Sir F. Burdettseeing a right hon. gentleman in his place, wished to call his attention to an instance of Military Flogging which had lately come to his knowledge. In the Carlisle Journal, published about ten days ago, it was stated that a soldier of the 13th light dragoons, quartered in Carlisle, terminated his existence the preceding Sunday by drowning himself in the river Eden, through dread of receiving the second portion of a number of lashes which he had been sentenced to receive. He had already received one portion. He was sentenced to this punishment for having married a young woman without previously obtaining the consent of his officers. He would not enter into the question, whether the offence was one which was properly deserving of punishment, hut would confine himself to inquiring of the right hon. gentleman, whether he had correctly understood him on a former occasion? What he had understood him to say was, that it was illegal to bring out a man a second 273 time to receive punishment, when he was unable to receive the whole of it at once. He understood that the individual in question had served long in Portugal and Spain, and latterly in France, and had always conducted himself in the most distinguished manner. He hoped the right hon. gentleman, if he was not acquainted with the case, would inquire into the circumstances, and if he found they were as stated, that he would take such measures as he might deem necessary.
Mr. MannersSutton said, he knew nothing of any punishment having lately been inflicted, such as the hon. baronet had described. He did not know that there was one word of truth in the statement. Neither had he any reason, from what had fallen from the hon. baronet, for believing that he knew more of it than himself. The hon. baronet had stated correctly the opinion which he had formerly delivered in the House, respecting the illegality of bringing a man more than once out to be flogged, under the same sentence. He still entertained precisely the same opinion—the opinion had been adopted by his royal highness the commander in chief, and was at present acted on. He entertained considerable doubts respecting the truth of the statement in the paper, because the matter seemed of so extravagant a nature, that if it had happened, he must have heard of it. If the hon. baronet would furnish him with the name and dates, he would make the necessary inquiries.
Sir. F. Burdettsaid, the name of the regiment only was mentioned in the Carlisle Journal, but he had understood that returns were made of all the sentences by courts martial.
§ Mr. M. Suttonsaid, that returns were regularly made to the proper office, but he was not made acquainted with them, except when it became necessary to consult him with respect to them; and this was one great reason of his doubting the truth of the statement in question, because if such a punishment had been entered in any return, it would certainly have been mentioned to him.