CORRECTION. Chastisement, by one hav ing authority, of a person who has commit ted some offence, for the purpose of bringing him into legal subjection.
It is chiefly exercised In a parental man ner by parents, or those who are placed in loco parentis. A parent may therefore jus tify the correction of the child either cor porally or by confinement ; and a school master may justify similar correction; but the correction in both cases roust be moder ate and in a proper manner; Com. Dig. Plead er, (3 M.) 19; Hawk. c. 60, s. 23, c. 62, s. 2, c. 29, s. 5 ; Johnson v. State, 2 Humph. (Tenn.) 283, 36 Am. Dec. 322; State v. Pen dergrass, 19 N. C. 365, 31 Am. Dec. 416; Cook v. Neely, 143 Mo. App. 632, 128 S. W. 233. See Asset:rm.; WHIPPING.
The master of an apprentice, for disobedi ence, may correct him moderately ; 1 B. & C. 469 ; Cro. Car. 179 ; Mitchell v. Armitage, 10 Mart. 0. S. (La.) 38; but he cannot dele-. gate the authority to another. A master has no right, to correct his servants who are not apprentices; Matthews v, Terry, 10 Conn. 455; 2 Green]. Ev. § 97; see ASSAULT for cases of undue correction. A master may be found guilty of murder for whipping a serv ant so that he dies, although he has a right to inflict the punishment, and the instrument is proper, if the punishment is so prolonged and barbarous as to indicate malice ; State v. Shaw, 64 S. C. 566, 43 S. E. 14, 60 L. R. A. 801, 92 Am. St. Rep. 817.
Soldiers were formerly liable to moderate correction from their superiors. For the sake of maintaining discipline in the navy, the captain of a vessel, belonging either to the United States or to private individuals, might formerly inflict moderate correction on a sailor for disobedience or disorderly conduct; Ab. Sh. 160; Brown v. Howard, 14
Johns. (N. Y.) 119; Sampson v. Smith, 15 Mass. 365; Flemming v. Ball, 1 Bay (S. C.) 3 ; Aertsen v. Aurora, Bee 161, Fed. Cas. No. 95; Thorne v. White, 1 Pet. Adm. 168, Fed. Cas. No. 13,989; Moll. 209; Turner's Case, 1 Ware 83, Fed. Cas. No. 14,248. Such has been the general rule.• But flogging and oth er degrading punishments are now forbidden in the army, navy, merchant service, and mil itary prisons ; R. S. §§ 1342, 1624, 4611, 1354.
The husband, by the old law, might give his wife moderate correction; 1 Hawk. P. C. 2. But in later times this power of correc tion began to be doubted; and a wife may now have security of the pence against her husband, or a husband against his wife ; 1 Bla. Com. 444; Stra. 478, 875, 1207; 2 Lev. 128. See MARBLED WOMEN.
Any excegs of correction by the parent, master, officer, or captain rendered the par ty guilty of an assault and battery and liable to all its consequences ; Com. v. Randall, 4 Gray (Mass.) 36. See ASSAULT. In some prisons, the keepers are permitted tb correct the prisoners.
The King's Council, in the minority of Henry VI. authorized a subject to chastise the king "when he trespasseth or doth amys." 3 Holdsw. Hist. E. L. 356.