Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
^Mtmvv.
¦'¦¦ ¦¦ . ) on the occasion has been variously described , —one account stating that he remonstrated strongly , but ineffectuall y ^ with the commanding officer , Captain A— , against its being fully inflicted , and another that he refrained from interfering altogether . A paper on " Military Punishments , ,, by Henry Marshall , Esq ., deputy inspector-general of army hospitals , which appeared in Colburn ' s United Service Magazine for May , 1844 , gives this account of the result : —
" The fatal issue of these cases having been reported by the staff-surgeon at St , Vincent ' s to the inspector-general of hospitals at Barbadoes , he forthwith recommended that Mr . Freer should be removed from the army . He stated in his communication , that although one thousand lashes may be awarded by a general court-martial , it is never expected that the whole should be inflicted in a warm climate ; as also to stand by and see it done , evinced great want of feeling and judgment . It betrayed , he added , neglect or ignorance , or both , to a considerable degree . ¦¦ ' " - The inspector admitted that Mr . Freer ' s former services and character were creditable , and that perhaps it would be unfair to dismiss him for what might be
deemed an error in judgment ; but still the inspector though it right to do so , for the purpose of depriving him of the power of committing a similar error . It seems never to have struck the inspector that by admonishing and instructing Mr . Freer , he might , in all likelihood , as effectually have obviated a similar result as by dismissing him from the service .
"No one doubts the . . right of the King to dismiss officers without offering any motive exeeptjiis own will ; but it must be admitted that this power may be used without sufficient examination , and consequently without that thorough understanding of a case which can only be obtained by fully hearing all parties-Mr . Freer had entered the service in 1813 , and remained an hospital assistant untilMay , 1822 , when he was promoted to the rank of assistant surgeon . An
officer of the rank of hospital assistant is seldom required to be officially present at a punishment parade ; and , as Mr . Freer might not have joined the regiment more than a few months when he was present at the punishment of the abovementioned men , he perhaps had little or no experience of the duties of a medical officer when corporal punishment is inflicted . The duty , in fact , might have been quite new to him , and hitherto no instruction have been issued for the
guidance of novices in that important branch of a medical officer ' s duty . Whatever were the exact circumstances of the case , Bro . Freer , as a young and inexperienced man , was placed in a situation of great danger and difficulty , for authorities differ widely as to the proper course to be pursued in such circumstances . Sir John Macdonald , in his Evidence on Military Punishment , asserts that it is at the peril of a commanding officer to order the infliction of a single
lash , after a medical officer interferes ; " and Dr . J . Gordon Smith , who served for a number of years in the 12 th Dragoons , says , "If , after touching his hat to the commanding officer , and stating that , in his judgment , the man could not receive any further punishment at that time , the punishment should be persevered in , the surgeon would be warranted in turning away , and protest that he cannot be responsible for the sequel . " Yet , Mr . Marshall , in the paper already quoted ., has this passage : — "In my opinion , a medical officer would not , under such circumstances , be warranted in either turning or going away , or in obtruding any
protest respecting his responsibility . He has performed his duty when he has , in a respectful manner , recommended that the punishment should be suspended ; but he should neither leave the parade , nor reiterate his recommendation , unless the connn an ding-officer solicits his opinion . " On hia return to England , Bro . Freer addressed a memorial to Lieut .-General Warde , praying for a revision of his sentence , but the application , as appears from the annexed letter , proved ineffectual , and Bro . Freer passed the remainder of his days a doomed and disappointed man .
Leamington Pjriors , August 8 th , 1825 . u , —I have been honoured by your letter , together with three other documents , and I regret extremely that I cannot in any way interfere in . your behalf , "Without the greatest inconsistency ; but , as H . RJi . the Commander-in-Chief is
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
^Mtmvv.
¦'¦¦ ¦¦ . ) on the occasion has been variously described , —one account stating that he remonstrated strongly , but ineffectuall y ^ with the commanding officer , Captain A— , against its being fully inflicted , and another that he refrained from interfering altogether . A paper on " Military Punishments , ,, by Henry Marshall , Esq ., deputy inspector-general of army hospitals , which appeared in Colburn ' s United Service Magazine for May , 1844 , gives this account of the result : —
" The fatal issue of these cases having been reported by the staff-surgeon at St , Vincent ' s to the inspector-general of hospitals at Barbadoes , he forthwith recommended that Mr . Freer should be removed from the army . He stated in his communication , that although one thousand lashes may be awarded by a general court-martial , it is never expected that the whole should be inflicted in a warm climate ; as also to stand by and see it done , evinced great want of feeling and judgment . It betrayed , he added , neglect or ignorance , or both , to a considerable degree . ¦¦ ' " - The inspector admitted that Mr . Freer ' s former services and character were creditable , and that perhaps it would be unfair to dismiss him for what might be
deemed an error in judgment ; but still the inspector though it right to do so , for the purpose of depriving him of the power of committing a similar error . It seems never to have struck the inspector that by admonishing and instructing Mr . Freer , he might , in all likelihood , as effectually have obviated a similar result as by dismissing him from the service .
"No one doubts the . . right of the King to dismiss officers without offering any motive exeeptjiis own will ; but it must be admitted that this power may be used without sufficient examination , and consequently without that thorough understanding of a case which can only be obtained by fully hearing all parties-Mr . Freer had entered the service in 1813 , and remained an hospital assistant untilMay , 1822 , when he was promoted to the rank of assistant surgeon . An
officer of the rank of hospital assistant is seldom required to be officially present at a punishment parade ; and , as Mr . Freer might not have joined the regiment more than a few months when he was present at the punishment of the abovementioned men , he perhaps had little or no experience of the duties of a medical officer when corporal punishment is inflicted . The duty , in fact , might have been quite new to him , and hitherto no instruction have been issued for the
guidance of novices in that important branch of a medical officer ' s duty . Whatever were the exact circumstances of the case , Bro . Freer , as a young and inexperienced man , was placed in a situation of great danger and difficulty , for authorities differ widely as to the proper course to be pursued in such circumstances . Sir John Macdonald , in his Evidence on Military Punishment , asserts that it is at the peril of a commanding officer to order the infliction of a single
lash , after a medical officer interferes ; " and Dr . J . Gordon Smith , who served for a number of years in the 12 th Dragoons , says , "If , after touching his hat to the commanding officer , and stating that , in his judgment , the man could not receive any further punishment at that time , the punishment should be persevered in , the surgeon would be warranted in turning away , and protest that he cannot be responsible for the sequel . " Yet , Mr . Marshall , in the paper already quoted ., has this passage : — "In my opinion , a medical officer would not , under such circumstances , be warranted in either turning or going away , or in obtruding any
protest respecting his responsibility . He has performed his duty when he has , in a respectful manner , recommended that the punishment should be suspended ; but he should neither leave the parade , nor reiterate his recommendation , unless the connn an ding-officer solicits his opinion . " On hia return to England , Bro . Freer addressed a memorial to Lieut .-General Warde , praying for a revision of his sentence , but the application , as appears from the annexed letter , proved ineffectual , and Bro . Freer passed the remainder of his days a doomed and disappointed man .
Leamington Pjriors , August 8 th , 1825 . u , —I have been honoured by your letter , together with three other documents , and I regret extremely that I cannot in any way interfere in . your behalf , "Without the greatest inconsistency ; but , as H . RJi . the Commander-in-Chief is