No flies on ADS' response to "frog march"

[Douglas G. Wilson]

>Since the HDAS cites "frog" as a British term for a policeman from
>1857/1859, and "Frog's March" from 1871 and later, why do we assume that the
>term implied being marched like a frog instead of being marched BY frogs?

I've read only a few descriptions of the "frog's march" ... but it seems to
me that the usually preferred approach (not called "frog's march") involved
a cooperative prisoner being escorted by police officers or equivalent,
each man walking on his own (with or without some form of restraint). The
frog's march was required only if the prisoner was combative or
unable/unwilling to walk ... then he would be carried face-down by his four
limbs ... if he continued to struggle, I suppose he could be bounced off
the ground a few times or dragged through the dirt a little bit, without
releasing his limbs ... an uncomfortable exercise, especially for the
prisoner -- but also quite strenuous for the four men carrying him, no
doubt. The policemen would be "marching" the prisoner either way, so I
guess it's more likely that "frog" refers to the spread-limbed face-down
posture.

-- Doug Wilson