MARINE MUTINY BILL. (Hansard, 25 March 1844)

§ Sir C. Napier
wished to take the opportunity of calling attention to one or two points connected with the existing Articles of War. If he were to send a watering party on shore, with a guard of marines and an officer to superintend them, and those marines got drunk or otherwise misconducted themselves, and if he were to punish them after they were brought on board the ship without trial by court-martial, they could turn round upon him and say, "The crime was committed on shore, and you have no right to punish us unless we are tried by court-martial." Well, his answer to that would be the authority given him by the Articles of War. This was a matter which required to be more clearly and thoroughly explained. The effect was bad. The marine could not be punished, but the seamen could. It was stated also in the Articles of War, that if a man committed such and such a crime, he must suffer death, or such punishment as the court-martial should upon trial inflict. The practice used to be to turn the hands up and punish the men; but they might have objected and demanded a trial by court-martial. By the last Article of War, all other but capital crimes were to be punished agreeably to the laws and customs of the Navy, and that was the only Article by which he could punish a man without trial by court-martial. He suggested that something should be done to make the Articles more intelligible. There were three cases only in which the punishment of death could be awarded. He remembered a master-at-arms being threatened by a drunken seaman, who said he would stick his knife into him. The man was rather a troublesome person, and there was no other alternative but to try him by court-martial, and he was condemned to die. The surgeon, however, certified that the offender had received a wound in his head, which at times rendered him not quite conscious 1533 of what he was doing, The Court, therefore, recommended him to mercy, and but for that recommendation he would have suffered death. He was sent home and transported for fourteen years. But the effect was lost upon the Fleet; there was no example before them; nobody knew what became of the man. The Article ought to be altered. Let it be death, or such other punishment as the court-martial should think fit, to be inflicted upon the spot. The court-martial should not be put in a position to prevent them carrying the law into effect.

§ Mr. S. Herbert
would not at that moment give an opinion upon the expediency of the alterations suggested by the hon. and gallant Gentleman; but he would consult with the Admiralty, and give an answer upon the bringing up of the Report.

§ Mr. M. O'Ferrall
said, this question had arisen in the case of the marines on service on the coast of Spain, and urged that some alteration should be made.

§ Captain Pechell
was aware that this was both a difficult and a delicate subject. But when they heard that every person, including every midshipman and every volunteer who should sleep on his watch, was liable to the punishment of death, or such punishment as the court-martial should think fit, they must admit that an alteration of the law was required. Sleeping on a watch was not so bad an offence as a sentinel sleeping at his post; and men were constantly in the habit of sleeping on their watch, with this threat of death hanging over their heads.