GENERAL HISTORY. 



[61 



cution of the projected barracks at 

 Mary-le-bone Park, Bristol, and 

 Liverpool. 



The subject of the corporal pu- 

 nishments inflicted in the army had 

 at different times been introduced 

 into parliament, and one effect of 

 these discussions had appeared in a 

 clause of the Mutiny act passed in 

 tiie last year, giving a power to 

 courts martial to commute the pu- 

 nishment of flogging for that of 

 temporary imprisonment. There 

 were members, however, who 

 thought that the system of punish- 

 ment adopted in the British army 

 required a further reformation ; 

 and on April 15, the honourable 

 Mr. Bennet rose, in the House of 

 Commons, according to notice, to 

 make a motion on the subject. 

 After some general observations on 

 the ignominy and cruelty attend- 

 ing the practice which he had in 

 view, he moved, " That there be 

 laid before the house a return of 

 the number of corporal punish- 

 ments inflicted in the army, in the 

 militia, and in the local militia, 

 during the last seven years up to 

 January, 1812, specifying the of- 

 fences, where committed, and the 

 number of lashes inflicted respec- 

 tively." 



Mr. Manners Sutton said, if the 

 returns were desired for the pur- 

 poses of examining whether there 

 were any cases of abuse, he thought 

 it scarcely a fair proceeding, and 

 that the previous production of 

 such cases alone should induce the 

 house to consent to the motion. 

 There was much variety of opi- 

 nion on the subject, even in the 

 army, and he believed as much dif- 

 ference wovild be found upon it 

 among the men in the ranks, as 

 amon^ the officers. His chief ob- 



jection to the revival of this dis- 

 cussion arose from its tendency to 

 unsettle the minds of the military, 

 and lead them to believe that there 

 must be grievances, though to them 

 unknown, which caused the subject 

 to be 30 often agitated. He gave 

 great praise to the illustrious com- 

 mander-in-chief, who had laboured 

 incessantly to bring the discipline 

 of the army to perfection, and as 

 speedily and geneially as possible 

 to do away corporal punishment. 



Mr. Abercroraby and Mr. W. 

 Smith both spoke in favour of the 

 motion. 



Sir F. Burdett said, that he had 

 expected that the right honourable 

 and learned gentleman would have 

 produced more cogent reasons for 

 opposing the motion. In speaking 

 of the necessity of producing some 

 cases for its foundation, he seemed 

 to have forgetten that many such 

 had already been laid before the 

 house. The honourable baronet 

 then referred to a number of in- 

 stances which had been made pub- 

 lic, of the abuse and cruelty of this 

 mode of punishment, all of which 

 went to establish one conclusion, 

 that it was inhuman, and had been 

 often inhumanly exercised. It was 

 a system unworthy of the English 

 nation, and the English army, and 

 a system which he believed would 

 not be allowed in any other coun- 

 try. Sir F. B. dwelt with much 

 energy upon these ideas, and from 

 the advantage to be derived from 

 complying with the motion, as a 

 means towards effecting the total 

 abolition of this punishment. 



Mr. W. Wynn said, he would 

 vote for the motion ; for though 

 he was not prepared to agree 

 to the total abolition of corporal 

 punishment, he thought that the 



frequency 



