381] APRIL 15, 1812. [382 could be continued only in holes and ings on the barbarous and ignominious corners. He would not disguise his feelpunishment which hung over the backs of the army, and now, indeed, of the nation also: nor could he at present join in the encomium passed on the Commander in Chief, being totally ignorant on the subject. If the papers called for were once before the House, and warranted that encomium, he should feel pleasure in joining in it; but he could not, without every information which could be required being before the House, join in covering the foulness of the cat-o'-nine-tails. petitions for reforms, or for the redress of As to grievances, what were they in comparison of this measure? If England was to be flogged, it was a species of infamy which been condemned to, or would have enno other people, he believed, had ever dured. When he saw attempts thus made of things, and to throw dust into the eyes to baffle all enquiry into the actual state of the House, he could not sit still and see such despicable chains fastened on rived from the present motion in his mind the people. The great benefit to be dewas, that it had in view the total abolition of this punishment, which he trusted would be speedily effected. Gentlemen on the other side wished to be esteemed religi ous; if they believed the Bible to be the word of God, they must agree that this stripes lacking one, were as many as were was a punishment forbidden by it. Forty allowed by that which they themselves called the law of God. It was a punishment against the policy of the military law itself. It was known in the military code of no other country; and what was should be palatable to them alone? Was there in the nature of the English, that it to be endured, that the image of God in man should thus be disgraced? Corporal Punishments in the Army. be seized with a total insensibility in all his parts, and so resolutely persisted in it, that after pins had been run under his nails, and every torture ingenuity could devise had been exhausted, a surgeon was called in, who, supposing that he had met with a hurt in the head, recommended that he should be trepanned, which operation was accordingly performed upon him, and it was not till they were scraping his brain, that a low groan at length burst from him. He obtained his discharge, soon rapidly recovered, and on the rumour of a press-gang being in the neighbourhood, disappeared. The name of the regiment, and of the surgeon, had been stated, and the officers of that regiment or the surgeon would have undoubtedly contradicted this statement if it could be contradicted. And would it after this be maintained, that men were not struck with dismay, at the very idea of being driven into a service, where this punishment of flogging was part of the system? Would it be alleged that they not only would not wish to see it changed; but, as was alleged on the other side, that it even formed a bond of union between the officer and soldier? If this was so, he knew nothing to which he could compare that sort of affection on the part of the soldiers, except to the idea of Juvenal in one of his satires, where it is said, that the fish was anxious that it might be taken, in order that it might form part of the emperor's dinner. In the year 1808 there were found to be nearly eight thousand blind men in the army, applying for their discharge on that account, but as it was suspected that the greater part of those men had caused their own blindness to procure their discharge, there was an order issued to deprive those discharged for this cause, of the benefits of the pen-it sions they would otherwise have had. When it was considered what dreadful sufferings men had thus borne or inflicted upon themselves to get their discharge, it was hard to believe that the situation of a soldier was quite so comfortable as had been represented. Young officers were obliged to attend these dreadful punishments in order to inure them to it; and private soldiers, who, perhaps, would have had fortitude enough to have undergone them, had often fainted in the ranks at being obliged to witness them. He was convinced that if such a practice took place, in the face of day, and the public, it must be soon laid aside, and that it Mr. Lockhart observed, that this punishthe hon. baronet appeared to imagine; ment was not peculiar to this country, as but that among the Romans, the most high-minded and military nation of ancient times, corporal punishments were allowed. The dictators and consuls were attended by lictors, and the order was often given " I, lictor, perge, cadite." the French army, formerly, there was the punishment of running the gauntlet, and geon, working at fortifications in irons, there still was imprisonment in a dunserving on board the gallies in irons, and, above all, death, which was inflicted at In 383] HOUSE OF COMMONS, least 100 times for once that it was in the Corporal Punishments in the Army. [384 nerals of great reputation had expressly He Sir Samuel Romilly begged to call back Mr. C. W. Wynn would vote for this motion, although he was not prepared to the attention of the House to the question This was not a moagree to the total abolition of corporal really before them. punishment. He thought that the fre- tion for the abolition of corporal punishquency of it, however, might and ought to ments, but for the production of certain be much diminished; and that, except in papers regarding military punishments. extraordinary cases, such as the suppression In resisting the production of the paper of a mutiny, corporal punishment ought now called for, gentlemen on the other never to be inflicted without previously side did more mischief to the cause they consulting the commanding officer of the wished to support than any return, howdistrict. He believed that cruel punish-ever great as to the number and extent of ments frequently proceeded from the mistaken notions of very young officers, who considered that nothing was more for the good of the army than great strictness and severity. Mr. Wilberforce said, that he felt it impossible to avoid being carried away, in some measure, by the powerful effect of the statement of the hon. baronet, and by the warm feelings which he had displayed so honourably, and so forcibly. At the same time, when he considered what an army was, and how sharp and powerful an instrument it had proved against the enemies of the country, he thought there should be great caution used before any very important alteration was made in our military system. He was aware that ge punishments it contained, which the inge- [386 produce the paper called for must lead to cussion of this subject had produced the the abolition of corporal punishment. If most important benefits, since within these this was really to be the result, must it not few years, in consequence of it, corporal be supposed to proceed from this, that the punishment had been greatly lessened. An return would be found to be so enormous, hon. gentleman had said, that in the mithat this must be expected as the neces- litia nothing was to be feared, because the sary consequence? The hon. and learned officers were frequently magistrates, or had gentleman (Mr, Lockhart) said, he should served upon the grand juries. How true wish to revise the military code. But this assertion was, might be gathered from would he wish to do so without knowing the writings of military men, best acquaintwhat it was, and without information wheed with the subject, among whom was sir ther it required revision or not? The re- Robert Wilson, who had stated expressly, turn now sought for ought to be made, if that corporal punishment was more fregentlemen opposite were correct, in order quent in the militia, than in any other deto remove false impressions. Did any man partment of the service, and had supported say, that false statements, on such a sub- his observation, by making it appear, that ject, ought to be suffered to go out, while if as many men were continued to be so they were capable, by a fair view of the punished annually, as had hitherto suffered, subject, of satisfactory explanation? Was for only six years, the whole 70,000 men there ever an assembly of human beings would have undergone the inhuman senso infatuated as to suffer such a statement tence. With respect to the nature of the to go forth; preferring to cover facts in punishment, it was almost needless to the veil of darkness, rather than to allow quote the well known authority of judge them to meet the light; particularly when Blackstone, who had declared that by the the production demanded was calculated constitution of England simple death, unto remove unpleasant impressions or sur- attended with any circumstances of tormises? He could not forbear expressing ture, was the severest punishment that the his astonishment at his hon. friend behind law allowed; the rack and the knout were him (Mr. Wilberforce), who agreeing in unknown, and it remained for us by a rethe desire to remove the evil complained finement of cruelty to drive a man to the of, still refused to be informed on the very verge of existence, a surgeon standsubject. He hoped his hon. friend would ing by to feel the pulse of the sufferer, and see the propriety of altering his opinion. to pronounce when nature could bear no As to his fear of the army looking to that additional infliction, and when his soul was House; nothing, he thought, could be about to forsake his tortured body, to leap more natural than that they should look to into eternity, he was taken down from the parliament. Did not parliament legislate halberts, removed to an hospital, and every for them? Did not parliament annually means taken to call back life only to be pass their Mutiny Act? And was it not again tortured. Here the poor wretch was proper that parliament, and also the tri- left, his body more at ease, but his mind bunals which sat to give effect to the le- still upon the rack, reflecting, that the gislative provisions enacted by parliament, faster his wounds healed, the nearer he should be informed of the consequences, was to the infliction of the remainder of beneficial or otherwise, produced by the his sentence; and that his wounds were regulations of the one, and adopted for the only healed by his tormentors that they government of the other? might again be torn open. It was mere One of the greatest objections to the hypocrisy to say, that the minds of the present system of military punishment was, soldiers would be inflamed by what passed that there was no limit to the punishment in parliament; they perhaps would never courts-martial might inflict, but the mercy hear it; and would those be affected by of the members. They might order the statements in a deliberative assembly who infliction of 5, or 5,000 lashes, without were compelled to witness unmoved the control, and it was most important, that sufferings of their fellow-creatures? The they should in future know, what it was substitution of death would be comparathey did, and what they ought to do. He tively merciful, for individuals had been would be glad to be informed, what mis- known to fly into his arms to be shielded chief was to be dreaded? Was it discus- from the lash. It should likewise be resion? The other side of the House, by their membered, that the persons who were thus resistance to this motion, provoked it, and, degraded and tormented, were not volun according to their own statement, the dis-tary victims; they were first compelled (VOL. XXIL) (2 C) to enter the army, and afterwards to endure its punishments; boys, who in law had no power of disposing of their property, were, in the army, permitted to sell their lives and liberties for a few guineas, spent in licentious debauchery. Under all these circumstances he was of opinion, that the account moved for ought instantly to be laid upon the table. The Chancellor of the Exchequer would impute only the purest motives to the supporters of the motion; but the effect of their arguments he was convinced would be productive of mischiefs of the greatest magnitude. Thinking as he did that the continuance of corporal infliction was a necessary evil, he was of opinion that he could not have done any thing more detrimental to the service, than if he had employed such language as had been used on the other side. He did not dread so much the dissemination of the truth, as he did the exaggerated misrepresentations that had been employed, and bringing forward into notice solitary instances of severity or suffering for which no parallel could be discovered. He admitted that there had formerly been cases where the punishment was partially inflicted at one time and completed at another, but the modern practice had been directly the reverse. It would have been well, therefore, had his hon. and learned friend, before he drew such a picture of the repetition of the punishment of flogging for the same offence, enquired whether such a practice was continued. The question of its legality had been submitted to his right hon. friend, the present Judge Advocate, and he had pronounced it not lawful. Why then was such a representation made, when no grounds for it any longer existed? It was likewise true that in some regiments corporal punishment was more frequent than in others; but the obvious reason was, because it was more deserved. Would the production of the document required throw the faintest light upon any of the cases which the hon. baronet had selected from the newspapers; to which authority, however, he declared that he gave little credit? Would it afford any information upon the instance of singular insensibility which he had adduced with so much ostentation, and which (though taken from a newspaper) the hon. baronet implicitly believed? For his part, he was not quite so credulous, for he discredited the story altogether. The statement that was published bore upon the face of it marks of fabrication; it was said, that the man had pins thrust under his nails, and endured the most exquisite tortures that could be invented, unmoved, until at last he was trepanned, and the brain being scraped, he simply exclaimed, "Oh!" This might be true, as well as the addition to it-that the man being discharged, instantly recovered; but on hearing that a press-gang was in the neighbourhood, made his escape, and never was heard of afterwards. He confessed, he thought that he never had been heard of before. This story shewed the distress to which the hon. baronet was reduced, and the state of mind in which he came to the discussion of the subject, when he who professed in general very little respect for newspaper authority, could still for his own purposes think every word of this improbable narration strictly true.-(Sir F. Burdett said, across the House, that the man belonged to the 1st Somersetshire militia, and that the surgeon who trepanned him was a Mr. Welsh of Taunton.)-No doubt, then, since the hon. baronet was so well acquainted with the names and addresses, he had taken pains to write to Mr. Welsh, of Taunton; but until better authority was quoted, he should think it a complete fabrication, since those who would naturally have received information about it knew nothing of a circumstance so extraordinary. The case of suicide introduced had no better foundation, it had been enquired into, and the newspaper in which it was inserted was now the subject of prosecution. Besides, upon these matters the document required would afford no intelligence, although it was preposterously held out to be one, the contents of which would throw the country into a state of revolt. One of the great objections to laying this account upon the table was, that it would point out particular regiments in which more flogging was inflicted, (although deservedly) than in others, and would hold up the officers commanding such regiments to the odium of the army, and of the whole country, from which not the slightest benefit could be derived, since the necessary punishments must be continued. The number of corporal punishments would appear, but the grounds and merits of each case would remain out of sight. If officers were thus to be put upon their trial, it would be far better to make any law that might be deemed advisable prospective.-Another reason for refusing it was, that it would only produce future debate, since the avowed object was to bring the general question under the notice of the House. In his opinion, nothing but the most trying necessity could justify the discusssion of military affairs by the legislature, and yet the present was the third or fourth time that gentlemen had volunteered to introduce the subject during the present session. To this it was answered, that resistance to the motion provoked discussion. How could it be avoided? For gentlemen finding that because they should not have the document required to debate upon on a future day, had taken this opportunity of declaiming, not on the point before the House, but upon the general question of the propriety of flogging in the army. An hon. and learned gentleman (sir S. Romilly) had set out with recalling the attention of members to the true matter at issue, but led away by the warmth of his feelings, and by the wide scope the subject gave to his eloquence, had wandered from the line he had in the beginning chalked out, and had entertained the House with highly-wrought pictures of miseries attending corporal punishment. If, therefore, the return were made, the consequence would be to ensure two debates, instead of getting rid of the subject in one. The hon. baronet had repeated now what he had before stated, that because we had a local militia, Great Britain was a flogged nation. It might as truly be said that we were a hanged nation, because all were subject to the criminal laws; and doubtless the hon. baronet (as well as others) could point out many individuals who, on this account, would wish this punishment also to be abolished; it might be urged too with much greater truth, that many persons had hanged themselves, rather than undergo the same ceremony by the hands of a public executioner. He concluded by expressing bis determination to give his decided negative to the motion. Sir S. Romilly, in explanation, pointed out several misrepresentations in the speech of the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, which misrepresentations he was astonished to find cheered by the hon. gentleman opposite. Mr. Brougham supported the motion. He was astonished at the line of argument adopted by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the hon. member for Yorkshire. The House were told, that if the motives of those who supported the present motion, were not such, as to excite a spirit of mutiny among the soldiery, the motion itself was replete with every danger. It was impossible to allude to the punishments of the army; the bare mention of flogging was it seemed the watchword to discontent; and those who were disposed to avert this danger would oppose every motion which in any way interfered with the management of the army. Where was the consistency of the hon. member for Yorkshire? In the same breath he had declared himself unwilling to interfere at all with the army, and pronounced an eulogium on the late Mr. Windham, whose plans began and ended in the amelioration of the army. He had pointed out freely the abuses of all kinds which existed in his time-the enlistment of individuals intoxicated or under age into a state of service or slavery for life. But no such motives were ever imputed to Mr. Windham. It was reserved to the present question to hear arguments of such a nature brought forward. Why, there was not a single session in which parliament did not interfere with the army, and in which they did not discuss questions which had a tendency to agitate the passions of those of which it was composed even more nearly perhaps than the present. To whom were the army to look up but to parliament ? Who paid them? Every thing, however, belonging to the army was not a proper subject for parliamentary discussion. They could not with propriety venture to sit in judgment on the shape of a button, or on the cut of a whisker or of a coat, because this being a more weighty business, required abler heads than could be supposed to be found in parliament; but the rewards which the army ought to receive and the period at which they should be discharged; the commissariat, also, that most delicate subject, were matters that came with propriety before them. The retreat to Corunna, and the expedition to Walcheren, where thousands and tens of thousands of our countrymen perished, were subjects upon which the House had deliberated; but never, till this day, did those who wished to scare them from enquiry, resort to such arguments as those of that night. Not even the planner of the Walcheren expedition, nor his coadjutor, who caused the question to be discussed with shut doors, ventured to hold such a language to the House. If such a ground for the refusing of papers was listened to, then there would be an end of |