and punished. " Habitual
drunkenness" constitutes about two-fifths of the whole
number of convictions. "Desertion," and "absence
without leave," are the most prevalent crimes among
troops employed in Great Britain and Ireland. In
1839 no fewer than 2,110, being nearly equal to one-
fifth of the number of recruits annually raised, were
convicted and punished for these two offences.
The frequency of delinquencies in the army has
been commonly attributed to the circumstance, that it
is recruited from an inferior class of the population,
by which means uneducated and low-born persons
are admitted into the ranks. How far this surmise
is well founded, it is difficult either to prove or to
disprove. Considering, however, the unfavourable
opinion entertained by the public in regard to the
army, the onerous duties and thraldom of soldiers, and
limited remuneration they receive for long and ardu-
ous services, I do not think a more prudent and better
class of men are likely to become soldiers.
The British army consists of two very distinct
classes, namely, officcers and soldiers. One class is
trained to command, and the other to obey—obedience
being the most essential elements in military dis-
cipline.
The crimes of soldiers chiefly arise from the con-
stitution of their profession. To disregard the verbal
order of a commissioned officer, or even of a non-
commissioned officer—a corporal, for example—is in-
subordination, and renders a man as liable to be tried
by a court-martial, and punished, as if he were to
commit a breach of the Mutiny Act or the articles of
war. Soldiers are also liable to be punished for con-
structive offences, such as alleged disrespect to a su-
perior officer. It is difficult, therefore, to escape from
the net of military law, its meshes being closed
against the exit of the minutest fry of delinquencies.
A court-martial may sentence a soldier to suffer cor-
poral punishment, not extending, however, to " life or
limb, for immorality, misbehaviour, and neglect of
duty." The vague generalities of this article literally
annul the benefits of a written code.
Well-educated persons, individuals whose parents
belong to a respectable class of society, and who have
undergone careful moral training, find the thraldom
and usages of the service as irksome, and are as liable
to military " misbehaviour," as the uneducated and
low-born class of soldiers ; perhaps they are, indeed,
more liable to fail in respect to their immediate su-
periors, whose conduct they may consider arrogant or
oppressive.
When so much is left to the arbitrary will of
officers, in regard to the delinquencies of soldiers, it
will appear that the welfare and happiness, and I may
add the efficiency, of a body of troops, will be greatly
influenced by the discretion, good sense, humane dis-
position, and experience, of a commanding officer.
Every one admits that the poor ought to be educated ;
but it is of more importance that the rich—in other
words, those in high station—should be well in-
structed ; for if their principles were right, and their
practice wisely conducted, the institutions and cus-
toms of society would eventually be somewhat puri-
fied and improved. The doctrine of expediency, and
the plea of custom, regulate weak minds ; and how-
ever well-intentioned routine commanding officers
may be, they are liable greatly to abuse the power
with which they are invested.
Experience seems to prove, that crime is more
effectually prevented in civil life by the diffusion of
information, good moral training, kind treatment,
and an easier mode of gaining a livelihood, than by
the most severe punishments. May we not therefore
presume, that offences may be prevented in the army
much more effectually, by raising the character of
soldiers, and by meliorating their condition—by
making them, in fact, prefer the public service to the
situation of labourers, or artisans in civil life—than
by either corporal or mental punishment's ?
It has been often observed, that extremely severe
sentences, such as capital punishments, defeat their
own object ; they certainly fail to prevent desertion.
During the American war of 1813 desertions from
our army to the United States were frequent ; and to
prevent this, men who were caught in attempting to
cross the boundary line were executed: six were shot
in one day, but without any beneficial effect. In
order to show with what indifference individuals met
death, and by inference how little influence this
punishment had in preventing crime, the particular
circumstances which attended the execution of one
man may be stated. " A private," says Colonel
Campbell, then Brigade-Major of De Meuron's regi-
ment, " was to be executed. The troops were formed
in three sides of a square ; at the other side, towards
the forest, the grave was dug, and the coffin for the
criminal to kneel upon was placed, as usual upon such
occasions, beside it. The provost, with the firing
party, escorting the prisoner, and with the band of
the regiment at their head, playing the Dead March,
entered the square—when, to my surprise, there
proudly marched the prisoner, coolly smoking a cigar.
Seeing the bad effects likely to result from such
evident contempt of death, painful as it was to me, I
called the provost, and ordered him to take away the
cigar from him. On approaching the grave, the
prisoner walked quietly but steadily forward, looked
into it, and turning round to me, said in French, 'lt
will do.' He then walked up to his coffin ' • and before
I was aware of what he was about, with his middle
finger and thumb he measured its length, and turning
round to me, he said in French, which his corps
generally spoke, It will do also.' He refused to
permit his eyes to be covered, pushing the provost
aside, and exclaiming in French, lam a brave soldier,
and have often looked death in the face, and shall not

shrink from it now.' The provost made signs to him
to kneel upon his coffin, but he replied, prefer
standing, and shall do so firmly.' The party fired,
and in an instant he ceased to exist."—(" A British
Army as it was," &c., p. 95.)
In illustration of the strictness of military law and
military usages, when compared with the laws which
regulate civil society, I have subjoined an account of
the execution of a very remarkable man.
Private Flanagan, regiment, was a fine-look-
ing soldier, about six feet one inch in height. He
had excellent natural talents, and had received a
tolerably good education. He had acquired a know-
ledge of Latin, and could speak the French language.
When the regiment went to India, he was in a short
time able to communicate with the natives in several
of the languages of the country. Although Flanagan
was a smart clever soldier, he was liable to commit
slight breaches of military discipline, and his name
was consequently sometimes entered in the defaulter
books. Being a man of high spirit and violent temper,
he could ill bear the reproaches of the adjutant, who
repeatedly censured him for his irregularities. On
one occasion he became so irritated with the rebuke

he was receiving, that he impatiently pushed the ad-
jutant from him with the back of his arm. Flanagan
wee forthwith tried by a court-martial for offering
violence to the adjutant, and sentenced to suffer death.
When the sentence was communicated to him, he
simply observed that he thought the award of the
court was severe. On the day of the execution he
preserved the most remarkable firmness, and con-
ducted himself with the strictest decorum. The
square having been formed, he, by permission, ad-
dressed the company to which he belonged. Having
reached the fatal spot, the fort-adjutant commenced
to read the proceedings of the court-martial ; but
having lost self-possession, his tongue faltered, which
being observed by Flanagan, he addressed him by
saying, " I see, sir, that you are agitated ; pray allow
me to read the proceedings for you." No notice was,
of course, taken of this offer. He then begged that
he should not be blindfolded, and that he might be
permitted to give the word of command to the exe-
cution party ; both of which requests were granted.
He finally gave the word of command, with as firm a
voice as a sergeant-major is accustomed to do on a
drill parade. Flanagan's untimely fate took place
in June, 1828, at Trichinopoly!
Another example, which occurred lately, on a
foreign station, may be given for a similar purpose,
namely, to illustrate the rigour and practice of
military law. Private 11-, belonging to the
regiment, was brought before the captain of his com-
pany for having been drunk, and ordered the trifling
punishment of two or three days' drill, when he gently
struck this officer's shoulder, exclaiming at the same
time, " There is now death for me." The man in
question was of highly respectable extraction, and a
graduate of one of the English Universities. He
drew up what he intended as a defence, but was dis-
suaded from the avowal of the sentiments and dis-
closires it contained, by some benevolent persons, who
thought it might operate aFainst him. 4'4 purport

~.~[3e~nu..n.