of wood. The Benbow, 74, was built in 1813; dry-rot infected her, and she was repaired at Portsmouth in 1818, without ever having been at sea, at an expense even surpassing that of the Queen Charlotte. The Ocean, the Foudroyant, the Bulwark, the St. Domingo, the Ajax, the Albion, and other ships of the line, were falling to pieces within five years after launching, and some of them in less than three. We ourselves happened to belong to one of the goodly "Forty," the Rodney, and there had our initiation into the mysteries of dry-rot; for after striving to be blind to the ravages going on in her frame, she was so torn and shaken by a gale off Cape Sicie, in January, 1812, that Sir Edward Pellew was compelled to discharge her from his fleet, and thereby weaken it by an apparently efficient line-of-battle ship. Again: the Dublin, 74, was launched in February, 1812, put in commission in the following August, and sent to cruize off the Western Islands in December. A very few weeks were enough for her, for she returned to Plymouth in January, 1813, in so deplorable a state that she was ordered to be paid off. Her repairs cost 20,000l.; but that was not the most serious part. The constant state of humidity had induced so much sickness among the crew, that she was wholly inefficient for the country's service; and on her return to port, not fewer than 150 of her men were sent to the hospital.

Great was the consternation, both at the Boards and throughout the Mateys, at such unexpected ravages among our most formidable looking ships: but the horror inspired by the inroads of dry-rot had the good effect of arousing such attention to the evil, that it is actually scotched, and rendered so effete, that we need hardly regret the being unable to kill it entirely. Before proceeding with the means by which it has been combated, we will show the vast sums which the nation has squandered for a dozen of those gallant 74-gun ships, the "Forty Thieves;" and the reader may be assured that most of the batch are as

A HISTORICAL SKETCH OF MILITARY PUNISHMENTS, IN AS FAR AS REGARDS NON-COMMISSIONED OFFICERS AND

PRIVATE SOLDIERS.

BY HENRY MARSHALL, DEPUTY-INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF ARMY HOSPITALS.

Declare the past and present state of things.-Dryden.

Military laws have for their object to force an unhesitating and instant compliance with whatever the military chief chooses to issue, and to sustain a constant unnatural state of irksome existence in obedience to rules which interfere every instant with our wishes and time: all this inconvenience being endured for a small pay, for which the soldier gives up a home and domestic comfort. Our military law changes daily, as circumstances demand; every order issued from the King, or from a Lance Corporal, is part of our law, OBEY! that is our law.-MAJOR. GENERAL SIR CHARLES NAPIER'S Remarks on Military Law, 1837.

THE object of the following sketch is :

*

*

1. To enumerate and describe the various modes of inflicting punishments which have been in use in the military force of this country. 2. To trace the influence of civilization and public opinion, in gradually meliorating military punishments.

The laws of civil life are intended to establish a rational, religious, moral state of society, by a steady and long-continued action upon human nature; but the object of military law is simply to produce prompt and entire obedience to the will of a superior. "An army is a collection of armed men, obliged to obey one man."-Locke.

The Rev. Mr. Colton appears to have had a very unfavourable opinion of the influence of the military law of the Emperor Napoleon; and I believe it must be admitted, that the usages of war in all armies are frequently but little influenced by rational, moral, or religious motives.

The reverend poet thus addresses Napoleon in his poem on the "Conflagration of Moscow,"

Forge then the links of martial law that bind,
Enslave, imbrute, and mechanise the mind;
Indite the conscript code with iron pen,
That cancels crime, demoralizes men.

The Honourable A. F. Tytler, in his Essay on Military Law, tells us that, "the martial law in former periods of our history, deserved all those characters of tyranny which have been assigned to it;" and he also designates it as "an antiquated and justly exploded tyranny," while he characterizes the law military, when he published (1800, and 2nd edition 1806,) as "a well regulated, moderate, and humane system."

Sir Charles Napier "is of opinion, that although martial law has been influenced by the spirit of the age, and softened both in its ordinance and its practice, we have maintained, if not surpassed, our former military glory and discipline." Can we have a more satisfactory evidence that military discipline may be established and sustained without the frequent infliction of excessively severe punishments?

Military punishments are regulated by the Mutiny Act, the Articles of War, and the general Regulations of the Army. The Mutiny Act

merely enumerates certain crimes which may be punished with death, or such other punishment as a court-martial shall award; while the punishment of all other crimes is left absolutely at the discretion of courtsmartial, with the restriction only, that the members are not entitled to adjudge the loss of life or limb as the punishment of any crimes, but those enumerated in the Act. But if, with this single exception, they spare life and limb, they are authorized to punish all other military crimes, viz., immorality, misbehaviour, or neglect of duty, either with corporal punishment, imprisonment, pecuniary mulet, or with a slight censure, as to them may seem best. The Sovereign is, however, allowed to regulate this discretion, in any way he may think proper, and to make what regulations he pleases for the direction of the courts-martial. These regulations are called the Articles of War, to which the general Regulations are subsidiary.

Tytler thus describes the military code of this country:-" A Britisa soldier, enjoying in common with his fellow subjects, every benefit of the laws of his country, is bound by the military code, solely to the observance of the peculiar duties of his profession,-a code which is simple in itself, reasonable in its enactments, easy in all its obligations, level to the meanest understanding, and more effectually promulgated and better known than any of the ordinary statute laws of the realm.” (An Essay on Military Law, &c., 2nd edition, 1806, page 25.)

A late writer on military law (Sir Charles Napier), and a much better authority on the usages of the Army than Mr. Tytler, gives a somewhat different account of the British military code :-" Dreadful," says he, "is the calling of a soldier, and dreadful must the means be by which that calling is fulfilled during war. A state of war is the natural state of an army, and military institutions must have war for their object, or they are without sense."

"As a soldier, OBEDIENCE is the Law and the Prophets.' His religion, law, and morals, are in the orderly-book.' If that says 'spare,' he spares: if that says destroy,' he destroys! The conscience of a good soldier is in the keeping of his General, who has the whole responsibility before God and man for what the soldiers do, in obedience to his orders. Perfect obedience is then a yoke which every soldier of the British Army voluntarily places upon his own neck when he enlists." "Those alone," says Count Alfred de Vigny,—a retired officer of the French Army, "who have been soldiers, know what servitude is. To the soldier alone is obedience, passive and active, the law of his lifethe law of every day and of every moment; obedience not stopping at sacrifice, nor even at crime. In him alone is the abnegation of his selfwill, of his liberty of independent action, absolute and unreserved; the grand distinction of humanity, the responsibility of a moral agent, being made over once for all to superior authority."-(London and Westminster Review, vol. vii., 32.) In fact, nothing short of this severity has been found necessary, in order that one individual might be master of one hundred thousand armed men. Passive obedience from grade to grade, is a condition essential to the existence and efficiency of an army. "When the clock-maker has made a clock, it goes without asking why. Soldier, you must be like the clock; march, turn, halt, and above all, not a word."

It is essential to bear in mind, that the object of military law is not

to punish moral delinquencies, in other words, to make men virtuous and good, but to produce prompt and entire obedience; hence, a military offence may not be a crime in its moral sense. Military crimes are usually arranged under the following classes :

1. Mutiny.

2. Desertion.

3. Violence to a superior; Insubordina-
tion.

4. Disobedience and neglect of duty.
5. Quitting or sleeping on post.
6. Drunk on duty, under arms.

7. Habitual drunkenness.

8. Disgraceful conduct.

9. Absent without leave.

10. Making away with necessaries.
11. Miscellaneous crimes, (see Article of
War, 70.)

Crimes in civil or social life are commonly classed under two heads, namely, 1st, offences against the person; 2nd, offences against property. The difference of the character of the requirements of social and military law, is therefore obvious.

The Army includes within itself the germs of the military crimes committed, and at the same time the temptations and the necessary facilities for their development. It is the military state or condition of soldiers which in some measure prepares these crimes, and the criminal may be said to be the instrument to execute them. A certain number, and a certain order of crimes, are the necessary result of the organization, discipline, usages, and services of the Army. Soldiers who have been unable to resist the temptations to crime and disobedience in the Army, and who were discharged as incorrigible or excessively prone to commit irregularities, have become industrious, orderly, respectable members of civil society.

Military law (obedience) has in all ages been enforced by more rigorous penalties than the punishments of social law.

It is the object of the following pages to describe the different punishments which have been adopted to promote order and preserve discipline in the British Army, and to notice the meliorations which have from time to time been made in these punishments. The improved discipline which, according to competent authority, has taken place, notwithstanding these alterations, inspires a hope that the penalty of corporal infliction (flogging) may be gradually allowed to fall into disuse. "It is," says Sir Charles Napier, "the duty of Government at once to put rewards and minor punishments into full activity, and in a complete manner. Thus, the lash will soon become obselete; and this is the safest method that can be adopted for the abolition of flogging." With this sentiment I most cordially concur.

We have the high authority of Sir Henry Hardinge for stating, that good discipline may be preserved without much punishment. His words are:-"The state of discipline in which the Army now is, and the great diminution of corporal punishment, prove that frequent and severe floggings do not produce good discipline. The regiments of highest reputation in the Service, have for years had the fewest punished men." -(Evidence on Military Punishments, Question 5662.)

There is, perhaps, no profession in which the improving spirit of the age has made such deep inroads as into the Military and Naval branches of the public service. The meliorations of the Navy may be said to have commenced after the mutinies at Spithead and the Nore, and to have been progressive and important ever since. The meliora

tions of the Army made an important step in 1806; but compared with the Navy, they have been less progressive, and of less consequence. Although considerable improvements has taken place in the Anuy, still much requires to be effected. Fortunately, the aid of public discussion, which familiarizes the mind to changes and improvements in our institutions and usages, is now permitted or recognised, by which means alterations are examined, and their benefits established before they are adopted. Without previous discussion, changes that may be good abstractedly considered, lose half their benefit by being precipitately carried into effect. In the language of the Commissioners on Military Punishments, "No practice can be long maintained, which is really contrary to the well-considered judgment and settled feelings of the country." The necessity or expediency of the punishment of flogging, must depend upon public opinion, namely, the feelings this mode of punishment excite, and the views taken of it by the bulk of the community possessing more or less influence.

The following sketch is calculated to show how progressively public opinion changes. The different kinds of military punishment, as well as the different degrees of severity with which they were inflicted, together with the relative frequency of their occurrence, mark the changes which have taken place in the "world's mind" in this respect, and show that the military laws, as well as the civil code of a country, yield to the influence of popular opinion-the will of the people.

The very great improvement which has been effected during the present century in the administration of military law and military usages, by the force of public opinion and the progress of civilization, may serve as a beacon for the guidance and encouragement of those who linger in the path of melioration, and anticipate evils from further change.

In the following pages my object has been principally to collect facts which may serve as materials for future inquirers, and who may combine, and compare, and draw deductions from them, and by that means render them practically useful.

The first regulation on record which refers to punishment in the Army is the Charter, as it is called, of Richard I., which was addressed to all his men going by sea and land to Jerusalem, and purports to have been made in the first year of that monarch's reign, for the emergency described. The ordinance being short it is here inserted verbatim.

CHINON, 1st RICHARD, 1189.

Richard, by the grace of God, King of England, Duke of Normandy, &c., To all his men going by sea to Jerusalem, greeting: Know ye, by the common counsel of all good men, we have made the underwritten ordinances.

He who kills a man on shipboard shall be bound to the dead man and thrown into the sea; if the man is killed on shore the slayer shall be bound to the dead body and buried with it. Any one convicted by lawful witnesses of having drawn his knife to stick another, or who shall have drawn blood of him, to lose his hand; if he shall have only struck with the palm of his hand, without drawing blood, he shall be thrice ducked in the sea. Any one who shall reproach, abuse, or curse his companion shall, for every time he is convicted thereof, give him so many ounces of silver. Any one convicted of theft shall be shorn like a champion, boiling pitch shall be poured on his head, and down of feathers shaken over it, that he may be known, and he shall be set on shore at the first land at which the ship touches.