THE GLOBE. THURSDAY, JUNE 10, 1880.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1964, 10 June 1880, Page 2

THE GLOBE. THURSDAY, JUNE 10, 1880.

It is stated in to day’s English telegrams that an official statement has been published to the effect that the Government has decided to. abolish flogging in the army and navy from next year. The agitation against flogging in the two services has been going on for some time, and has at length apparently gained its object. But it would appear as if tho grounds on which such agitation proceeded were sentimental rather than practical. In the old days no doubt the practice of flogging was shamefully abused, particularly in the navy. A captain on a cruiso was often a despot of the worst description. A sailor might be ordered to receive the cat for the most trivial offence. But in these days of more advanced civilisation, when tho cause of the soldier and sailor has no want of advocates, flogging is conducted under a totally different systern. It is reserved for extreme cases, and is in use principally during active service. On these latter occasions, indeed, it is difficult to see how any efficient punishment of a similar deterrent nature can be substituted. The writers and thinkers who cry down the practice assert that it is degrading and lowers the self-respect of the individual who is so punished. But it is easy to imagine cases where the fact of having been flogged would be by far the lessor of two evils. We will take one of several instances quoted by Mr. Archibald Forbes in a valuable paper written on the subject and published in the last October number of the “ Nineteenth Century,” premising that Mr. Forbes has every right to be called an authority on the subject, for he is an able writer, in the old days he served in the ranks, and has since then seen a large amount of active service as a special correspondent. Tho case wo allude to was as follows :—A detachment was left to guard some stores during tho Zulu war in a solitary post, some distance from the main column, and while Brigadier-General Wood had gone back to tho frontier to bring up a large convoy. “ Some men of this detachment,” we quote Mr. Forbes’ own words, “broke into the stores, consumed not a little, destroyed more and made boasts of themselves. They were flogged, and I ask how else could they have been dealt with ? Every man was wanted for the protective duties of the post; none would be spared either permanently to guard them as prisoners on the spot, or to escort them back to a place of confinement in tho colony. Whore every man was laboring hard from morning to night, no additional labor punishment could have been imposed upon them. It would have been a refinement of cruelty to postpone their punishment until tho return into civilization of tho regiment to which they belonged; and if this had been possible, what soldiering meanwhile could have been got out of men who know that such a fate was before them ? As it was, they had sore backs for a couple of days; they robbed no more, neither they nor their follows; and will wear their Zulu medals —when they are issued—with tho consciousness that their lapse into blackguardism has boon effaced by good and steady service.” Now this is a very strong case, but it is only one of several quoted. One cannot doubt but that these men would, if they had boon asked, have infinitely preferred going to tho triangles to missing thejeoming campaign and being thereby disgraced for ever. Which course was the most likely to lower a man’s self-esteem ? Wo say unhesitatingly that flogging was tho least of the two evils.

But the objectors to tbo system will point to the continental armies and

say that in the French and German forces Hogging is not practised. Now in the first place in France and Germany universal service prevails, and the armies cannot be said to be altogether recruited from the same classes who almost entirely fill the ranks of the British army. Again, the discipline of the French army in the field has never boon high. One of tho weak points in their army organisation is that the common soldiers are not well under command. It would bo a bad day for England if she were to look to Franco for a pattern as to army discipline. With tho German army tho matter is different, but neither does its case afford a parallel to that of our force. “Tho German soldier/’ as Mr. Forbes remarks, “is imbued, above every other, with tho military spirit in the finest sense of tho word. Ho is disciplined because of his patriotism; ho practises self-restraint in an enemy’s country out of self-respect; ho rarely needs punishment and feels being tied to a tree a disgrace; ho is preeminently a citizen soldier of the very best typo.” Now, tho greatest lover of tho English soldier cannot say this of him. On the contrary, ho is generally a man of not very groat self-restraint, ho requires looking after in an enemy’s country, and he is not so highly educated as is almost every soldier in tho German army. His bravery is proverbial, but ho is and acknowledges himself to be a rough and ready customer. And tho cry against flogging has not risen in tho ranks. Mr. Gladstone says “ flogging has a bad effect on tho man who suffers.” That is Mr. Gladstone’s opinion, but the dread of being flogged has kept many a man out of harm, and many a man has dated his reformation from his first taste of the cat. Indeed, the whole affair is a matter of sentiment, and the average run of soldier does not attach the depth of disgrace to the punishment that certain well disposed people are apt to do. A foreign critic might cry out against the practice, but then the same critic would bo horrified at tho amount of horseplay that is tolerated both in the ranks and among commissioned officers. The tone of foreign armies is not the tone of the British army. Tho latter is built of rougher fibre, but is perhaps all the more enduring on that account. Tho British soldier will probably be the last person to thank the humanitarians who are moving in the matter. It is singular that, concurrently with tho movement for abolishing flogging in the army and navy, there should exist a growing feeling that it is the only punishment of a sufficiently deterrent nature in cases of robbery with violence, and assaults on females. The arguments that are used in the one case it might be thought would apply with equal justice to tho other. The self-respect of the civilian would bo lowered, one would think, just as much as that of the soldier, and he would be just as likely to be turned into a desperate man. Moreover into' the case of the civilian the exigencies of active warfare cannot be taken into account. Will, Mr. Gladstone extend the wgis of his protection to the latter class ? To act logically he should most certainly do so.