62] 



ANNUAL REGISTER, ISl^. 



frequency of it might and ought 

 to be much diminished. 



Mr. Wilberforcesaid, it was im- 

 possible to avoid being in some 

 measure carried away by the ho- 

 nourable baronet's statements, at 

 the same time he thought there 

 should be great caution used be- 

 fore any important alteration was 

 introduced into our military sys- 

 tem. Improvements had been 

 made, and others might be sug- 

 gested ; but he felt a dread of the 

 army looking up either to the 

 House of Commons, or to any in- 

 dividual member of it, for redress 

 of their complaints. He should be 

 glad to get the information re- 

 quired, but not in the way pro- 

 posed. 



Sir Samuel Romilly desired to 

 recall the attention of the house to 

 the question really before them, 

 which was not for the abolition of 

 corporal punishments, but for the 

 production of certain papers rela- 

 tive to military punishments. In 

 resisting the production of such 

 papers, gentlemen on the other 

 side did more mischief to the 

 cause they wished to support, than 

 could accrue from any returns, how 

 great soever in number or extent, 

 since it would excite a suspicion 

 that they were afraid to make the 

 public acquainted with the reality. 

 One of the greatest objections to 

 the present system was, that there 

 was no limit to the punishment 

 courts martial might inflict, but the 

 mercy of the members. They 

 might order five, or five thousand, 

 lashes without controul. What was 

 the mischief to be dreaded ? was 

 it discussion ? but according to the 

 statement of the other side of the 

 house, the discussion of the subject 

 had produced the most important 



benefits, since in consequence of it 

 corporal punishm-^nt had of late 

 years greatly lessened. An honour- 

 able gentleman had said, that in 

 the militia nothing was to be feared j 

 because the officers were fre- 

 quently magistrates, or had sat on 

 giand juries ; and yet Sir Robert 

 Wilson had stated expressly, that 

 corporal punishment was more fre- 

 quent in the militia than in any 

 other department of the service. 

 It was mere hypocrisy to say, that 

 tlie minds of the soldiers would be 

 inflamed by what passed in par- 

 liament : they would perhaps ne- 

 ver hear of it ; and would those be 

 aflected bj^ statements in a deli- 

 berative assembly, who were com- 

 pelled to witness unmoved the 

 sufi'erings of a fellow-creature ? It 

 should further be considered, that 

 most of those who were thus sub- 

 ject to be degraded and tormented, 

 were forced or debauched into the 

 service. 



The Chancellor of the Exche- 

 quer said, that thinking, as he did, 

 that corporal infliction was a ne- 

 cessary evil, he was of opinion that 

 nothing could be more detrimen- 

 tal than the language used on the 

 other side. He did not dread so 

 much the dissemination of the truth, 

 as the exaggerated misrepresenta- 

 tions which had been employed, 

 and the bringing into notice solitary 

 instances of severity or suffering, 

 for which no parallel could be 

 found. He admitted that there 

 had formerly been cases where the 

 punishment had been partially in- 

 flicted at one time, and completed 

 at another ; but modern practice 

 had been the reverse. Would the 

 production of the document re- 

 quired throw the faintest light 

 upon the cases selected by the ho- 

 nourable 



