§ In the committee on this Bill, the hon. Mr. Bennett wished to know if the Act, as it at present stood, authorised solitary imprisonment? He knew that that, made of punishment had been resorted to, and was inclined to believe it had been abused.
§ Mr. M. Suttonstated, that very few instances had occurred of solitary imprisonment. If, by the Act as now worded, courts martial had not that power, they ought to have it; but he was inclined to think that the term imprisonment included all kinds of confinement whatever.
§ Lord Palmerstonmoved a clause to prevent persons, not authorised, from advertising for recruits; which was ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Bennetagain rose, and, after alluding to a number of cases which had come to his knowledge, of a degree of severity and cruelty in the infliction of corporal punishment, which made the blood run cold, the hon. member moved a clause, that any officer attending the first execution of a sentence, and suffering the remainder to be afterwards inflicted, should be cashiered.
§ Sir Samuel Romillysaid, that he might refer to a high authority in that House, who had stated it to be, in his opinion, illegal to bring out a man a second time to receive the remainder of his punishment, after he had once suffered as much pain, as human nature was capable of enduring. Besides, the terror of this renewal of the punishment was, he knew, often held out to compel the soldier to enter into other service, or what were called the condemned regiments. He hoped that a country which boasted of the mildness of its punishments, and from which the torture had been long banished, would not continue so disgraceful a practice, and that the House would receive some satisfaction on the subject. The idea that this sentence could in any case be evaded, in consequence of such an amelioration of the law, was entirely chimerical, as a surgeon constantly attended to see how the soldier could bear.
§ Lord Palmerstondid not think the objection 216 so chimerical as the hon. and learned gentleman seemed to suppose: he had heard of several instances in which the deception had been successfully practised.
§ Mr. Manners Suttonsaid (in allusion to what had fallen from sir S. Rommilly with respect to himself that he had no hesitation in declaring his opinion of the impropriety, injustice, and even illegality of inflicting the second part of a sentence after the first had really produced all the suffering that was intended. But, he thought it possible to evade the punishment altogether by means of the proposed clause, and therefore he should vote against it. He was not, he said, prepared for the clause which the hon. member had submitted, nor, indeed, for the discussion of the Bill at the present moment. It was brought forward thus early, that it might pass before the recess.
§ Sir Samuel Romillysaid, he had been misconceived if he was understood to say, that he knew, from any particular information in his own possession, that the practice had prevailed, of calling out men to receive the remainder of their punishment after as much had been inflicted as they could bear: what he had asserted was, that after receiving as many lashes as could with safety be given the threat of undergoing the remainder was held out to compel them to enter into particular kinds of service. The right hon. and learned gentleman (Mr. M. Sutton) said he should, negative the bringing up the clause, because it would retard the progress of the Bill; but that argument only afforded another reason for not passing the Bill at all, at this unusually early period of the session; for it now appeared, that they were not only going to pass a Mutiny Bill for a much longer time than heretofore, but all discussion was also to be excluded.
§ Mr. Manners Suttonthought the hon. and learned member's argument would be much stronger if any thing new were proposed to be introduced into the Bill by that (the ministerial) side of the House; when it might be urged, perhaps, that they were taking an unfair advantage of the presumed state of the House; and it was to that supposition alone that, he alluded, when he used the expression adverted to. It should be remembered, however, that the Bill in question would not have any operation till the 25th the next March, and its actual duration would be no greater than if passed at that period 217 instead of the present. The reason why it was now brought forward had been stated by his noble friend on a former night; namely, that as it was probable political causes might render it necessary to extend the approaching adjournment longer than customary, it would be inexpedient to leave the Mutiny Bill to any hazard of not being introduced in time before the existing one expired.
§ Sir Samuel Romillywas aware that the actual duration of the Bill could only be a year; but then it was a year to commence three months hence, and that was a perfect novelty.
§ Mr. Bensonexpressed his satisfaction that the present discussion had arisen; as it would, at least, produce the good effect of communicating to the world the declaration of the right hon. and learned gentleman, that it was illegal to inflict upon a soldier the remainder of any corporal punishment after he had undergone as large a portion of it as he could endure.
§ The clause was then negatived.