Justice Website Design, Content and the Reports © April 2, 2002 by Eric Krause, Krause House Info-Research Solutions (© 1996)
All Images © Parks Canada Unless Otherwise Designated

  Researching the Fortress of Louisbourg National Historic Site of Canada
  Recherche sur la Forteresse-de-Louisbourg Lieu historique national du Canada

The Administration Of Justice At The Fortress Of Louisbourg (1713-1758)

General Introduction 

Punishments

According to the Encyclopédie of Diderot and D'Alembert, military punishments had once been very severe, but "this severity has gradually reduced". [1] By 20th century standards those punishments imposed in the mid-18th century still seem extremely harsh, yet they were not inflicted out of a sense of cruelty, but rather in the belief that such penalties were absolutely necessary in order to maintain discipline within the ranks. Deterrence by example was the primary motive behind all corporal punishment. It was for this reason that comrades of the accused were usually made to carry out the sentence before the assembled garrison. Both this witnessing of the punishment by the troops and the display of an executed soldier's corpse were to permit the victim's comrades to "learn from his example" and thus avoid the same fate. [2]

While the penalties were rigorous, excessive bloodshed was frowned upon. For this reason the ordinances provided that whenever more than two deserters were to be executed at one time, the men should draw lots; the unhappy loser being executed as sentenced, while the "winners" were sent to serve on the galleys for life. [3] Such a situation occurred in Louisbourg in 1736 when three men who had deserted in June were captured and tried for their crime. One was executed, two went to the galleys. [4]

Executions and lesser corporal punishments in the military were generally carried out by soldiers, except when the sentence was hanging. For this the services of an executioner were required. If none was available, the accused would be shot by a firing squad of his fellow soldiers and his dead body placed on the gallows for exhibition. The only other occasion on which the executioner was required was when the condemned man was to have his hand cut off prior to his execution, a circumstance which arose when a soldier struck or physically threatened an officer. [5]

Between 1720 and 1745 at least eight soldiers were executed for the crime of desertion at Louisbourg, while three were sent to the galleys for life - two for desertion, one for threatening his sergeant with a gun in the guardhouse. All those executed seem to have been shot. There is no way of determining to what degree punishments were imposed for less serious crimes, but there is mention of soldiers being put in the dungeon with their legs in irons, being made to pass "par les baguettes," and being made to mount the wooden horse. [6] 

To carry out the punishment a corporal "de corvée" and two soldiers of the guilty man's company were commaded beforehand to to "couper les baguettes," which they carried to the corps de garde or guérite nearest the place where the punishment was to be meted out. The victim was then led to the spot by a sergeant and four soldiers. Each soldier in the two lines through which the man was to pass either picked up a "baguette" or removed the sling from his gun, which might be used instead. [14] When the soldier to be punished arrived at the end of the double line, he would strip to the waist. The extremities of the lines would be closed by the soldiers who had escorted him there. While he passed between the lines the drummers, standing behind the escorts at either end of the lines, would beat La Charge. When, instead of a soldier, this penalty was administered to a fille de mauvaise vie, the drums would beat Les Marionettes. [15]
  

[Endnotes: Puinishments, 1 Diderot et D'Alembert, Encyclopédie ..., Tome 3, p. 250. Original quotes: "cette sévérité s'est insensiblement adouci"; "prend exemple"; 2 D'Hericourt, Elemens De L'Art Militaire, Vol. 2, pp. 234-35; A.N., Colonies, C11B, Vol. 23, fols. 60-64, 19 octobre 1741; ibid., B, Vol. 74, fols. 557-57v., 6 juin 1742; A.N., Marine, C7-50, dossier personnel of François Joseph Cailly, fols. 18-19, 22 décembre 1741; A.N., Colonies, B, Vol. 48-2, fols. 964-65, 25 juillet 1725; ibid., Vol. 74, fol. 579v., 11 juin 1742; 3 Côde Militaire, Vol. 1, pp. 159-60; D'Hericourt, Elemens De L'Art Militaire, Vol. 2, p. 233; 4 Côde Militaire, Vol. 1, p. 281*; D'Hericourt, Elemens De L'Art Militaire, Vol. 2, pp. 156, 234; Diderot et D'Alembert, Encyclopédie .... Tome IV, p. 800; 5 A.N., Colonies, C11B, Vol.,5, fols. 242-60, 26 janvier 1720; ibid., Vol. 7, fols. 14-19v., 16 novembre 1724; ibid., B, Vol. 59-2, fol. 540, 2 juin 1733; ibid., C11B, Vol. 18, fols. 357-60v., 4 août 1736; ibid., fols. 289-94, 6 novembre 1736; ibid., B, Vol. 74, fol. 579v., 11 juin 1742; ibid., C11B, Vol. 22, fols. 128-31v., 1 novembre 1740; 6 D'Hericourt, Elemens De L'Art Militaire, Vol. 2, pp. 234-35; William Duane, A Military Dictionary. (Philadelphia, 1810), Vol. 2, p. 513; Willcox, A French-English Military .. Dictionary, p. 313; 7 Willcox, A French-English Military ... Dictionary, p.449; Diderot et D'Alembert, Encyclopédie ..., Tome IV, p. 880; A.N., Colonies, C11B, Vol. 6, fols. 79-96v., 7 juillet 1722; ibid., Vol. 7, fols. 78-93, 18 octobre 1724; 8 D'Hericourt, Elemens De L'Art Militaire, Vol. 2, p. 234; 9 Diderot et D'Alembert, Encyclopédie ..., Tome VII, pp. 440-41. Quote: "de pied en cap; il tient de la main droite la Crosse du fusil & lui dit: te trouvant indigne de porter les armes, nous t'en degradons; 10 Ibid. Quotes: "mort civile"; "repris de justice"; 11 A.N., Colonies, lE, Vol. 101, fols. 499-500, 7 mai 1723; 12 D'Hericourt, Elemens De L'Art Militaire, Vol. 2, p. 236; 13 Ibid., pp. 236-37; 14 Ibid., p. 237; 15 Ibid.; Diderot et D'Alembert, Encyclopéie ..., Tome III, p. 250; 16 Diderot et D'Alembert, Encyclopéie ..., Tome III, p. 250, 308; [Margaret Fortier, Fortress Security and Military Justice at Louisbourg, 1720-45, Unpublished Report H E 14 (Fortress of Louisbourg, 1980), pp. 63-66]

General Introduction