ARMY AND AIR FORCE (ANNUAL) BILL. (Hansard, 19 April 1923)

§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (THE EARL OF DERBY)
My Lords, the annual Bill that I now present to your Lordships is to all intents and purposes exactly the same Bill as was presented last year. There are one or two minor amendments, which were made in response to requests made in another place. There is, however, one other change which is not in the Bill, but which, nevertheless, is a change of somewhat great importance. Field punishment No. 1 has been abolished. That can be done simply by regulations, but it was urged in the House of Commons that the subject should be included in this Bill, to show that this punishment had been abolished and should remain abolished. It was left for decision in this House by my honourable friend the Under-Secretary of State for War, after consultation with me. I am entirely in accord with the wishes of those who desire it to be placed in the Act, and before the Bill leaves this House I propose to ask your Lordships to insert an Amendment to that effect.

§ VISCOUNT HALDANE
My Lords, I understand the noble Earl to say that he is going to propose an Amendment to make the abolition of field punishment No. 1 a statutory provision. What does this punishment consist of at present? It has varied from time to time, under the King's Regulations, I suppose. Can the noble Earl tell us what it consists of at this moment? My recollection of it is that it has become very light indeed, but I should like to know what it is now, if he can tell us?

§ THE EARL OF DERBY
The part of field punishment No. 1 which was particularly appealed against was the tying up of men to a fixed object.

§ VISCOUNT HALDANE
A wheel.

§ THE EARL OF DERBY
Yes, to a wheel or to any other fixed object. In the war it was called a form of crucifixion. The actual form of tying up was modified, and that accusation could not be made against it. But we are going to insert words which will show that field punishment can no longer include the tying up of an individual to a fixed object.

§ VISCOUNT HALDANE
That is rather what I thought. It had already become something very light.

§ THE EARL OF DERBY
It might be very light, but there was a general feeling among military people, as well as among civilians, that it should be abolished, and therefore words carrying out what I have said is our intention—namely, that there should be no more tying of the soldier to a fixed object—will be inserted in the Bill.

§ VISCOUNT HALDANE
In the light of what the noble Earl has said, I shall not offer any opposition. I think a good deal of the debate in the other House on the subject was rather sentimental. I do not believe there has been any real hardship in any of the field punishments for a long time past, but there is a good deal of sentiment on this subject. However, we abolished flogging, which was quite right, and now the noble Earl is going to abolish tying up. That is also quite right, and certainly there will be no opposition from this side of the House.