§ MR. THOMPSONasked the Secretary of State for India, If he will lay upon the Table a Return of the offences for which 72,650 of our Indian fellow-subjects were punished with flogging in the year 1877?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONThe hon. Member has, no doubt, obtained his information from the Report on the Moral and Material Progress and Condition of India, from which it appears that the punishment of whipping was awarded, in addition to other punishment in 1877, to 6,203 persons; in lieu of other punishment, to 66,447, of whom 28,127 were sentenced in the Madras Presidency. I am sorry that the Return asked for cannot be given, because the judicial statistics do not classify the punishments under the offences, but merely give separately the totals of the various offences and the totals of the various punishments. The required information is, however, contained in the Act VI. of 1864, which will be found in the Library of the House of Commons. The chief provisions of that law are as follows:—For theft, receiving stolen property, housebreaking, and extortion, the offender may, at the discretion of the Judge or magistrate, be punished with whipping 961 in lieu of any punishment to which he may be liable under the Penal Code. On a second conviction for the above offences, the offender may be whipped in lieu of, or in addition to, other punishment. On a second conviction for false evidence, false accusation, criminal assaults on women, indecent offences, robbery, or dacoity, forgery, and habitually dealing in stolen property the offender may be whipped in addition to other punishment. For any offence a juvenile offender maybe whipped in lieu of any punishment except death. No female is to be punished by whipping. First class magistrates only are empowered to sentence to whipping. Whipping is to be inflicted with due regard to the health of the offender, and, if practicable, in the presence of a medical man. I do not know how much importance the House will attach to the distinction; but the punishment is termed by the law whipping, and not flogging. The reason why so many sentences of whipping were passed during the year 1877 was that, owing to distress among the people, petty crimes increased greatly, and the magistrates exercised largely their discretionary power of inflicting whipping instead of fine and imprisonment. If a sentence of fine was passed, it would have been equivalent to imprisonment, as people in distress could not pay, and must have gone to prison in default. I am sorry to be compelled to add that the rate of mortality in the prisons increased so very largely in that year that a sentence of imprisonment necessarily carried with it considerable risk of life. I have inquired into the cause of this increased mortality, and I find that it was due to the low and emaciated condition to which a large number of persons who were convicted of petty crimes were reduced by the distress.
§ MR. A. M. SULLIVANasked whether the noble Marquess could inform the House exactly what the distinction was between flogging and whipping; secondly, whether people in an emaciated condition were considered fit subjects for flogging; and, thirdly, whether the Government intended, seeing that in deference to the public opinion of this country flogging in the Public Service was to be abolished, the Government would take steps to abolish the use of the lash among our Indian fellow-subjects?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONPerhaps the hon. and learned Member would give Notice of his Question. I may say, however, that I have inquired, but have not been able to obtain as yet a satisfactory answer as to the precise distinction between whipping and flogging. But the punishment in India is not usually inflicted with the "cat," and is a milder punishment than what is known as flogging in this country.