the noble Lord (J. Russell) seemed to be that, because they did wrong in admitting one article of slave produce, they were justified in admitting others. It would appear from this that they were to have free trade in morals as well as in everything else.

MR. RICARDO said, he could not agree with the hon. Member for Montrose; and his hon. Friend's doctrine, which was quite new to come from such a quarter, surprised him much. He believed that the worst part of the Corn Law Repeal Bill was the postponement for three years of the final settlement of the duties. He thought the noble Lord had not made out a case, either in a financial or colonial point of view, for delay in equalising the duties on foreign and colonial sugar; and he hoped, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer had expressed himself open to conviction on many points, he would be open to conviction on this point also, and cause the duties to be made equal at an earlier period.

MR. WAKLEY observed, that the noble Lord on the cross benches expressed great satisfaction at the portion of the plan which permitted the unlimited introduction of

a great advantage to the interests of the consumers and of the producers that the duties, which, on being annually voted, had produced so much stagnation and uncertainty, should be settled; for those who produced sugar would not apply their capital when they did not know what the duties would be in the following year. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman did not know that in consequence of the high prices a great quantity of sugar had been brought to this country; but that a loss incurred upon this sugar had prevented the increase of produce until the matter of these duties was settled. For the purpose of settling the matter, the House should sit, if necessary, beyond the usual period. He was glad to find the facility to be given to the introduction of labour, which was the one thing necessary to procure capital to be employed; but he wanted to impress upon the noble Lord the expediency of putting an end to the differential duty, and to make the duty the same in Scotland and Ireland as in England. In Scotland the duty on spirits was 3s. 10d., and the duty on rum, 9s. 4d., was perfectly anomalous. Then, as to the prohibition of the use of sugar and molasses in breweries and distilleries, it was a monstrous absur-free labour into the West Indies; and yet dity to continue the present system; when sugar had once paid the duty, every individual ought to be allowed to apply it in any way he pleased. He thought it would be of advantage to the House and to the Government, if any one had any objections to any part of the scheme, that he should state them at once. The noble Lord (Lord G. Bentinck) hrd objected to the plan on account of the slave question, which he thought had been settled. He highly ap-lect the case of the Hill Coolies, and pause proved of the course the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) had taken. He only feared it would occasion some loss of revenue; but if this were not the case, there could be no objection to it. He hoped to see the time when the duty on all sugar would be less than 10s. If this change were not effected too suddenly, it could be made without loss to the revenue. Sudden changes only benefited the foreigner; but when they were made gradually, the consumer got the benefit, as he ought to have in every case of reduction. He considered that, after corn, SIR R. H. INGLIS observed, that the this was the most important subject that acuteness of the hon. Member for Finscould engage the attention of the Legisla-bury seemed for once to fail him: the ture; and he trusted that the same Ses-House had decided nothing, not even that sion would witness the settlement of both the Resolution should be adopted, up to questions. that moment; though the hon. Member

the noble Lord dwelt with a most energetic tone upon his adherence to the principle of protection, stating that British capital should be supported. But what was the fact: the introduction of crowds of labourers into those Colonies would swamp the West India labourers, at present living in comfort; and the enormous importation of these men would revive slavery there in its worst form. The House should recol

before they sanctioned that part of the scheme. He (Mr. Wakley) trusted that the noble Lord would, at all events, see if an unlimited supply of labourers was to be permitted, that the Slave Trade should not be again revived-that merciless, cruel, and cold-blooded speculators should not be allowed to prey upon human life-and that those wretched creatures who were imported into the West Indies should have the same degree of protection accorded to them as the Hill Coolies.

MR. HENLEY said, the argument of had assumed its sanction to the importation

VISCOUNT SANDON was understood to suggest that those statements which referred to colonial protection had better be deferred to another Session. The effect of admitting slave-grown sugar directly to the English market would be to act indirectly upon the whole market for foreign sugar, and raise the price, perhaps as much as 25 per cent. With reference to the observations of the hon. Member for Finsbury respecting the condition of the West India labourers, he thought that the House was bound to attend to the condition of the East Indian labourers also, and not to make an exception of one in favour of the other.

of unlimited labour. The hon. Member, | terial difference in the punishment for the however, had no reason to fear anything same offence, as inflicted by the crimion the subject of the revival of slavery; nal law, and as enforced by the regulafor three hon. Members had risen to pro- tions of the navy. Stealing was now fretest against it, and he (Sir R. H. Inglis) quently punished by short imprisonment. would be ready to do so when occasion The sailor was liable to be hanged for this should arise. offence. Many Chartists had been punished, of late years, by a three months' imprisonment for seditious words. A sailor, for the like offence, would be condemned to death. And let it be borne in mind how differently circumstanced were the two men. A sailor might have been seized by a pressgang, dragged from his home like a criminal, have all his prospects blasted, and under feelings of irritation from such treatment, might utter words of complaint which might be construed into seditious language. Such a punishment ought not to be allowed to remain on the Statute-book for another day. And under whose authority were such punishments inflicted by courts-martial, consisting of commanders and post captains, without any appeal from their judgment? The civilian might appeal for mercy to the Crown; but the sailor had no appeal. In the army there was protection against any violence or injustice. The punishment of flogging could not be inflicted without the sanction of a courtmartial. The sailor was flogged at the sole will of the captain. In his opinion the time was come for according to the sailor the same protection as that vouchsafed to the soldier or to the person in civil life.

MR. BORTHWICK said, if he opposed any part of the scheme of the noble Lord, it should most certainly not be that part of it which abolished the distinction between free and slave-grown sugar.

LORD J. RUSSELL, in explanation, stated Her Majesty's Government were not prepared to admit applicants for labour from the coasts of Africa, where there was not a British settlement, for fear that anything approaching slavery should take place. Precautions would also be taken to secure the principle of free and voluntary emigration in all other cases. With respect to the remark of the noble Lord the Member for Liverpool, as to the probable rise in foreign sugar, no doubt there would be a rise; but then it would only be, according to his opinion, temporary. Resolution agreed to.

All these severities were in

flicted on men who, by an Act of George II., were declared, under the provi

By

dence of God, to constitute the wealth,
safety, and strength of the country.'
the Act he had referred to, a power was
given to the Admiralty to make orders and
regulations for the navy; and it was under

House resumed. Resolution to be re- this power that the flogging system was ported.

NAVAL COURTS-MARTIAL AND

FLOGGING SAILORS.

On the Motion that the Order of the Day be read for a Committee of Supply,

MR. W. WILLIAMS rose to call the attention of the House to the practice of flogging sailors, and to the manner in which courts-martial were constituted in the British navy. The severity of our criminal code had been very greatly ameliorated: the punishment of death, which was formerly inflicted for numerous crimes, was now imposed only in a few cases. He must point out one or two cases of ma

carried out. Under one of the sections of the Act it was declared that all punishments not mentioned in the Act, should be inflicted on sailors according to the practice of the navy; but it was in the orders and regulations he had referred to, that we must look for the establishment of the practice of flogging, and for the definition of the power under which it could be exercised. He admitted there had recently been instituted regulations which were a great improvement on those that preceded them. Previously, any commander of a ship could flog his men at his own will and pleasure: they could tie a man up for a trivial offence, and order

the infliction of as many lashes upon | under what circumstances did the comhim as they thought fit-a power, he con- manding officer acquire power to flog? ceived, that reflected no great credit on He acquired it in cases when complaint those that conferred it. But what was the was made against a sailor. The officer amount of protection now afforded to the in command was required by the Admisailor under the new regulations against ralty order to make an investigation into this most degrading species of torture-a the complaint. The officer sat as judge; torture that violated the best feelings of he decided on the merits of the comhumanity, and that had broken the hearts plaint; and then, as it might be, he orand spirits of many of the bravest men this dered the man to receive thirty-six or country had produced? Nay, it had done forty-eight lashes. The officer was called still worse; it had driven those gallant on to address a warrant to himself, giving spirits who had fought and bled for their himself power to inflict the punishment. country into the service of the foe; and Now, what was stated in the warrant was those very men were recorded in the his- the name of the man, the length of his tory of the country as having humbled her service, and the offence. But should the flag, which no other Power had been able captain see the alleged offence committed, to do. He would ask the gallant Ad- then he became judge, jury, witness, and miral (Sir George Cockburn) connected executioner. He meant of course exeeuwith the Admiralty to refer to the Ame- tioner of his own sentence. Naval Gentlerican war; and in support of what he now men in that House appeared to indulge in stated, he would undertake to authen-great merriment over this matter; but he ticate a great number of instances in recommended them to recollect that miliwhich the system of flogging had produced tary men had taken up the subject of punthe consequences he had noticed. What ishment in the army; and they deserved were the present regulations about flogging? the thanks of the country for the reform It limited the number of lashes to forty- they had effected. And he would tell hon. eight; but he had been told by a naval Gentlemen belonging to the navy that the officer who had seen as much service as public would very soon take up the subject any hon. and gallant Member in that of punishment in the navy, and would proHouse, and by others who had encounter-tect the unfortunate sailors who were ed the " battle and the breeze" in all their tried and tortured without either jury most imposing character, that forty-eight or justice. He would remind the House lashes inflicted in the navy were equal to, how much more necessary it was to protect at the lowest estimate, 200 lashes on the the sailor, who was isolated on board soldier. Common sense pointed out that his ship, and had not the same securithis must be so. The soldier was flogged ties against tyranny as the soldier. The with a cat-o'-nine-tails composed of small soldier before being punished must be twine, and the punishment was inflicted by brought before a court-martial. The sanca drummer boy. In the navy, the cat with tion of the Commander in Chief, if in Engwhich the sailor was flogged was made of land, or if in the Colonies the sanction of thick cord, and it was applied by some the Governor or Commanding Officer, was brawny stalwart boatswain's mate, perhaps required before punishment could be inthe strongest man in the ship. The flicted. Flogging on board ship was carcommander stood by at the time of pun-ried on without any such salutary proishment to see that the man laid on tection. If a sailor before the mast was with sufficient severity, though it made the blood flow from every pore. Not content with this, commanders-he had been told the circumstance by naval officers, and would prove the fact before a Committeehad ordered the mate to be changed between every dozen or eighteen lashes, that the flogging might be administered throughout with sufficient strength. It was not so in the army. There was another point: you could never see the punishment inflicted in the navy: you could hear the cries of the soldier, but not those of the sailor flogged on board ship. Now,

found guilty of a fault or an error, magnified into a crime, he was punished without the formality of a court-martial. The sailor was condemned, perhaps in excessively hot weather, to traverse up and down the rigging, or to wear a wooden collar day and night, perhaps for a month; or he was possibly ordered to undergo the more degrading torture of the brutal lash. He could state a good deal more; but he thought he had given a pretty correct description of what usually took place on these occasions. He believed that every man who was acquainted with naval affairs must

should have to bring it before the attention | use frequent punishments in the course of of the House.

the first year, to bring them into proper discipline, which would be altogether unnecessary on subsequent occasions. In conclusion, he could only repeat, that the feeling of the board was to regard excessive punishments on Board any vessel as discreditable to the officer in command.

MR. WARD hoped his hon. Friend, who had given him much pleasure by the tone of his remarks, would recollect that the present Board of Admiralty had been only constructed on Monday last. The question to which he more particularly referred had not yet come before them; but he hoped MR. HUME wished to ask if there was that the question of naval punishments any intention of proposing the reconsiderawould be brought under their consideration. tion of the articles of war. He had freIt had been found impossible to restrict quently brought the question before the the use of summary punishment altogether. House; and on the last occasion the articles Taking the admission of the hon. Member, had been condemned by every one in the that there must be a system of punishment House, including the naval officers. They where a large number of men were brought ought to do everything in their power to together in one vessel, it was clear that draw our men from abroad to enter their the good sense of the hon. Member would own service; and though there had been, as tell him that summary punishment must he admitted, an enormous amelioration in exist. As for himself, he must say that a the condition of the navy of late years, yet greater curse to the service never existed he hoped the Admiralty would see how than the old system of arbitrary punish- much further they could go, and how far ments. But, if the hon. Member would they could modify the system in accordlook into the question as it stood, he ance with the spirit of the age. He thought would find that the improvement in the there ought to be returns of the punishnaval service had kept pace with that in ments of the various ships in the service. the civil and other departments of the In some they would find that one-half or State. He found from a return which had perhaps three-fourths of the crew had been been made the other day by his direction, flogged, while in another they would see that in 1839, when there were 34,000 that not one had been subjected to such men in our naval service, there had been punishment. Surely this ought to be re2,000 punishments; but that in 1845, medied. No service could be better taken when the establishment consisted of 40,000, care of than our navy, as regarded diet, there had been only 1,200 causes of pu- clothing, and cleanliness. It was evident, nishment. He was prepared to state that then, there must be some cause to keep the greatest disposition existed at the the men away from it. He thought a courtBoard of Admiralty to check the system of martial of three officers would be an imarbitrary punishment, and that it equally provement on the present system of arbiprevailed among the admirals of the vari-trary punishment, and might produce similar ous stations. He had seen instructions good effects to the allowance of a certain which had been recently issued by Admiral time before punishment was inflicted, which Parker in the Mediterranean, showing the had been made in consequence of speeches strongest inclination on his part in the in that House. He wished the returns of same direction; and he could state that there punishments would be laid before the was every intention at the Board of Admi- House; and he would venture to say if they ralty to regard excessive punishments on were made, that nine out of ten of these board of any ship as discreditable to the martinets would be found not to be their officers in command. In the principle laid best naval officers. If there were but a down by the hon. Member for Coventry, few officers who followed this system, let as to any ill-judged parsimony in our naval them at least be known to the public. service, he entirely agreed. There would SIR G. COCKBURN said, that as no be large sums necessarily required for va- hon. Member connected with the Admirious experiments in this department; and ralty had got up to answer the question he was sure the hon. Member would offer and remarks of the hon. Member who no opposition to their progress from any had just spoken, he felt it his duty to do feeling of false economy. A return of so. When the hon. Member for Coventry punishments in ships for any one year must be fallacious, for it was evident that an officer taking command of a crew collected at haphazard, might be obliged to

said there was no law for the infliction of summary punishment, he was mistaken. There was a decision of Lord Stowell on this point, in the case of a merchantman,