The Sun. — London, England, 1845-02-28 00:00:00

I i" be table Q . Feo' tO s°l f, f 4i cacti t r, Or eb e ,d , t d o t.ui o ,or, o lPk the f o r 0 0y g 6g3e tbe e.l l the P r oth e 1' „e ,er, t" t he r c', 4 4 r , P A na Th e et) , t• c , sp ec i, Ref° e t l ` oil corn,eooo,oi stet 5 io. 0 0 1 01. 0 .0 40 ' be c OOO , CL io: the ba t f' t o or , 1‘ e • 1 " or j r t a iron C to r it. orq' hE, c o t " ev er efil / tbose rummers, as appeared by the news pape.., and to hope that a remedy w ou ld h e prepared by u,111.11 to protect 4.110,5. e farmerens p.ral those oqat wil , I, ed by the tivation of' the soll.—(Cr: es of " Heir, hear.") ITse 3 Ire was aa'are that ~oin• ohject, : ,,, would ho made to urse, still consi.l( :-ing how rnany i‘.lembei a of the ctu,, were landed proiTi-tor-, and iaavia;. as he fully admitted, a strong and sincere sympathy with those who cultivated the land, he th. tight no objection would be en tertained against that part of the subject, and that they would be willing It. to examine thoroughly int o He would give the House 80100 particular ca , ,es of the d amage done to the farmers by game Some few weeks ago he was in Hampshire, and IVHS lconversing with a farmer, fro:u whom he received _he following facts :—Thi s person s t ate d th at h e that'ad seve nty - eight acres of land in cr o p s , an d according t o a f a i r va l uat i on, the damage done was not less th an 2 04 1 i n t h e year.—( C r i es of :‘ Oh, oh,") The particulars were in the paper he held t ji his hand, and the person from whom he had it was a e nant of a M em b er of one of the Houses of Parliament ; and ti stated that he was ready to come up and give evidence if e C ommittee were granted. Another case from the S ame. • neighbourho o d was that of a farmer who held 600 C . es of l an d . He ‘%ottld be willing to give the names of te parties priv a t e l y to any Member if he had permission ° du so; but, o f course, he could not do so unless he had per naision to that effect. This farmer had one field of 70 acres, w hich ra n a l ongside the demesne of the landowner, and he B,,t,ted th at the annual damage in that one field of 70 acres was n u " l . ; and he sa id t h at he would as soon keep fifty sheep as the ame which w ere d estroying his crops. He In gar, to trap the area, having the consent of the landlord for doing so ; but the ntiosekeeper, who was !yin. in cover over the fence, found out Chop it was that took th game from the trap, and he had to PaY 50s fine,and e •7h d a licence. He then to o k • lOs, costs, not havim., a ~„ out a licence, and for six months after that period he trapped . :Itat rabbits and 28 hares per month. He bought his traps tthe half gross at on( Laughter ) He bought . all the traps in the town near him, and, Ilt„, s , l° Pheught up all the traps that were there, he sent to tra•-ulegham for others.—( Laughter. ) He had twenty-four B ,p , aft at once, but the garaekeepers came upon the laud and fiT e . the trape,_(Laughter.) He said that he had land in the mgr Which were turned up by night for the sheep to eat in th e rn°ll liuß ; but during the night they were half eaten by Iv rabbit ( g; u.e said the hares eat the young corn in winter „ n c s i . 1 1 the sprin g the young shoots did not ripen with . the rest., an :t i the thrashing machine did not fetch out the unripe grains, d ete v !hat did come out was poor, mere chickens' meat, which tw o reorated the general produce of the land to the amount of 1 ,, ,t ,0r three shillings per quarter. He said the hares made of t 'ta or runs of nine inches in width, through the whole length vhizfields. The hares bit out the hearts of the young clover, in fi sa Prevent e d i t from coming to maturity in summer. Well, farm Year s d amage to the amount of 300/. had been done in this tbio ,,a°to ithstanding the game destroyed ; and besides, those c reated great ill-feeling between farmers and land - titede%and between farmers and gamekeepers, and in a mut- R -°' e aathe farmers felt themselves obliged to bribe the sera e h s _ es . till, st" Per. This farmer went into many other cases,. which at that t i:! e he would not enter into. He was anxious to show V ery ts state of things was not confined to one county. A R o f, re'Peetable farmer, and a tenant to a Member of that , tent a ' wrote to him (Mr. Bright) from Stirling. He said, „: I i ttt ` t .about h eighty-five Scotch acres, and in this small farm 5 . ../. of Svc as destroyed by game. Last year, in a field of turnips Thi s acres, nearly three acres were totally destroyed. acre s Year it was worse; be had upwards of twelve to Valueestroyed. H e ca ll e d t h ree respectable . men 104 the turnip s in order to charg the the landlord with the wo o an d then he as obliged to carry remains of the field fe sni a w sble c ure place to p re vent th e i r b e i ng ea t en u p. He could att o h or them with statements of a similar nature from a great p iers ea ° House f farmers in th e same ne i g hb our h oo d ; a n d these ar- Rive Pressed th e i r w illi ngness to come before the and frettheir eviden ce . Th e next case h e wou ld quo t e was one N al the county of Chester. He would read a shortaragraph prith„ t he Stockp ort Advertiser, a paper which had no sym heeoith th e objects in which he was interested. It was ' , er e Hares an d R a bbi ts. " I t state d t h at t h ese anima l s *lnch red to an extent in some parts of the county of Chester Sad Wa s injurtou t the farmers wards they destroyed, Pabl s o ? ally l e aSnapathy had been excited t those who were k 3* sufferin from these animals. The extract went on to , y, e „ g lest s ,`", t at a few miles from this place 300 rabbits were weekly t esta t e'. and a large amount of hares, and the "bi le ' s . Were obliged to quit their farms on account 1 4r - °Me, without receiving any compensation for it. tenantsB W ere some of the farms at present unoccupied, and ss s at "'ot be found for them, because they were over- I t „, ith „ , 11' r.". Om game IS system was not confined to one county, letter horn (spread over several. The Hon. Member read a by tc 'antler near Clare, in Suffolk, who stated that the loss * Liter - gime was great e r than the amount of the rent. The tl t , eitattributed the t ur b u l en t s pi r it w hi c h p revai l e d b e t ween teti n P la Yers and t h e emp l oye d, i n a great measure to t h e /it Itrolit-4 PaPer,he game-laws. In proof of this he referred % in which it appeared that one half of the con- N e l l'. St the late assizes in that county, were under the 1 w il •ti ltwa • - •••( Hear hear ) In one parish the majority oleo.: farmers . ;ere insolvent, and when they corn- 1 bre e - ,, they were told that if they disturbed the 1 . 141 t t,;: e 7 might give up their holdings ; and it ! at tel:',, that in those parishes in which the game laws were i atttb l e ,;,_Y enforced, there were the most incendiary fires. l I:thy-itartet inth t county stated that upon 100 acres his I (4 t kk . . " e game a 5O/ (Hear)—and he had been obliged i 1 n e t wa ! It r. n rt L a game licence to destroy the game.--( Hear. )He era, of hadanother case, that of a farmer named tre '°f M , - I i l 4 ssarshal s Farm, Sussex, which he (Mr. Bright) took i had had some differ- I tl llt, e t s , ° ; '! ex newspaper. That farmer 'ete. - to his latallord into which he r. Bright) would not I kV out this I dthe correspondence ) which Mr. Hayward 1 i tt , sh od. s e to . t t 'at t ,„ Mr. Hayward, in his statement, divided his land 1 -4 b„ - Parts the damaged and the least damaged. In llt Ott er , most . 1 tiel'e al a portion of 18 1 4 acres yielded 327 bushels of corn, _ a os _he i t ° „ 11 1 the bad side, 14 acres, 3 roods, yielded only 1 11,7 ' Vs•-•(Hear, hear)—and his damage had. been Il t - ttl e 4 ''Y competent surveyors at 129/. Ils.—( Hear. ) I hnt,t t l. h ead an extract of a speech delivered at a meeting of I I ss _e'werl, Is a ro Association, by Mr. Beaztey, a farmer, who had Vile t ",fen much praised by the Duke of Rutland for his 1 !doge4esag ent He said that in one field he saw 82 I l -,,' thalt the oust of feeding them was equal to the cost of I ietz4,-3 sheep.—(Loud cries of " Oh, oh," from the Con- I _ltee e „ b enchea.) Mr. Beazley further said that he would i -9 1 r, 1; 411 tholes hares for any landlord in the world.— I I se t .lod ss e s ar .) He ( Mr. Bright) was not an owner . of land . lo , to lat was necessary to give him a county qualification. i R' g oal Neither was he a farmer; and, therefore, , f a ith ,ulSot venture to discuss abstruse questions connected i Ir e tliter ll. , le ulture.--( Loud cries of " Hear, hear," and I let s aey *,,; But he would give them authority for his facts. , se h ll t - „,°u s hi grant him the Committee he should be able to I d i Arlin . ."..,,,' which no man could dispute, and which would i Vas e ; i t ," Committee and the House that facts more extra- I Ltoi o Cart these were indisputably true. Another case he I tOthi s , - ,• 4 eit to the House was from the county of Bucking- I, : t. co 44t arld it was really deplorable that in many parts of I h ' state Y there was such a waste of the produce by the game. ( J rltt et , lUent was from a speech before the magistrates at i li sle Ele"i"'•held at Buckingham or Aylesbury, delivered I a fg t . arr kt tig Y Verney. He was not a man to use exiggerated 1 kik its; and he said that those who hold lands where game tl ta b e eat abundance, and the temptation to poaching could o _ 1 fli ts op t , resisted, had special reason to complain f Or tom pd t, tu ul of the game-laws. There were some I to t a ed, s„••• Which one-fourth of the crops were de. I to tt ;P , eie„J,, fame. Nor was this all of which the farmer 1 liosseatee. besides the loss of his crops, he had to pay 1 sealertoer's eNtty-rates for the expense of maintaining the Itt a l a tfe and family while he was in gaol. In a memorial 1 %N th le i i i e l a trit Government it was stated that out of 593 pre- , Ni -q 1„ fo e e ,?„ounty gaol, RC or nearly one-third, were corn -4 'tie s ?"ences connected with the game-laws. These tltaaoeoe;utY eases which he proposed to submit to the House he t :lot h : 4° P With this branch of the subject ; but he assured le t of -; toat he had a vast number of letters containing tt e ,„ °4 tl; L tirnilar kind, which he was almost afraid to lay e ,d b e - "oltse, lest he should be disbelieved. He knew it 40 op ass erted that th e l an d owners had a right to keep stOish to heir land. He did not deny their right, nor did th,"Perty. intelfere in the smallest degree with the rights ot Ist,rave4 'Whatever injury was done in particular cases by s ates W atile el e game, he thought it probable that greater in %foil to •,,,•7 done if the Legislature were directly and abso t!tst,.4 cir L s ' f r utge the rights of property, either of the land httlo4 stool,t`4auY other c l ass of th e commun i ty . B u t h e t h oug h t be admitted that there ought to be limits to the Itis`aereerrePertY d • t oer that any man should ss eel l h se th ~ an it was no pr p . . . sa es , our, an ose rights as to bring a grievous injury on his o se,"' s to l d: (1 on the community. By the common law, nut '''er •-• Ch a fe nu down.Besides,the landlords ought to re dlyods th they t * Ate - didnot keep their game on their own In „ NI eeti o `' a ut-farmer, who had spoken at Aylesbury, at tlte l aid th g* to which he (Mr. Bright) had been invited. t tei t t r itotatl at be would be glad if the landowners would keep t ale l oari gat ue, but the fact was, the game was kept by the ge, oe hs.,•ug occupiers The Hampshire farmer, to whose le: i hl tn 'u already alluded, had told him that his landlord R ees 4dtiPerrnission to kill rabbits, that he had no objection reemerge ) ~,n g hares, but that a gentleman in the next estate ois!r's) e l ute. and that itwas that destroyed his (the t mi tt prodgame , s a tle, estr o „ , u je• He had to pay 4/. for a licence before he i'lle s ! 1 ; iso t e 'els game, and then it took up his time and at oil Thi n . after all he could not prevent this game from atlh t ntee t % on him serious injury. It was not SNt deb l ' i to introduce into this discussion any ty t he lte t a hle matte but it should be remembered so d of .ande w r ' . themselves the *. sl 4 4 p rovi , ners had taken upon . sse ti r s otip s at st o „ r'eg food for the people of this country. for rjtk i l', o tlt i t " inquire whether that system was right or s`rtei`kaes the upheld by the House. They had constituted P ott s) ntjt iti e P urv eyors -general of her Majesty's subjects of 14ateed that and Ireland d 1 a lar e portion of the people N Pt est ' Q at the 'r, . g • of the failure k t ed . a the had y sre!•e iii-fed, in eon/sequence pro d `beaded fr et ..._,3( a right to complain, when they were %e' Pro p su 'ug to other sources for their food, that the s. iti o rlet ors 6 - 4 shouldo l Usem en „ keep large quantities of game for tkkr t a eitt a de str 't wh a considerable portion of !he pro ed, T ° Y e a, and the evils of scarcity considerably ils Its ss 4 fight be said that the farmer had made a con to l ee ‘lle 1, 11 ,, ... ope te 'ed th a elord, and that he must stand by his bargain. tip i t or t the farmer didmake contract, but every landed l a t rop roust be a It ,‘ and e aware that the competition for land was so ‘ ‘ , 4 1. • if ..itio n a° merciless, that the farmer was not k t ed ;be to make a fair bargain.—( Hear, hear.) k atll o 4oat thmers did make a contract of this sort,. and 4%6 kno w :, would not kill game, why, how would the . *so h to s ee nethe r he did or not ? Fur he could easily /NI e took 1 ? la P the quantity of game that was on the farm '.p h eel, It. 0 . (M B i ht) If 4 teed that n this ground, then, he r. r g If far etUbers he had strong grounds of appeal to several ta l tti.,4aer s, e of that Huse. He had heard complaints from e t a tto o 11 °T th a v ;: since this session had commenced,. of the d ee rs o k, n t at rr ner.s. and he believed there was a notice of a 1 1 „,* 10 eu ru e ,. subject before the House, and he applauded lo rds ol u sre that had for its object. the amelioration of be, ands off 14 Illk • S . 9 otise w • f loat 1, gnio nen , .as it not possible for them to give a (re thast sonic ' retie{ to the farmers, by giving up a por k es s _ , e s ole s portion of this absurd law, and make each horn ' h it e ear ) "r i ner or , every living thing on his farm.— tes tol: 11 Li en 3 nal conversed with very intelligent far lshtz *Lriel Stith. oshire on this subject.—(" Hear, hear," th e 4t . " were rP)—and there were no farmers from that till fart fro% r,notointelligent—( Renewed cries of " Hear, of , ge t ers had\ole ei s Sibtherp, and laughter)—and (sanethe „eslaes, assured him that the abolition of Prot e . would it,r e, a ono, On e Co mpensate many farmers for the removal art ( i i tlis to" t heret o rn. , He had heard the same from other i t ,.e b ._Uch of tLe re ne would say that the landlords ought to i: 1 ofir.---( H e u ar, e‘iljoyment of the chase, for the advantage Sh it of e al ' "at%) He would now pass to another -41,, ( sem en ; ec and ~ 4 f ti l -11 thi n u ,b , call attention to the position of that ti t .eR o I Point h e c' s ueld what had been called allotments; bad 4Ulpi:. mem ielt assured he should have the sympathy . see n 4- H e f or Dorset and Hereford, if they were in . y o „ re en ha s st nu -• himself • holes which 'kit e ‘ 4 :•s. reh s • Y triad b counted sixty rabbit 4, 4 eti tz 4 vita d o. Zyoung rabbits learning to excavate, ha tiZ er ibUt few dinner (( 'rest laughter.) He had sown . peas, of 4 bi l‘h ,he h ad sof green ones and bacon during the tse,; e" ilia only had a gall n where he should have 4e ar h' l ' Was all Os, ass.b lit is own houSe, done by the game. He tried bits e ttal reo teci all ten t ouse, and thought to grow turnips and he e fr r o h ° f Col one ls_he rabbits.—( Laughter.) This land s o ,f Itl s e . „ts esta te Nyyndham, of Petworth, and the game Nit h_erigh t s ':f ,aud the estates of two other gentlemen. ' ibi ght i lr t aken great pains to ascertain the truth, Y a fair statement before the House, In ~~ THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDA Y EVENING, FEBRUARY 18 , 1845. Midhurst, where there five allotments, likewise great ; again, the poachers on Lord Rendelsharn's _and the Mar damage had been done, though not to a great quis of Hertford's estates carried their calling so far that they extent ; but in most cases they were afraid to say hail formed a society and subscribed a fund for their mutual much for fear of offendieg. Another case from Suffolk protection, teeing counsel, &c. —( Hear, hear, and laughter.) he would mention, in which great damage had been done to These w ere men who hail led this lie se long that they were allotments. From a respectable farmer in the neighbourhood now in fact almost shut out from the pale of society, and led a of Clare he had received a letter, which stated that a poor man, kind of saelge life; and this he thenght showed how little a of the name of Bruce, had twenty shillings' worth of eta- - bleach of the game-laws was regarded as an offence against mage done to his barley by hares and rabbits ; and this twenty I moral law. In a country newspaper lately, the obituary con shillings was more than he could earn in two weeks, even I tained an account of the death of a notorious poacher, but it hough he had been constantly employed. Another case—a said that in every other respect he was a highly-respectable indi poor man, who had a worse crop, in the same neighbourhood, vidual, and was so esteemed in his neighbourhood that he was was obliged to sow his crop three times over, having been am ually entrusted with his own commitment, when convicted eaten up by the pheasants as soon as sown. And what re- of au offence. —( Hear, hear, and laughter.) It sometimes mained after the damage done by the hares and rabbits was happened that landlords employed poachers as game-keepers ; cut with a knife in the harvest time, there not being a suffi- but he would ask, would any man in business promote a clerk ciency of stem to employ a sickle. He asked, in all earnest.- whom he might have found with his hand in his till ?—( Hear, ness, that the Right Hon. Gentleman would attend to these hear.) He had dwelt long upon this subject, but he did statements, as being very important. There were parties in think he might be excused as this was a subject of no ordin try this country who considered that the allottment system was a interest, and not one which usually occupied the debates of the, good one. He was of opinion that it would be a great en- House.—(Gear, hear.) In the past session of Parliament, couragement to the agricultural labourer to have a nice bit he moved for certain returns upon this subject, of ground attached to his house. There was no doubt that in a and by them it appeared that at one assizes there moral point of view it was worth half of the police of the dis- were 152 convictions in England and Wales for trict. Those very landowners should, it it were possible, give offences against the game-laws ; and 4,377 at the quarter ses to every cottage as much land as would supply a little amuse- sions ; of those 35 had been sentenced to transportation at the ment and employment, and enable him to at-ovate a few things assizes and 5 at the sessions, and 112 to imprisonment; others for his family. Now the case he was about to put would be had been sentenced to pay a fine of 21., and others again to at once araterstood by the House. A labourer got up two seven weeks' imarisortment. It would be very easy for Hon. hours before his usual time—at sunrise—he worked with glad- Member of that House to throw down a fine of 21. Many of ness and spirit on his little bit of land. He sowed his crop, them spent as much in a day. But when a poor labourer was hoping to get a profitable return from it. During the day it titled that sum for an infraction of the game-laws, lie would might be that his wife and children were weeding and planting ask, was it not a monstrous punishment when compared with it here and there, as far as was consistent with their strength the offence, and was calculated to destroy all respect for the and knowledge; and then, when the sowing was beginning to law, and all confidence in the justice and impartiality of the appear above ground, the game from some landed proprietor— Legislature.—( Hear, hear.) He would now call attention to some man who, standing on the highest eminence in the another return of still deeper interest and importance than that country, could not see to the extent of his land—the game he had read. By that return it appeared that in the year 1842- from his estates came into the poor man's garden, and de- 43, no fewer than 40 gamekeepers had been killed ; and of those voured the produce of his labour. He (Mr. Bright) (lid not the verdicts of the coroner's juries were wilful murder in 25 envy the feelings of any man, who, conscious that cases. In the case of the murder of Lord Knowsley'a game the game which ministered only to his sport, committed keeper, both he and the poachers fired; the latter escaped, the such damage as blasted the hopes and destroyed the former was shot, and, on his death-bed, he expressed how prospects of the honest labourer.—( Loud cries of " Hear, pleased he felt at not having shot the poacher.—( Hear. ) hear.") But there was another consideration respecting the No fewer than five persons were convicted for this offence; one labourer. All farmers were agreed, and landowners who of them was hanged, and the others had been sent to the penal spoke their honest sentiments were of opinion that the preser- colonies, leaving wives and helpless families destitute behind nation of game was most injurious to agricultural pursuits, and them, with a stain upon their names.—(Hear, hear.) This .very much prevented the due cultivation of land. In Ruislip, was the class of grievances attending those game-laws that led in that county, a petition had been got up, and signed by every him, more than any other, to bring this subject before the farmer in the parish. A farmer there told hint that in that House; and he could not help saying that he could not under parish, containing 7,000 acres of land, there were not stand how any man could set up his o,vn personal enjoyment in more than 100 labourers employed ; the game was preserved comparison with a system that led to such great 'and grievous to a great extent there, and he had suffered severely from it evils.—( Hear, hear.) The year 1844 had also its catalogue for several years back. From this and several other statements of victims.—( hear.) In one of those desperate en he (Mr. Bright) was led to this conclusion, that where the counters between gamekeepers and poachers, two of the latter game was rigidly preserved, there could not be good farming; were killed, and two men were hanged for their murder, under and if there were not good farming, there could not be a rea- circumstances by no means satisfactory, both ef them having sonable amount of employment. If he were a landed p ro - p ro t es t e d on th e sca ff o ld, w ith a solemnity of manner that it prietor he would feel proud to see the labourers growing up would be impossible to imagine could be feigned at such an around his demesne. Nothing he would be so anxious to ad- awful moment, that they had no hand, act, or part, in those ante as to give them greater employment and murders. 'then, again, he would say, there were incidents greater remuneration—(Hear, hear)—or increasing their which made it worth the while of the Legislature to consider, physical comforts, and laying that foundation without whether the mere amusement of a very small portion of the which, all attempts at moral or literary education would community should be kept up at such an awful expense.— be useless.—(Hear, hear.) Let them recollect what had taken ( Hear, hear.) He did not mean to say that there should be place in Suffolk last year—in Wales sometime ago—what a re• no game, nor laws affecting game ; but he made these state fraetory spirit periodically spread throughout all the counties of meats in order to show the lamentable consequences attending England. Justice to all owners of property, and common the present state of those laws, and to show that he had a strong sense, induced him to tell the House that a remedy must be claim upon that House for the Committee he asked for.—( Hear, provided for such a state of things. He asked the attention of hear.) There was another case which he had well nigh for the House to the condition of the labourer, and to the mode in gotten to state; it was that of a man who had been sentenced which he had been treated by the administration of the laws to be transported for stealing rabbits in Staffordshire ; and The Right Hon. Gentleman at the close of the last session of that man's mind became so affected at the awful penalty Parliament expressed his desire to mitigate the hardships in- he was about to suffer for this act, that he put an Meted upon many persons by the operation of the game Acts ; end to his existence in the prison. ( Hear, hear. ) and had sent through the country expressions of his opinion that There was another case of a young person of sixteen years of the magistrates should administer the law with a little more age, who went shooting sparrows, hat a pheasant coining in mercy, and in a more lenient spirit. He had a case or two Lis way, he shot it also. Was there any one of those who which he would state to the House as samples of the oppression heard him who would deny that he would not h a ve d one th e which had been practised, and he could as easily have brought same at the age o f sixteen ?—( Hear, hear.) But for this he a hundred such cases as one. One ease took place at the Petty was threaten e d w ith t h e l aw, and having all its consequences Sessions of Ashby-de-la-'touch, in the county of Leicester, before him, he hanged himself to escape the troubles he saw before Mr. Abney and Mr. Chafnell Manning. The case oc- before him in this world.—(Hear, hear.) What a system curred on the 12 of March, 1844, before that court. The whole must that be which produced these results ! It was said that facts of the case had been represented to the Home Secretary, gentlemen kept gamekeepers to be spies over those very farmers but no alteration had been made in the punishment of the who paid dearly for their land.—( Hear.) It was a system of individuals. William Edwards, John Edwards, and James terrorism injurious in its effect upon the labouring classes, Finch, the former two being brothers, one of them only eleven and detrimental to the agricultural interest. He did not be years of age, all of Worthington, were charged by John Peters, lieve that any Gentleman in that H ouse wou ld oppose his one of the game-keepers to the Earl of Ferrers, with using a motion for an inquiry into such a system, except, perhaps, the net for catching game without having a game certificate. The Hon. Member for Gloucestershire ( Mr. G. Berkeley)— parties who absconded had nut been arrested until the 17th. ( Laughter)—who had written a pamphlet in defence of it. Each of them was fined Si. and costs, and, in default, to three They had heard of a Berkeleian theory before, which denied months' imprisonment and hard labour. They were then charged the existence of matter.—(Laughter.) That was the doctrine with a Sunday offence (the offence took place on Sunday) and of immateriality, but in this new theory there was nothing fined st. and costs, &c., in default of payment to three months' of that kind, for " punches in the head, and blows before imprisonment and hard labour. Wm. and John Edwards were words"--(Laughter)—had;semething very material and sub charged with trespassing in search for game, and fined 40s. and stantial about them.—( Laughter.) But he would not attempt costs, and, in default, to two months' imprisonment and hard to answer the arguments in that pamphlet, for it was its own labour. Wm. Edwards and John Finch were then charged with bane and antidote. But one singular discovery which it con an assault on Peters, the gamekeeper, and fined Si. each, and tained was, that the British Constitution lauded as it was— in default of payment, two months' imprisonment. Here was (and it was net without some merit)—and liberty of conscience a case in which two men had been convicted of an overwhelm- were, in some way or other, interested in the preservation of ing offence. One would imagine that the magistrate would great heads of game. —( Laughter.) He had often said look to the condition of life and the degree of intelligence of harsh things of the proprietors of land, but he had the parties, and proportion the punishment accordingly. But never said anything so harsh of them as those persons instead of doing so, the very worst penalties of the law, the who defended the preservation of game and the buttue system , most stringent of its enactments, were carried into effect, and and who maintained that it was the enthusiasm of the chase eight and ten months' imprisonment and hard labour were which kept gentlemen upon their paternal estates. His opinion inflicted on those unfortunate men for going out on a Sunday was, that there were other pursuits besides those connected with with a net, in search of game. Another case, one which the preservation of game, which it would better become must be fresh in the remembrance of most Hon. Members from them to follow, and which would be better for the country. its having been' put so prominently forty and in the neigh- Why, there was not a finer position in the world, than that of bourhood—it was the case of ' a man named Hibburn, which a gentleman of property who attended to his own estate—he took place in Buckinghamshire, in September last. The had an opportunity of doing untold good.—( Hear, hear.) He gamekeeper of the Rev. G. Ceetwoode saw him at the snare; might look after Lis tenants—watch over the physical comforts the man was seized, but it did not appear that there was any proof of his labourers, attend to their cottages, and see that they. that the snare had been found at all. The gamekeeper said he were neat and commodious—build schools, and provide for the believed it was the man's first offence ; the man cried bitterly ; education of the poor.--( alear, hear.) Those were pleasures he had a family of four children, one an infant; nine of as great as those of the chase, and far better, because the plea them had died—having had fourt een i n a ll. He f u rth er s t a t e d sure of doing good never tired—( Hear)—and those gentlemen . that he had only had ten days' work within the last month— who looked to those things far better deserved the character that he was in great distress, and that his children had not a of English gentlemen, than those who merely dwelt bit of bread to eat. Mr. Stone, the magistrate, a most ap- amongst their tenants for the purpose of enjoying the' propriate name, for it required a heart of atone to take the pleasures of the chase.—(Cheers.) One mode of enjoying course which that gentleman took in this case ; he said the sport was called the battae system. He had never seen it prisoner was liable to three months' imprisonment and hard himself, but he heard it described, and he believed it consisted labour, but as this was the first offence—what extraordinary in the sportsmen standing in a line on both sides of a wood, views some men take of misery !—he would sentence him only and firing upon the game, which were driven within the range to six weeks' imprisonment and hard labour, and to of the muzzles of the guns which were driven out by persons find sureties, himself in ten pounds, and two others employed for that purpose. It was pretty evident that none of in 5L each, and in default thereof to be further imprisoned, the game could escape. He would say nothing ridiculous of with hard labour, for six months. He presumed this gentle- this system, because it was not worth it.—(Hear, hear.) It man was still a magistrate, but he asked the House to observe, was too absurd for ridicule.—( Hear, hear.) A person might that here was a man who said that he had got only ten days' as well go to Leadenhall-market and put the muzzle of his gun work for the last month, his children had not a bit of bread to upon the game in the baskets, and having killed them all, came eat, and yet a man sitting on the bench to distribute justice, home with a quantity of game and enjoy the reputation of a under the constitution of this country, sentences him, not only good sportsman.—( Hear, hear.) If there was anything more to three months' imprisonment and hard labour, but orders unsuited than another to the character of England it was this him to find sureties likewise—a man who had not constant system.—( Hear, hear.) '['he maintenance of this system of work, and when he had, did not earn more than 7s. or Bs. a-week, game-laws would counteract all their efforts fur the improve ordered to find sureties !—( Hear, hear.) What must be the ment of the poor, and now more than at any former period opinion of the public en this case ? Why, every newspaper, of they showed their sympathy for the poor. All their legislation whatever politics, took it up and denounced it as one of the lately was in some way or other connected with the poor.— most flagrant instances of cruelty that had ever been inflicted (Cries of " Hear, hear,") The Noble Lord the by a courtofjustice. But there wereamultitudeofsuch cases. The Member for Dorset ( Lord Ashley) to whom he gave every sympathy of the country was so much enlisted in this case that credit for the honesty of his motives, had half-a-dozen plans money was sent from all parts of the country. A five-pound every session, and the Hon. Member for Hereford introduced note was sent in a letter, the fine was paid, and the man was a Bill connected with the allotment system, and not only in liberated. He ( Mr. Bright) hoped that some of this poor that House, but in the country, amongst the higher and middle man's friends took care to remove him from a district in which classes, there was a sincere and anxious desire to promote the he had suffered this punishment, and conducted him to some happiness and comforts of the poorest classes.—(Cheers.) He honest district where justice for an offence against the game- had deawri no exaggerated picture of the operation of the game laws was not dispensed by . a bench which had invariably shown laws, and he thought he had stated sufficient to induce the the interest which it felt in the preservation of game.—( Hear, House to grant the Committee which he asked for.—(He ae , hear.) If either of these cases of Hibburn or of Ashby-de- hear.) But he did not want a sham Committee.—( Hear, hear. ) la-'touch came before a jury, what would be the consequence? He did not want a Committee composed of persons who took One of the principles of the Constitution was, net only that a extreme views on either side.—( Hear, hear.) All he wanted man was to be tried by a jury, but he was to be tried by his was a fair, honest, and impartial Committee-4 Hear, hear) — Peers. Agricultural or manufacturing labourers were not which would go through the question, beginning, middle, and often on juries, nor did they often have a jury of Peers, but end.—( Hear, hear.) He did not object to the fair sports of in this case they had not even a jury of disinterested the rich, but the interests and rights of the poor were net to persons. But it came before a bench who entertained strong be sacrificed to them.---( Hear, hear.) He had endeavoured feelings in favour of the preservation of game. When the to state his case without uttering a harsh expression against any Right Honourable Baronet brought forward his Bill last class or person. He could state with the utmost sincerity session for the regulations of factories. he took care to intro- that he did not harbour in his breast an unkind feeling towards duce a clause to prevent the owners of factories from sitting on any individual in connexion with this subject.—( Hear, hear.) the bench when factory cases were to be disposed of.—( Hear, But he had seen the sufferings of thousands of the poor and hear.) And why should a different principle be applied the defenceless, to whom the law should be a protection, and to the owners of mills and to the owners of land? Why for whose especial good parliaments and constitutions were in should they consent to a different system from that which was stituted.--( Hear, hear.) He had seen sonic sacrificed under practised in reference to millowners in Lancashire, Yorkshire, or this system—he had seen others led out to receive the dreadful any other county ? Those poor men when brought before the sentence of the law, while the public sympathy was in their bench had neither counsel nor attorney. It might be said the favour; and seeing and knowing those things, he called on the law empowered them to obtain such aid? But where was the Government and the Legislature not to assent to a principle, or money to come from? Virtually they were excluded from to give the aid of their influence or encouragement to a system such assistance. So here was a poor labourer dragged before a productive of such grave evils, not to one, but to every class— bench of magistrates, who were enthusiastic in the preserve- not to one district, but to the entire kingdom. The Hon. tion of game, without any assistance whatever, and fined and Gentleman concluded (amidst loud cheering) by moving for a imprisoned as these magistrates thought fit. Yet this was Committee to inquire into the operation of the game- laws. called law and justice in this country. He did not blame the Dr. BO WRING seconded the motion. magistrates so much as the law itself. He supposed if there Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, that though the Hon. Gen were magistrates at all, they must execute the law. But he tleman had occupied a considerable time in the delivery of his thought those who acted in the manner described, if they were speech, he had no fault to find with its tone or temper—( Hear, not men of very little feeling, would join with him in his en- hear)—more particularly as regarded his closing remarks, in deavour to abolish, or at least modify, these cruel laws, so that which he (Sir J. Graham) cordially concurred. The Hon. the feelings of the community might not be outraged by the re- Gentleman, on this question, had done justice to the gentle currenee of such cases.—( Hear, hear.) In considering the men of England, and he thought the Hon. Gentleman esti amount of criminality which attached to a labourer's infringe- mated rightly the feelings of the House when he said he ment of the game-laws, some consideration ought to be made hoped there would be a general disposition, in the present cir with respect to the amount of temptation which was pre- cumstances of the case, to sanction a full, fair, and dispas sented to him.—( Hear, hear.) They had an authority sionate inquiry. He heard the Hon. Gentleman with satisfac altogether indisputable that temptation in some districts was tion when he said that there was no higher sphere of action more than flesh and blood could stand. It had been stated be- than that of a country gentleman who inspected the state of fore a Committee, of which the Hon. Member for Wiltshire his labourers and tenants, watched over the wants of the poor, (Mr. Benett) was a Member, that agricultural poachers were ministered to their necessities, and afforded them the means of more successful because they began early; the boy of twelve education ; and he must say that he felt a pride and honour years of age sets snares with his father. He had received a (however imperfectly he performed those duties indi v idually) letter from Huntingdon on this subject, 'in which it was stated in being one of that class. He was confident, if that the shepherd boys, when they left their work at twilight, the fact had not been notorious before, that the seeing hares running abut in all directions, were so much result of the Committee would show that the tempted that they could not resist the temptation ; and the gentry of England had fulfilled their duties.—( Hear, hear. ) writer further stated that poaching was more injurious to boys Arid, as a sportsman, lie would say that the enjoyment of field than public-houses.—(Hear.) 'They were brought up in a sports was not inconsistent with those duties.—(Hear, hear.) manner so as not to believe that any moral guilt attached to an He thought the Hon. Member had laid sufficient grounds for infringement of the game-laws. He hoped Hon. Members inquiry, for in the course of the last two or three years most had read the 9th Report of the Inspectors of Prisons, and lamentable circumstances connected with the preservations of they would there find the strong language which Mr. Williams game had forced themselves upon the notice and attention o f th e used on this subject. The substance of wat he stated was, that public, and they had not escaped the consideration of the Go with most other offenders there was some hope of reformation vernment.—( Hear, hear.) He would state the reasons why he by prison discipline, but that those confined for poach- thought an inquiry—a fair and impartial inquiry—such as the ing were very seldom reclaimed.—( Hear, hear.) Hon. Memberdesired, would be politic. Since 1823 there was He held in his hand also the testimony of chaplains who no inquiry instituted by the House of Commons into the opera attended prisoners, and they stated that argument. admonition, tion of the game-laes. An inquiry took place before a Com entreaty, were all alike unavailing, in .trying to induce those mittee of the other House in 1828, and that - Committee recom prisoners to admit that they felt they had committed any moral mended that game should be made property, and should be pro offence ; and they add that there wa s more sympathy for those tected as property. In 1831, Lord Althorp, as the representative people than any other class of offenders. Their invariable ef Earl Grey's Government in the House of Commons, pro answer was, that the law was oppressive, sad that they had as posed alterations in the then existing game-laws. The feudal good a right as others to those hares. In the report of the year distinction of the possession of property as a necessary antece -1823 on this subject, Stafford, the Bow-street officer, stated, dent to the liberty of killing game was taken away, and a large in answer to questions put to him, that it appeared to him that class of persons was thereby enabled to kill game, who were those who were taken for offences against the game-laws 'did not previously prevented by law from doing so. The effect of that at all conceive that they had taken any portion of the property law was, that where a person was both owner-and occupier the of another; and Mr. Hunt, afterwards a Member of that House, game that would be kept was kept at his own cost, and even when said that the large quantity of game in the country was too a person was only occupier there was nothing to prevent his strong a temptation to the people to resist, and that they did killing all the game on his farm, if he took out a three guinea not conceive they had taken anybady's property.—(Hear, licence, unless there was a specific stipulation to the contrary. hear.) Mr. Benett, the Member for Wiltshire, in his an. —( Hear, hear.) But he admitted that the law which made swer, stated that neither in the lower order, in the class a little game property was an extensive change. The first effect of it higher, nor in the occupiers, was it deemed any disgrace to be was, as he before states!, to open the right of sporting to a punished for an offence against the game-laws. Hon. Members large class of 'individuals before disentitled to do so.—( Hear, might say that all this arose from a confused idea as to the right hear.) A consequence of this was, that the large cities ' of property ; but he ( Mr. Bright) would contend that the right of were better supplied with those luxuries which were parties to game was not at all so distinct as might be imagined ; to be found at the tables of the rich. For a long time that law if it were, it was very odd that that House should pass a law to appeared to have operated favourably; but, of late, there was prevent the sale of game ; and it was the only description of unhappily au increase of crime connected with the game-law. property against the sale of which any law had ever been passed. That being the case, and fourteen years having elapsed since If game were property, it should not be forgotten that it could any inquiry was instituted into the matter, he thought the time not be identified or impounded if found straying like a pig or was arrived when the operation of the law should be inquired other animal. But notwithstanding that, if a man were caught into.—( Hear, hear.) He admitted that there were many . with a hare or a rabbit in his hand, or even a piece of copper grave errors committed in the way game was sometimes pre wire mud a string, or taking a gun from a smith's shop across a served—( Hear, hear)—and whatever might be the result of field, he was sure to be imprisoned and otherwise punished. A the Committee, he was sure that the present debate would man might meet a hare crossing the wood and kid it ; but this have, at all events, a good moral effect.—( Hear, hear.) But house had hedged round these animals with so many laws that the cases which the Hon. Gentleman adduced, he might men the man was liable to be punished very severely. I'o so great tion, were almost entirely confined to hares and rabbits. If an extent had pOaching been encouraged by those laws, that in a that species of game multiplied very much, he believed the far place in Suffolk there was a poacher who was said to be mer had good ground for complaint. The Hon. Gentleman; carrying on a " very respectable" trade—(Laughter)—he much to his credit, had avoided to mix any feeling of hostility employed thirty or forty men, sent his hampers to market, and Iwith the question, and he (Sir J. Graham) would follow the received his remittances and paid his men as regularly as any example. But he must say, that he could not help thinking man in any other line of business.—(Heart hear.) Then, that there was gross exaggeration in some of the statements— (Hear,. hear)—and he believed that the inquiry would have a salivary effect in showing that exaggeration. If even it effected nothing else, he should like to see the statements in vestige, sd.—( Hear, hear. ) lie should like t o see the witness whose Se acres of land suffered damage to the amount of I 114/ in one ear from the ravage of hsres and rabbits. ( Hear, hear, and a laugh. ) He should like to see the fernier Who had lost by the game 50/. worth of his crop mien 100 acres in a year.—(Hear, and laughter.) He should like to see the farmer whet could prove that he had seen 83 hares at a time in one corn-field, and that these 83 hares consumed as much as 23 sheep.--( Laughter.) Above all, he should like to see that trustworthy, upright. Yorkshireman, who walked nine times to Wakefield gaol with his committal in his pocket. Mr. BRIGHT—I told you he was dead.—( Renewed laughter, ) Sir J. GRAHAM was sure that, so far, the investigation would be somewhat amusing. Another proposition put for werd by the Hon. Member for Durham was, that the preser vation of game was incompatible with the cultivation of the soil. But the Hon. Gentleman admitted that he was not a sportsman or a farmer, and he did not make the assertion upon his own experience.—( Hear.) Now, he (Sir J. Graham).aw an Hon. Friend of his near him who was a preserver of game, and with whom he had had the pleasure of shooting in Norfolk, and who he thought could bring abundant proof that the Hon. Member for Durham was mistaken, end that the preservation of game was not incompatible with the highest cultivation.— ( Hear, hear.) As lie (Sir J. Graham) did not intend to op pose the motion, he would not detain the House much longer than to make one observation, which was necessary, in conse quence of the reference made by the Hon. Gentleman to a case of irregular committal. That was a case to which his (Sir J Graham's) attention had been especially turned, and which led to a regulation in his office, and he would state to the House what that was. He lied thought it his duty to direct that, from day to day, collies of all commitments under the game-laws should be sent up and should be regularly examined. Frequently errors were found in the commitments, and these were communicated to the ma gistrates, who in every single case concurred with him, and the penalty was by his advice remitted; or in cases where the pestalty had been inflicted, and it seemed to him to be too se vere, he had been met by the magistrates in the same spirit.— ( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman ( Mr. Fright) was mis taken as to the law, ar.d he had stated the practice somewhat to the disadvantage of the magistrates. He (Mr. Bright) said the game preservers were in the habit of deciding in game cases, whereas the owner of a mill would not be allowed to de cide in a case under the Factories Act. The Right Hon. Baronet read the Factories Act to show that millowners, being magistrates, were not precluded by that Act from sitting on the bench to hear cases under that Act, but that the owner of the mill in which the offence was alleged and his immediate relatives were prohibited from taking part in the de cisions. —(Hear, hear. If in a case under the gatne.laws persons standing in a similar relation to the case were to sit on the bench and aejedicate, he ( Sir James Graham) would have no hesitation in recommending the Lord Chancellor to remove those persons from the commission of the peace.-- ( Cheers.) In making these answers to the Hon. Gentleman, he must also say that he had great satisfaction in support ing the motion —( Hear hear)—with a desire that there should be a full, impartial,' and honest inquiry.—( Hear, hear.) lie hoped the Hon. Gentleman would have the goodness to pest postpone the nomination of the Committee, upon the under standing that by a private examination out of the House they might agree upon an unobjectionable and competent Com mittee. lie was sure that whether the inquiry resulted in a change of the law or not, it would have a great moral effect, and assured the House, on the part of the Government, that that would be, in their estimation, a most happy result, and they would, therefore, give every facility to the investigation. Mr. V. S 111TH regretted the course which was pursued by the Right Hon. Baronet after what he himself ( Sir J. Graham) had acknowledged. He thought the Government ought to have done as Earl Grey's Government had done upon this subject. Having seen the evils which were com pl tined of all over the country, they ought to have brought in a Bill upon their own responsibility. What was to be the result of the Committee? Neither the Hon. Member nor the Right Han. Baronet had said to what the inquiry of the Cum mittee was 'to be directed. The Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bright) had stated the evils of the case with great ability, and the Right Hon. Baronet did not deny their existence; and yet they both allowed them to continue over another season. What was the object of the Committee ? Was it only to ex pose the alleged exaggerations of the Hon. Gentleman, on which the Right Hon. Gentleman had facetiously commented ? A Noble Friend of his had' written a pamphlet, with a view to point out the means by which game might be assessed, but he had since given up the idea as impracticable.—( Hear.) The Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bright) brought forward the question as one of grievance between the farmer and the land lord, which would lead to an interminable inquiry. He thought the inquiry ought to be limited to this point :—What were the remedies to be applied to the acknow ledged evil ?—(Hear, hear) —for he believed there were not halt-a-dozen Gentlemen in the House who denied the existence or the extent of the evils. In 1831 the Duke of Richmond made a speech in the House of Lords, in which he exposed and reprobated the game-laws as they then were, say ing that they widened' the distance between the higher and the middle classes, and condemned to the prison of a felon the unfortunate labourer, who too often could not resist the tempta tion thrown in his way.—( Hear, hear.) In 1831, before the change took place in the law, the committals under the game laws, in England and Wales, were 2,150 ; in the last year, 1844, they were 4,500,. the committals being more than doubled under the change of the law.—( Hear, hear.) He thought it would be impossible to compel men to give up pre serving, or to say that they should preserve only a certain amount.—( Hear, hear.) But he thought' it right to take away from them any encouragement, more than was given to other species of property.--( Hear, hear.) He might be an swered that there was little difference between the penalties of trespass in pursuit of game, and other kinds of trespass. He untended there was too great a difference.—(Hear, hear.) In other kinds of trespass you paid for the amount of dereage ac tually done, but under the game-laws the fines were accumu lative; and for a single act, even of inadvertence, a man' 'might be fined 27/ , when it would be only a feiv shillings for any other trespass.—( Hear, hear.) He thought it was very improper to call game property ; although he admitted that it would be absurd to say that pheasants, which were fed as if in a coop, were free natura, and no man's property. But other kinds of game, of which there was no identity and no reclaimer, were not rightly called property ; and he agreed with the Hon. Member for Durham in asking were they to establish a penal code for their own amusements ?=( Cheers. ) He admitted that. in some respects - the change of the law, in 1831, had been an improvement, but it had in other respects been accompanied by a great aggravation of the former evils. He thought the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite ought to have taken up this subject himself; and, with the majority which he commanded, and the facility with which he managed it—( A laugh)—he would be able to remove some of the evil._( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. V. Smith) did not think the Committee would effect any good ; and he thought it would be as well to postpone legislation on the subject till next year, and that, in the meantime, they should endeavour to remedy the evils as best they could, each in his own district. Mr. DARBY was surprised to hear the Right Hon. Gen tleman taunt the Government with not having introduced any measure on the subject; for, by his remarks in reference to it, he hail involved it in inextricable difficulty and confusion.— ( Hear.) With respect to the seeech of the Hon. Member for Durham, he must confess that to the tone of that speech he thought no one could possibly object. He only hoped that on all future occasions he would adopt a similar tone; and he would then find gentlemen who were eonnemed with the agri cultural districts ready to join with him in doing anything which could be effected for the good of the country. —( Hear, hear.) It appeared that the Hon. Member was not prepared to interfere with private rights. Undoubtedly that part of the subject which was connected with the morality and good con duct of the poor, was weltsvorthy of the consideration of the Committee; but if the Hon. Gentleman supposed that by removing the came-laws they would take away all temptation to crime and make everybody virtuous, he was under a great mis take. lhere would always be persons disinclined to work, and ready to engage in poaching, whatever might be their circum stances. Still he thought that the great point to which the at tention of the Committee should be directed was the moral ef fect of the game-laws.--( Hear, hear.) Mr. H. BERKELEY said he was very unwilling that the debate should terminate without at least one Member of that House expressing his dissent from the positions which the Hon. Member for Durham had assumed. It was not his intention to oppose the appointment of the Committee which the Right lion. Baronet was prepared to concede, but he could not for one moment allow that the reasons which the Hon. Member for Durham had stated for its appointment were valid and sufficient. Indeed, be thought the Hon. Member for Durham owed the concession of this Committee to the peculiar course which he had adopted that night, so very unlike the course which had been adopted throughout the country by those persons, whether orators or writers for the press, who had advocated so strenuously the abolition of the game-laws.—( Hear, hear.) Ho must say that the agitation which had been carried on in reference to that question, ever since the Hon. Member for Durham gave notice of his motion—an agitation with which that lion. Gentleman was connected, and in which he had taken part—was one, the character of which was anything bat creditable.—( Hear, hear.) It was an agitation which, in his own opinion, was very well calculated not to forward the cause, but to make people look upon the course the Hon. Member was pursuing with suspicion. He agreed on many points with the Honourable Member for Durham. Mere was no person in that House who desired an abolition of the corn-laws more than he (Mr. Berkeley) did. He was perfectly contented to be called any thing which Hon. Gentlemen pleased—a radical, a reformer, or, if the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite proferred the term, a Whig-radical—( Laughter)—but he never would assume per sonalities towards those Gentlemen who were opposed to him, and he trusted that he would always be found to give them cre dit for proper motives when he happened to differ from them in opinion. Now, if he followed the agitation touching these game-laws throughout the country, what did he fi id? From east to west, and from north to south, he found the landocracy held up as a set of tyrants. He found the Hoe. Gentleman setting himself forth as the farmer's friend, and in that character striving apparently to set the tenant-farmers and their landlords at variance. Now lie did maintain that such a course of agitation was well calculated to prejudice the Hon. Member's course; and he was very glad that on introducing the subject in that House he had adopted a different mode of proceeding. He had reaped the benefit of the course which he had now pursued by the Government conceding to him the Committee, for he verily believed that for that concession he was indebted to the moderation of the tone which he had assumed. --(Hear, hear.) Butstill he, for one,could not permit the op portunity to pass without expressing his dissent from the opinion that the game-laws were in fault as regarded the crimes and offenc s which had taken plane under them. They might just as well contend that any other statute besides the game-laws was to blame for an excess of crime. Take, for instance, offences against the revenue laws. There was a great similarity in the character and pursuit of the smuggler And no doubt, grea t c h arms f or the poacher.—( Hear. hear.) There was somethi ng adventu rous in ih t i he an li d fe t o h f e letth, which know that at one time more murders , were co mm itt e d un d er the revenue laws than were ever committ e d un d er t h e game laws ?—( Hear, hear.) The lion. Memb er cou ld not b e igno rant of the fact that more' violence was perpet ra t e d, more murders were committed, tinder the f ormer t h an under the latter. But did the Government, on disco ve ring th e extent o f crime which prevailed under the revenue -l aws , i mme di ate l y dissolute. hid, Rut did the Hon. Member assume what the Hon. Gentleman had assumed in the case of the game-laws, that the laws should be abolished on account of the crime which had been committed? No; instead of abolishing the laws, the Government took the opposite course. They strengthened the executive power; they put on a blockade force; they adopted every means to check smuggling; and the consequence was that they did put down the evil.— ( Hear, hear.) But the Hon. Gentleman, and those who agreed 'with him out of that House, contended that the instant crime took place under a statute that statute should be abolished.. Why, it was not the game-laws alone which were disagreeable to a certain class of the community. There were other laws which were equally distasteful to one class of persons frequently referred to in the newspapers—the light fingered gentry.—(Laughter.) There were certain laws which were extremely disagreeable to that portion of society.— (Laughter.) But was lie to be told that because an excess of crime arose uatler particular laws they were therefore to be abolished. Why, if they were to follow the Hon. Gentleman's principle of legislation, the result would be this : If any body of men found pai Ocular laws disagreeable they would only have to offend against them, and to commit murders in doing so, in order to secure their abolition.—(Cries of ,‘ Hear, hear,") Such a principle of legislation was of the most imbecile order. He could imagine nothing more monstrous and ridiculous. It was actually the prin ciple of Old Dogberry, the constable.—(Laughter.) If they took Dogberry's language, word ior word, they would find the opinions of those who advocated the abolition of the game laws precisely simi!ar to those of the weak old constable. If the House would allow him, he would point out the resem blance.—(Laughter.) Dogberry tells the watch (continued the Hon. Gentleman), " that they shall visit all the ale houses, and bid them that are drunk get them to bed ; but if they will not, why, then, let them sleep till they be sober. If we know a man to be a thief, shall we not lay hands upon him ? The most peaceable way, if you know him to be a thief is, let him show himself what he is, and steal himself out of your comoany."—(Laughter.) Exactly the principle of the Hon. Member for Durham. Dogberry let the thief go ; and the Hon. Member would abolish the statute which detained him in custody. The principle was the same ; it was the principle of abolishing all statutes against which offences were committed. Such a principle appeared to him, he repeated, to be absolutely monstrous, and he trusted that the House would not assent to it.—(Hear, hear.) Now, as this Committee was to be appointed, he did trust that it would be a fair one He should like very much to hear to what point their lahoura were to be directed ; for upon that subject. he confessed that he was at present entirely in the dark. If they were to follow the course of the agitation, he must pro nounce the inquiry to be absolutely absurd. The Mem ber confessed that he was perfectly ignorant of farming, that 116 knew nothing of sporting.--( Hear, hear.) He had shown a great want of knowledge of ornithology and natural history. Honourable Members who came to that Howe impressed with an idea of the destructiveness of geme, were utterly ignorant of the subject ; and persons should know more about it before they took part in the discussion. He would appeal more especially to those lion. Members who were agriculturists, and who were not ashamed, also, to be called sportsmen, for really, if he might judge from the accounts which he had read of this agitation, to be either an agriculturist or a sportsman was to be one of a denounced class.—( Heer,• hear, and laughter.) He would ask whether it would not appear from those accounts as though the pheasants, the partridges, and game in general, had not a moment to themselves from year to year, but were constantly employed in devouring grain ?—( Laughter.) Now, did the Hon. Member for Durham know that, for six months in the year, pheasants and partridges could hardly be called granivorous ?—( Hear, hear.) From the time that the heat of the sun brought the insect egg into life, from that moment the quantity of grain destroyed by pheasants and partridges was actually as nothing. He could tell the Hon. Gentleman thathe had seen pheasants on their nests tempted with grain, and actually turning away from Hear, hear.) He appealed to any Hon. Gentleman whether he ever saw a pheasant go near a stack of wheat after the month of April? The fact was, that they fed on insects and grubs ; and they were particularly destruc tive to that injurious insect the wire-worm. It could not be pretended that they eat the corn in the month of May. The injury which they committed must take place when the grain was ripe. But who ever heard of a pheasant seizing ears of corn before the corn had been cut ? The pheasant, as many lion. Members whom he addressed well knew, if he might use the expression, was a gleaner and not a reaper. To ju!ge, however, from the writings and speeches of those who agitated 'this question, and . especially from those of the Anti-Corn• law League, it would appear as if the pheasants were continually eating wheat and barley.—( Hear; hear.) The niost extraordinary statements were made, and the most extraordinary abuse was lavished on the proprietors. Henry Baring was depicted as a kind of Robinson Crusoe, going about destroying game with four guns on his shoulder. —(Laughter.) With respect to the petition froth Ruislip, presented that evening, he had no hesitation in saying, that the meeting at which that petition was agreed to was a most disreputab e meeting. He would tell the Hon. Gentleman that his friend Mr. Jenkins—(Laughter)--the gentleman who was found speaking at that meeting, weet,to the beer houses on Saturday night to get signatures to the petition.-- (Laughter.) That he would prove; and he would prove like wise, that the petition was got up merely on account of a feud between two farmers, and in point of feet there was not game enough in the neighbourhood to injure any farmers whatever. But now, he would ask, what were the Committee to do with reference l to this matter ? Was the House to legislate so that game should be entirely extirpated in this country ? Should they favour the intrusion ()flan armed invasion on landed estates ? Should they deny to a man the right to possess the beast and ' the bird which he bred and fed ?--( Hear, hear.) Somet'iing had been said about the impossibility or impropriety of making birds and beasts private property, because they had locomotive powers. Why, if they were to carry out that that principle, they would sanction the Duke of Richmond's being deprived of his salmon, asserting that every man had a right to hook it.— ( Laughter.) Dovecote pigeons were often seen to follow men as they sowed grain, and there was a penalty of half-a-guinea for shooting one. He dare say the Hon. Member for Durha,n would be exceedingly angry it any one were to shoot one of hit pigeons.--( Hear, hear.) If those who agitated this question took care not to go to a Re publican meeting for golden maxims, how came it that they had not heard a word as to' the practice of any country ex cept England 2—( Hear, hear.) 'Where was the pattern, Re publican America'? Where was the El Dorado—the Utopia which would, on other questions, have been referred to? The fact was that America had game-laws infinitely more stringent than those of Great Britain. He had there an abstract of the laws of New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey, inclusive of Duchess' County, Queen's County, King's County, and Suffolk County, and he had selected States in which the negro and the white man were upon equal terms. Now, there a law existed protecting the birds and beasts during the breeding season ; and though they might be considered as firm natura, he would show that they were treated strictly as private property. The penalty for shooting a deer out of sea son was 25 dollars; and the law went on from a deer, through a number of other animals, down to the miserable musk-rat, for shooting which the penalty was one dollar. What would the House think if an Hon. Member were to get up and propose a penalty of five shillings for killing a hedgehog ? The magistrates of America, under this law, could act on an information only, and if it was merely suspected that a red deer's akin was concealed in a man's house, they could be corn pelled to issue a search warrant, to enter that house and make a search, and if a red deer's skin was found, the person was liable to a penalty of twenty-five dollars.—( Hear, hear.) For birds, also, the same kind of penalties existed; for killing grouse, or as they were called in some of the Acts heath-hens, for pheasants, for partridges, and quail ; when he said phea sants he ought t.) explain that though this was the word he found in the Acts, the bird itself, he believed, was really a kind of partridge. The penalties were extended even to the migratory woodcock.—( Hear ' hear.) Now let them tu r n to the laws of the State of New Jersey. That State more resembled England than almost any other State of the Union ; it was very populous, and it was adjacent to the States of New York and Philadelphia. The first game-law of this State to which he should call their attention, although there were others passed before it, was of the date of 1771, when New Jersey was a British colony. That law prohibited any person from carrying a gun over another man's property without leave, under a penalty of forty shillings and costs.—( Hear, hear.) There was the same penalty for setting snares for deer, for carrying spears, or pointed sticks, or for hunting with dogs. If any stranger in the colony should shoot over another man's land, without leave, he was liable to a penalty of 5/. and the forfeiture of the gun.—( Hear.) Now, it might be said, that this law was passed in 1771. But when these republicans shook off the yoke of Great Britain, did they shake off the game-laws ? By no means. At that time they were not in a humour to find much to admire in British institutions; yet they found no fault with the game-laws. In 1820 they increased their stringency; in 1837, they enacted a supplement to these laws, and in 1838, a second supplement. But there was one more law he ought to mention, which prohibited hunting even over the waste lands . of the State. It enacted that all persons except freeholders, or the sons of freeholders, above eighteen years of age, should be prohibited from hunting on he waste and unimproved lands of the State, under a penalty of 20s. for each offence. Now, at some future time, the Hon. Member for Durham would no doubt visit the city of Philadelphia, in which he would find many respectable men of his own peculiar class. He could say that for no class had he (Mr. H. Berkeley) more respect. He numbered many friends among the Society of Friends, and he could say that that class was a most respectable, kind, and hospitable one. He had no doubt that the Honourable Member for Durham would be made very welcome in the city of Philadelphia. In that State he would find pheasants, and quails, and partridges, and birds of all descriptions, with which the Hon. Gentleman might amuse hitn , elf.—( Laughter.) But let the Hon. Gen tleman beware how he carried that natural instinct, which he said all men possessed, to kill game wherever they saw it ; let him beware how he indulged his propensity for poaching— . . . (Laughter)—in the adjoining State of New Jersey, because he would find it rather more expensive than in England.— ( Hear, hear, and laughter.) And let him give the Hon. Member a word of advice ; if he carried out with him one of Manton's or Purday's guns, he might find the penalty by the forfeiture of the gun, amounting to 60/. or 701. —( Hear, hear, and laughter.) He had to thank the House for the patience with which they had heard him. He could only say, in conelusion, that he trusted that this Committee, be it what it might, would prove successful. He would not oppose it ;_ but what on ear th it s at t en ti on was to b e d irecte d to h e cou ld not conceive. Captain RODS said he had been much pleased with the tone of the speech of the Hon. Member fur Durham ; it was different from what had been expected from him, and he was sure that there was b u t one f ee li ng on th a t s id e o f the House, that it was an able and statesmanlike speech.—( Hear, hear. ) At the same time, he could not brio , himself to believe many of the stat emen t s ma d e b y t h e Hon. Member. They were too exaggerated ; and he had lived too long in a sporting coun try not to know that they were exaggerated. He held in his hand a pamphlet on the subject of the game-laws that had gone through three editions. That pamphlet recerred to a nobl relative of his, and stated that in a cover on his estate, in the course of last year, a keeper was killed by poachers. Ile could only say that, to the best of his belief, for the last hun dred years, no gamekeeper or poacher had been killed or hurt on that estate. Again, the pamphlet said that on his property two keepers had lately shot themselves, searing that, on the arrival of hi s noble re l a ti ve f rom Irelan d,' they would be found fault with for the want of game. This pam phlet had been in circulation for three months, and he was sure the House would excuse him if be said a few words in defence of his own brother. The first man who destroyed himself had been a keeper for thirty years, and was, at the time, heads keeper. He had been in a very bad state of health, and had offered to give up his situation, but he hsd been urged to retain it, and his son was taken to assist him. But his state of health had such an effect on his mind that he destroyed himself. It was a most extraordinary fact that on the following day another of the keepers, who had charge of the greyhounds, de stroyed himself also. His wife had gone to church, one of the children was in the garden, and another was playing about the house, when he took down his gun, and whether by accident or do:ign was not known, but he was found dead. Now, as to the question itself, it had been said that it was absolutely necessary, on some occasions, to deduct as much as 20 per cent. from the rent of estates, as the compensation for the damage done by game. But it. should be understood that, in many cases, the land was let 20 per cent. less than the value on that account. That was the fact, to his certain knowledge. The Hon. Member for Durham complained that the very circumstance of pre serving game had a tendency to affect the morality of th la bouring classes, and that gentlemen had no right to do it. Why the same argument applied" to the case of a shop keeper exposing his goods in the street. There was a tendency in the poor labourer to steal game, and the starving man in a town might be tempted to steal the goods before him. But what was the reason that the agricultural labourer was a poacher, and stole pheasants and hares in preference to ducks and fowls? For this reason, that they could be sworn to, and the others could riot. But the same men would, in all probability, go on in crime till they stole sheep and cattle; but there was one thin ' , that checked them, and that was, that they might be hanged or transported for the offence. He had lived all his life in a country full of game, and well pre served, and in his part of Suffolk there were no better disposed people on the face of the earth, more hardworking, or indus trious. There had been no incendiary fire within ten miles of hi. house, and nothing could be better than the feeling that existed generally among the people.—( Hear, hear.) But he could show a case which had occurred in his own county, on the estate of a most amiable nobleman, who had written a pamphlet on the game laws. He also preserved his game, but in a peculiar mode, inasmuch as he did not allow any keepers to watch by night; but ho allowed his neighbours to shoot over the estate on one proviso—that they should not employ any labourer on their property who had been detected in poaching. What was the result? Throu c h this nobleman's not employing keepers by night, the whole parish was full of poachers from one end to the other, and they frequently extended their ravages to the surrounding neighbourhood. When they were asked why they did not keep in their oe xi place, as there was game enough there? they said, " Oh, the pheasant over all this property are so badly fed that they won't sell— (Laughter)--and therefore we steal yours, which we can find a market for !"—(Laughter.) And these very men, whom this nobleman tried to keep pure and moral, were some of the most determined sheep•stealers in the whole country round.— (Hear, hear.) Now, that was the difference between a coun try well preserved and one that was not, or only half preserved. There was no doubt that the game-laws, like every other Aut of Parliament, might sometimes require alteration and revi sion, but he trusted they would not go in their legisl tion to the extent of destroying the game in this country ; it gave an in ducement to young men of family and fortune to live on their own estates ; if they contracted the habit of living on th Con tinent, they generally came back insignificant and worthless members of society.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) In dealing eith the game-laws, thereore, he hoped that they would pre serve entire al 'he rights of property, Mr. HUME said, when the Hon. Member for Bii-tol took the laws of America, anal compared them with those of England, he ought to take them as a whole ; there might be some of the laws of America which he (Mr. Hume) should condemn as much as the lion. Member, and some that he might be disposed to adopt. The Hon. Member had not done justice to his Hon. Friend the Member for Durham; his Hon. Friend did not wish to affect the prosperity of any individual, but he wished to alter the administration of the laws which, at the present moment, were producing great evil, and which no man could look on without being appalled. Neither of the Hon. Members who had spoken had directed their attention io that point ; he could not think why the Hon. Member for Bristol was not as anxious to have the Committee aia. pointed as the Honourable Member for Durham, because the Honourable Member (Mr. 11. Berkeley) loved sport, and wished for its continuance.—( Hear. ) If so, he ought to try and have the law so altered that it might lie exercised without causing public feeling to be opposed to it. Publie feeling was at present so opposed to the system that societies had sprung up in all parts of the country for the purpose of denouncing it. Could anything denote more plainly that a Conviction of the evil of this system had taken a deep root in society., and required consideration ? He did think that the Hots: Member for Durham deserved great credit for the manner in which lie had brought this question forward, and he was su. e the country at large, after the speech his Hon. Friend had delivered, and the result it had produced, would be grateful to him for his exertions. Why, let them lo ik at the calendars of crime and see the condition of the population of the country. Why, there were 4.540 persons convicted of offences against the game-laws. It might be a matter of some curiosity for the House to know that in 1811 there were in all England and Wales only 127 convictions for offences against those laws ; the whole number of convictions in 1811 was, in England anal Wales, '3,163; and in 1843 there were 4,540 convictions for offences against the game laws alone. The Hon. Member for Durham had evi dently produced an impression by his speech that g reat evils dial exist, and these evils cri e d a l ou d f or reme d y . He hoped the Committee would not proceed hastily, or that they should attempt to legislate this year ; but that it would meet from day to day, anal submit a proper report to the House, on which the Government would found a legislative measure. They saw this progessive increase in crime, they were demoralising society by this state of things, and something was evidently wrong : they were not then prepared to state precisely where the evil was, but he believed the result of this inquiry would tend to correct that evil. He was sure that not only t hose who cared nothing for game, but even those Members of that House who were earnest sportsmen, would thank his Hon. Friend for the result of his labours. Mr. LIDDELL said he had heard with a great deal of in terest the speech of the Hon. Member for Durham, and had listened with a great deal of pain to some of the facts he had brought under the notice of the House. He did not rise to offer any opposition to the appointment of the Committee, but he did think it would have been more satisfactory if some Hon. Gentleman on the other side of the House, and enter taining the same views as the Hon. Member, had indicated or shadowed forth the extent or nature of the alterations to which their attention was to be directed. His paternal property was situated in the midst of a populous neighbourhood, it covered a large area of ground, and for many years the game upon it had been carefully preserved. And he was bound to say that in that immense population he had seen nothing, speaking of their general character, but the most excellent disposition, and a desire to pay a due observance to the laws. But at the same time, among such a number, some evil dispositions would exist and it was with great pain he had seers upon his father's pro perty outrages of a most formidable and distressing nature. ( Hear, hear.) There had been one case of murder, and, in the present year, four frightful outrages, in which, without the slightest provocation, two keepers were fired at, anal wounded in a most serious manner, the charge lodging in the breast and shoulder of one of them, and had the shot been but the slightest space nearer the heart, the man must have been killed. After these outrages, the subject engaged the serious attention of his fattier and the whole family, but, after due attention, and after making up their minds to sacrifice entirely the game on their property, they came to the deliberate conclusion that they could not do anything of the kind; not for the sake of the ganie, but for the peace and security of the property and the neighbourhood, they were compelled to keep a watch to protect the property from the incursions of poachers. He was certainly glad to see this inquiry insti tuted before the House, and he would thankfully adopt any suggestion that could be made by those who had thought them selves ealled on by a sense of duty to make such a proposition. But he really thought some suggestion ought to have been thrown out, as to the amount and extent of the alteration re quired For they must be careful in this matter ; while lamenting the number of convictions they saw under the law as it existed, they must take care they did not make matters worse instead of better. He was perfectly convinced that if the game-laws were done away with altogether, and killing game were made an invasion of property instead, depending en tirely on an extension of the Trespass Act, in populous neigh bourhoods every third person they met would be armed with a gun. On holidays, and Sundays, and every time of a temporary suspension of labour, they would meet marauding parties on the public roads ; all these dangers had to be avoided in any alterations they might suggest. It was fair that they should consider who were the parties to blame in these outrages ; let him put a case to the House. In the immediate neighbour hood of that House there were some beautiful walks and plea sure-grounds laid out for the recreation of the inhabitants of the metropolis. In these grounds there was a curious collec• lion of waterfowl, which might be seen every day, and fur nished a great deal of amusement to the public. What would be said if a man, because his family were starving, armed himself with a gun, shot two or three of the ducks, and when interfered with by the park-keeper, should knock him down with the butt-end of it—who was to blame there ? The law that protects the property, or the individual that breaks the law ? It was the same in the case of game; if a poacher went into a preserve and shot pheasants and hares, and is interfered with by the person to whom the law gives the right of protecting the property, was the law, therefore, to blame for the outrage ? The question di vided itself into two distinct heads—the one the question of the damage done by the game to agricultural produce, and the other was the question of the outrages to whi c h h e h a d a l rea d y re ferred. Now, the amount of grein destroyed by these creatures was, he believed, greatly exaggerated. In almost every question between landlord and tenant, where an excessive quantity of game was preserved, a compensation was always given to the tenant, and if the Hon. Member for Durham, in pursuance of his vocation as a member of the Anti-corn-law League, and in support of his argument of the diminished supply of the food of the people, took this destruction of grain as an instance, he at tached no weight to the argument whatever. Though a certain amount of grain was destroyed, yet another article of food was supplied in its place for consumption, more nourishing, more grateful to the palate, and equally adapted for the market. Mr. AGLIONBY was much gratified at the course that had been pursued on the present occasion, and he was only sur prised that any Hon. Member coul I object to the course the Right Hon. Baronet had taken. He thought there would be great good effected by an inquiry before a fair Committee. He did not believe that the preservation of game was generally in. jurious to the land, and as a proof of that he might state that he knew an instance where the ' name was preserved as much by the tenants as th e l an dl or d s . With regard to the poor he was glad that the subject would be inquired into, because if it was found that the game-laws increased the demoralisation of the poor, that calamity would be averted.—( Hear, hear.) It must not, however, be supposed that he thought the game-laws had any such effect.—( Hear, hear.) lie believed that the statements that had been made were greatly exaggerated, and he hoped that good results would come from the inquiry, that it would take place immediately, and that the report would soon be laid on the table. " No, no," and " Hear, hear.") In the parish of Ruislip, which had been referred to by an Hon. Member, it was stated that the greater number of labourers employed ti ere came from distant parts of the country, for the burners eonneeted with the preservation of game would not employ men who had ever been detected p(iachitig.—( Cries of " No, no," and " Hear, hear.") It was astonishing to him that gentlemen of England could sit down to enjoy themselves, when they knew that their pleasures cost so high a price to the poorer classes of their countrymen. It was deeply to be rejetted that this state of feeling should exist ; but although that Committee were ap pointed, it would be useless unless it came to a more rational conclusion than that referred to by the Right Hon. Baronet. He had been himself a preserver of game, and he knew that a system might be introduced which would effectually preserve the game without being an annoyance to those around them. His assurance to the preserves was this. If they wanted a day's sport for themselves or friends, and gave him notice, the land would be kept quiet for souse days before. He had caught a poacher once, and how did he act on that occasion. He would tell the House. He said to him, " I presume you are in distress and cannot find employment to support yourself and your family. lam sure you are in dis tress or you would nut do this. Come to my house and I will give you a joint of meat, and when you want food for yoerself and family come to me and you will have it." Ile replied, " You will give me meat, then depend in it I will never snare another hare. "—(Laughter.) Then why should riot Honourable Members adopt this system ?--(Laughter.) Such would be better than invoking the vengeance of the law upon those poor creatures, who were probably driven by dis tress to this crime, in order to obtain a meal for their wives and children. The evil of preserving game had now increased to an enormous magnitude. The Hon. Member for Montrose had stated that between 4,000 and 5,000 persons had been convicted in 1843, and the term of their imprisonments, taking the average, amounted to six weeks for each person.' 'lVow, he would ask Hon. Members if the pleasure they derived from their sport would compensate to themselves for the curse these laws inflicted on the country ? Ile did not believe that when the amount of demoralisation induced by these laws was con sidered, that they could possibly desire them to be continued. There was a very great difficulty with regard to a remedy on this subject. The Hon. Member for Durham, who had devoted so much time to the subject, had explained to the House that remedy, in a speech seldom equalled, and he (Mr. Wakley) was of opinion that the time would ultimately arrive when game, by an increasing population, would be driven out of the country, as the Red Indians in America were by the encroachmeets of a more civilised people.—( Cheers.) Mr. NE WDIGATE felt bound, by the reference which had several times that night been made to the parish of Ruislip, to give some explanation upon a subject with which he was inti mately conversant. It had been stated that the inhabitants of Ruislip had been oppressed by the expense of maintain ing a police force which had been almast wholly em ployed in the suppression of poaching. He ( alr.,New digate) denied that statement, and he called upon the Right Honourable Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department to ascertain whether there was any reason,for such an allegation. In many instances of trials at the sessions he did not remember of policemen giving evidence in cases of infringement of the game-laws. He was glad to see that the landed proprietors were willing to submit their plea sures as well as their properties to the examination of this Committee. Mr. COBDEN said that although there was a general con currence in the tone and temper of his Hon. Friend ih bring leg the subject under the notice of the House, there was a great disposition to attribute exaggeration to his statements j. and when he mentioned the quantity of produce of farms which had been consumed by game, there were loud cries of " Oh ! oh!" The fact was, the county Members knew less of the grievances and circumstanees of the farmers than the mem bers of that much maligned body, the Anti-Corn-law League. If there were any one subject in which landholders; game keepers, and labourers were agreed upon, it was in a thorough detestation of the game-laws.—(oh, oh.) Hon. Members might cry " Oh, oh." That cry would go forth to the coin , try, hut it would rather strengthen than alter that univertal agreement.— (Hear, hear.) He would venture to say that he had conversed and shook hands with more tenant-farmers, ten to one, than any Member of that House.—(Laughter.) With regard to the exaggeration of the statements, as they were called, of the cost of keeping game, he had been in Scotland himself last year, at Cupar, in Fife. A farmer wrote him a letter, which requested a public meeting in Cupar, in order that he might state the grievance s which the game-laws entailed upon him. The farmer said that the Anti-Corn.law League should take up the question of the game-laws as well as the corn-I aws.—(lronical cheers from the Tory benches.) This farmer gave his name, and he had no objection to state it. It was Andrew M'Farlane, who lived near Cupar. "In order to convey to you some idea (this farmer writes) of the destruction by game, I beg to inform you, that in 700 Scotch acres, held by me and four farmers, from Captain Wemyss, who had a seat in this House—(Laughter)—that in 1841 we had 7001. awarded to us by arbitration, for the destruction by game, and even that did not indemnify us for the damage done. This showed what a loss of human food these game-laws entailed. He repeated that the most entire ignorance prevailed among the landlords of the condition of the tenant farmers. It was easy to talk of exaggeration, but he would point his finger to the r e p or t s on t h e table of that House. Was it any exaggeration to say that the game-laws were a monstrous evil, when 4,500 persons were convicted under them in one year, and forty transported in ten years ? Twenty-seven persons had been shot in game preserving. Sixty thousand persons took out licences to shoot. In order that 60,000 persons should have amusement, 4,500 were convicted and forty transported ; so that for every fifteen licensed sportsman, one man was con victed and punished. You think that exaggeration and com plain of it as an evil ; and the Hon. Gentleman who hadjust sat down found fault with the Anti-Corn-law League, as did the Hon. Member for Bristol, for the part they took in this matter. He pleaded guilty to the accusation that the Anti-Corn-law League had been the means of bringing this question before the House. Nothing but the force of public opinion could have compelled the Government to grant the Cominitt ee.— ( Cries of " Oh, oh.") He said again, it was public opinion that had effected it. Ho did not want to tome there as th • farmer's friend. The farmers had suffered too much•from pro fessing friends already—( Cries of " Hear, hear")—and the very best services he could render to the tenant-farmer would be to advise them not to believe in professing friends, but to trust to themselves, and make up their minds to enter into an organisation from which they might expect much more than from the Legislature. Was it net most monstrous that when the farmer had taken his land his produce should be destroyed? A let to B a farm, for which B paid him the rent of the day ; but then A let to C the right of shooting over this farm, the game which the farmer led, but for which the landlord was paid. The farmer paysithe rent, the game destroys the corn, but the farmer must pay for the landlord's profit or amusement. It would he just as reasonable to let land to a farmer, and then to give permission to a butcher to turn his cattle over the land.—( Hear, hear.) It had been already stated, and he firmly believed it, that five hares destroyed as much as one sheep. Such was the condi tion of the tenant farmer. He did not believe that any good would come from the Legislature on this subject, but the-in troduction and discussion of the question would give the far mers an opportunity of stating their grievances, and . of uniting among themselves, so as to force Parliament finally to abolish those odious grievances.—(Cheers.) Mr. A DDERLEY said he was anxious for the appointment of the Committee. Mr. WODEHOUSE repudiated the insinuation, so often thrown out, that the landlords were selfish and cared for no other nterests but their own. Mr. FORBES wished to know if the Hon. Member for Durham had alluded to him in the course of his speech ? Mr. BRIGHT said he had already told the Hon. Gentle.. man, in private, that h e did no t: a ll u d e to hi m. ; Mr. CARLISLE bore testimony to the proper manner in which the magistrates of Ashby-de-la-Zouch had always ad ministered justice. He confessed he was not favourable to the present game-laws. He thought the damage which had been committed on crops was rather attributable to those more in nocent hares arid rabbits which the Hon. Member for Bristol had shown could do but little harm. Sir ROBERT PEEL thought, that with the evidence of increased crime before them, any resistance to an inquiry on the part of the Government would be impolitic. At the same time, he must confess that he did not think any beneficial alteration could be made in the law. They would find that the prejudice against the game-laws arose more out of the excessive preservation of game than anything else, and the change must be a moral one instead of a legal one. He ap prehended the law, as it stood, was equally as just to the tenant as the landlord, but when leases were granted a clause was introduced, reserving or otherwise the right of the game to the landlord. If, therefore, a tenant thought the preserva tion of game upon the land adverse to his interests, let him object to it before he made the contract with his landlord. But, really, the evil lay in the excessive extent to which game was preserved by certain parties. It they wished to derive pleasure from sporting, let them enjoy it in the way their forefathers did. The change, he thought, rested with the landlord rather than in any altera tion in the law. Indeed, he thought an alteration in the law would materially affect the rights of property without re moving the evil, and it was now too late to go back to the time when the sale of game was illegal. Certainly they could not alter the law in that respect. He cordially concurred in the appointment of the Con.mittee, and hoped they would approach the conside ration of the subject in the same spirit and temper which had characterised that debate. As he stated before, lie despaired of any alteration being made in the state of the law ; but he trusted that, if no alteration were made, the proprietors of land would see the necessity of regulating their conduct according to the prevailing feeling amongst the rural population of the country. 'I hey might create a better feeling amongst their tenants by joining with them in their sports ; and he trusted that in future his Hon. Friends would adopt this course. lie believed, in the first place, that the complaints against the excessive preservation of game were well founded, and if this evil were removed he thought that it would reduce the amount of crime. It was highly creditable to his Hon. Friends who had taken part in the discussion, that they had consented to a full and impartial inquiry. Nothing could be more honourable than their conduct, nothing could be more marked than their desire to have the matter properly investigated. They threw aside the mere consideration of preserving game, for the paramount object of securing the peace and good order of so ciety. lie repeated, nothing could be more honourable than the course they had pursued that evening, determined as they were, been thrown againstan y reference th em,t to o c any o-o iv ratateurwitithwthhiec:hHmonig.hGtenhtlave: Colonel SIBTHORP would not oppose the motion, because he thought they ought to have inquiry on the subject. —( Hear, hear.) The speech of the lion. Member for Durham seemed to him to have been founded on the supposition that the greatest ill-will existed between the landlord and the tenant larmer. He cared nothing about game, but this he would tell the lion. Member for Durham, that if he caught him on his preserves using any of his snares, he should not be lung in ap prehending him.—( A laugh. ) Mr. G. BERKELEY would not have addressed the House, had he not been particularly alluded to by the Hon. Member for Durham. He must confess, , looking at the speech that had been made by the liononrable Member for Durham, that he could hardly bring himself to be lieve that it was him that made it.—( Hear, hear.) It had been said that it was net the labourer that poached, but the house less wanderer. Now, he did not believe that such was the case, because he was convinced that the labourer, who was in constant pay, was the criminal. He denied that the preserva tion of game caused crime ; and as a proof of that he referred to several returns, which showed that crime was greater in parts where game was net preserved, than where it was. The Hon. Member for Montrose had said that there was greater ci ime committed in consequence of the game-laws now, than there was in 1811. 'Why, what was the fact? Why, that the game-laws were ten times more stringent in that year than at present. He had not the slightest objection to inquiry, in fact he demanded it ; but what he asked for was this, that the tenant-farmers should not be set against their landlerds by false promises.—.( Hear, hear. ) Mr. EStJOTT wished to bear his testimony to the able manner in which the Hon. Alember for Durham had brought this subject forward.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member said that before that statute was passed, the restrictions on poaching were much more severe and stringent than those now in ope ration. The protection of game seemed to proceed en the principle that it facilitated the sale of game. It confirmed a property in game, and it was necessary, therefore, that they should put heavier penalties on poaching to increase that pro tection. Now that seemed to hill the most vicious course of legislation that could be adopted. They had heard the Learned Judges say that one of the worst things of which a prosecutor could be guilty was the holding out a temptation that poverty could hardly withstand, and that woe also a reason for not granting the costs of the prosecution to shopkeepers and others who exposed their wares in the street. The existing game laws gave an incentive to the poacher, by providing a market for his game, and then, as soon as he obtained this market, they increased the penalties for a trans gression of the law. He believed that there was another point that greatly increased the evil, and that was the frequency o f summary convictions. It would not do to leave the la.!, in the hands of in th toe o ff s e e ct w . ho h lt ad the wasa d g i r dl ea c t u e l s t t iss ,suebieibcl interest in a ,iato c up r e ry o: he and becausetrusted it of wouldtha very t beou r t e e a r s e o , n i an u inquiry ponwi was called ice fo o r r , and ill feeling to those poachers or to those who gave rise to poaching by preserving game. H e would not wish to put down fi e ld sports, but he believed with the Hon. Member wh o h a d last spoken, that there was nothin g in this inquiry to interfere with the preservation of their sports. Mr. WAK LEY would make one or two observations, which were prompted by the remarks of the lion. Member for West Gloucestershire, who had devoted much time and attention to this subject, and what was his allegation? That poaching was not committed by houseless wanderers, not by strangers, not by vagrants, but by the agricultural labourers, and in what pro portion ? In 99 cases out of 100, he stated that the offence of poaching was committed by that class. If that were true, and it was not denied—he believed it approached the truth--but if it were proved, could the game-laws be continued? They must be admitted, in that case, to be the most injurious and demoralis ing laws in the country. What was the condition of the agri cultural labourer after being detected poaching? Would the farmers employ him? No. He dared not employ him, or he might lose the occupation of his fa rm . —(C r i es o f " Oh, oh," men opposite to obtain this inquiry. WINDOW-TAX. Lord DUNCAN begged leave to withdraw his motion, which was to the effect—that the taxes levied on windows In Great Britain are unjust, unequal in their operation, and most ve oppressiwho are least able to bear there, and should i mm ediately eci r y epealed ; and to giv e not i ce t h at he would bring it on on the 13 th of March. EMPLOYMENT IN WORKHOUSES . to bo those especially Captain PECHELL begged to move " That there be forth with laid before this House a return from the Boston Union, stating whether the pauper inmates thereof are, or have been. since the formation of the said union, employed in grinding or crushing bones by means of mills, machinery, or otherwise, to. gether with the date of the erection of such mills or machinery. • and the names of the chairman and vice-chairman of the board of guardians of the said union at the period; also, the cost of the said bones, includinc, the expenses of carriage and other incidental expenses, and amount which the same have pro dnced in their manufactured state, and whether the sates have been sold by tender, or at a fixed price or otherwise."--- Agreed to. COMPANY'S CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION BILL, This Bill was read a second time. PROPERTY-TAX. The Property-tax Bill was read a second-time. STAMPS DUTIES ASSIMILATION BILL. This Bill was read a second time. ~ ~ GLASGOW JUNCTION RAILWAY. . • : The Committee on standing orders reported, that the order had b'en complied with in this Bill. LONDON AND BRISTOL JUNCTION RAILWAY. The standing orders were reported to have been complied with in this Bill. YORK AND NORTH MIDLAND RAILWAY. The Committed reported that the standing orders had been compl ed with in this Bill. The House then adjourned at Eleven o'Cleck. CHEAP TRIP TO LONDON.—The Corialpitte a th• Great National Anti-COrn-law Bazaar intend to make-ar rangements with all the lines leading to London, for cheap trips, during the mouth of May.Aext.—leceds 41Iercti.r44 ~; ~, << 1