Commons Sitting of 25 May 1811

MR. PALMER'S CLAIMS—THE PRINCE REGENT'S ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS.
Mr. Whitbreadsaid, he came down to the House to day, for the purpose of renewing a notice which he had given last night on the subject of the Message received from his royal highness the Prince Regent, in answer to the Address of the House, relative to Mr. Palmer's claims. The answer which his royal highness had been advised by ministers to give to that Address, conveyed the grossest possible insult on that House, going, as it did, to express a doubt of the inclination, or of the ability of the House to make good any sums which his royal highness might order to be issued in consequence of an Address of that House. He had given his notice on this subject, in consequence of having seen a printed paper, purporting to give an account of the proceedings in another place, in which it was stated, that his Majesty's ministers had advised the Prince Regent not to accede to the recommendation of the House. Nothing but imperious duty could have induced him to postpone such a motion beyond the earliest possible moment at which it could be brought forward; but he was under an absolute necessity of going to the country, and could not be in the House sooner than Thursday; he therefore now gave notice, that if no other member chose to bring the matter under the consideration of the House before that day, he should then submit a motion on the subject, although he should thereby be obliged to postpone another matter of importance which stood for that day, it being his intention that the present subject should take the precedence. He now moved, That the Answer of his royal highness the Prince Regent to the Address of that House be read.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, he had no objection to accede to the present motion, nor to the bringing forward of that of which the hon. gent. had given" notice, but he would say now, as he would maintain, when the subject was properly before the House, that there was no insult contained in the Answer, nor any thing unbecoming the high personage from whom it came, or the ministers who advised it. He should do no more at present than shew his readiness to take up the challenge of the hon. gent. And he was convinced, that when the discussion should take place, the House would be satisfied that the censure of the hon. gent. upon the proceeding was unfounded and misapplied.
Mr. C. W. Wynnsaid, that if there was any instance on the Journals of a similar answer to an Address of that House, the minister who advised it might perhaps be justified, but he defied them to produce any such instance. In the present instance the privileges of the House were attacked. He would contend it was the case; for the power of the House to make good its engagement, was either doubted or resisted by the minister. He was sorry that his honourable friend had named so distant a day; because the duty of a member of parliament was paramount to all others; and in cases such as the present, he thought it would become them to imitate the conduct of their ancestors, by postponing every other business or consideration to a question of privilege. He was more surprised at this proceeding than at any which had taken place since he had a seat in parliament. As to the measure against which it was directed, it was one, however objectionable in principle, sanctioned by the practice of the House upon other occasions. In the case of Mr. Webber, the House injudiciously, he thought, had exercised the privilege of Address; and though his opinion was not altered with regard to the case of Mr. Palmer, or the general inexpediency of adopting the principle of Address upon such occasion, yet, when it was done, it must be carried into effect, and was entitled to all the weight and authority that parliament could give to its proceedings. The House of Commons might as well be required to wait the opinion of they Lords upon every public monument, yet monuments were voted without that sanction. The debts of Mr. Pitt were paid without any such postponement; and the salaries of the Judges were increased without waiting for the opinion of the Lords. For these reasons, he was anxious that the question should be brought forward, as its importance entitled it to an early and full discussion.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that through the whole of his observations, the hon. gent. was pleased to run away with the assumption that he intended to question the privileges of that House. Nothing could be more unjust than such an assumption. On the contrary, he should contend, that the Address alluded to contained nothing which could, in the remotest degree, affect those privileges, or question the authority of parliament.
Mr. Whitbreadsaid he could not attend
320
on Monday, as he had already declared; but it was competent to any other gentleman to bring it forward at a more early period. All he should say at present, was, that the advice of the minister to the Prince Regent, could only be interpreted in this way; that where the House said, I will give the money, the minister said, you shall not.
The Answer of the Prince Regent was then read by the clerk.

FLOGGING IN THE LOCAL MILITIA—TAYLOR'S COURT MARTIAL.
Sir Francis Burdettrose to call the attention of the House to the subject of Military Flogging. It was a subject which had long and deeply occupied his mind, and he would have brought forward some motion on the subject before, but he had been advised to defer it, as the general feeling of the government appeared to be adverse to this odious, disgraceful and abominable practice, and the clause which had been introduced this session into the Mutiny act, shewed, at least, a disposition to counteract the evil; and he had been willing to receive it as an earnest of some better plan of military discipline than that which now existed. However, he had received information of the continuance of this practice, and in a service where such an ignominious and cruel punishment could least be justified—in the case of a person compelled to serve in the Local Militia, which obliged him, however reluctantly, to bring before the House some motion, which might lead to a more certain remedy for so great an evil. The circumstances with which he had been made acquainted, by letter, were these: The Liverpool regiment of Local Militia, commanded by colonel Earle, had been marched from that city to Ormskirk, on the 22d of April, and the quality of the bread was a subject of complaint among the men, many of whom had been used to a comfortable mode of living. However, the quality of the next rations of bread was not better, and after some representations on the subject, and the examination of the bread by the colonel, who declared it to be good, the major part of the men consented to take it, but nineteen of them refused, who were confined on the 27th of April. One of them, Thomas Taylor, composed a song, which contained allusions to the bad quality of the bread, (here the hon. baronet read a part of the song) copies of which were

321
printed, and the colonel obtained a copy, and then sent to stop the press. No further notice was taken of it until the 2d of May, when the adjutant confined Taylor, who was tried immediately after in the course of the day, and allowed but one hour to prepare his defence, in which three witnesses bore testimony to his good character. He was sentenced to receive 200 lashes, and was marched to the regiment at 2 o'clock the same day, when he received 50 lashes, the rest being remitted. He was refused a copy of the Minutes of the Court Martial, and among other reasons alledged for his punishment, his politics were one. He was a very respectable man, held the situation of clerk, was married, and his wife, when he received the first lash, fainted away, and had since been very ill, and the privates and drummers of the regiment had been much affected at the infliction of the punishment. The hon. baronet said, that he considered this case of the highest importance, both as it affected the individual and the character of the country, which was disgraced by the continuance of such a practice, and he had the authority of persons who stood high in the service for saying, that flogging was as unnecessary as it was cruel, and not at all requisite for the maintenance of discipline in the regular service, when its only effect was to produce a loss of character, to which loss of life was infinitely preferable. But when this punishment was extended to the respectable father of a family, dragged into the service, it was truly dreadful. After some further remarks on the nature of military punishment, the hon. baronet concluded by moving," That the Minutes of the Court Martial held on Thomas Taylor, private in the 8th company of the Liverpool Local Militia, be laid before this House."
The Chancellor of the Exchequerexpressed a wish that the hon. baronet would defer his motion until some inquiry could be made into the propriety of complying with it, as he believed it was contrary to the general principle, and was desirous that some general officers might be consulted upon it. As next week was full, and Monday and Tuesday in the following week were holidays, perhaps the hon. baronet would consent to defer his motion till Wednesday se'nnight.
General Tarletonthought that it would be better to delay it, till a letter could be received from the district.
Mr. Whitbreadagreed in this suggestion, and said, he should be sorry to be absent at the discussion, as he had been one of those who hoped the new clause in the Mutiny act would have prevented the continuance of the practice of flogging, which he believed to be wholly unnecessary in the English army. As Wednesday se'nnight would be the 5th of June, perhaps the following day would be more convenient.
Sir F. Burdettsignified his concurrence in the proposed adjournment of the question.
The further debate on the subject was then adjourned till Thursday the 6th of June.