The Sun.
London, England, 1825-03-05 00:00:00

PARLIAALENT.

•
tIOUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 4.
COMMISSION.
The Royal Assent was given by Commission to the Twenty
MirlionwExchequer Bills 'Bill, The -Annual Indemnity-Bill,
and‘the"Transfer in Aids Bill. The Commissioners were the
Lord Chancellor, •the -Marquis ..of- ,Wincheater; mid Lord
Melville.

CORN LAWS.
Earl DARNLEY presented a petition 'from the inhabitants
of the town of Colne, in the county of Lancaster, against the
Corn Laws.—Laid on the table. ,
Lord MELVILLE gave notice, that on Monday next he
should move for the appointment of a ComMittee to consider
the Laws respecting the Elecaon,of Scotch ", 7

_ -'eers.
CA THO LIC -ASAOCIA TION,. ; • -t•
The Earl of LAUDERDALE presented a petition from tile
Roman Ckitholics of Macro*, in. the County of Cork, against
the Bill relative to. Irish Illegal:Associations.
- SMALL DEB:I S. . •
Lord KENYON presented'a petition from the-illerchirms- of
Lowth, in the County of Lincoln, praying for some alteration in
the Laws for the Recovery of Small Debts. - e•
Lord HOLLAND presented a petition' of a similar nature
from the 'Merchants and Bankers of the Borough: of New
Walton. • • • '

1 FOREIGN IRON.
Lord CALTHORPE •
presented a petition frcm the Directors
of the Chamber of Manufacturers and Commerce in the• city
of Birmingham, praying fora Reduction in the Mich.'s on •Iron.
The Noble Lord said, that he concurred in the prayer of the
petition, which stated that the most beneficial effects would re-
sult from the reduction they hoped for. Ile was glad to find
that his Majesty's. Ministers had confirmed the hopes of the
country by reducing the duties on Foreign Iron. Ile hoped`
they would, also, at no very distant period, find it convenient to
remove the restrictions on- other articles, which were primary
articles of manufacture.—Laid on the table.
SCOTCH JUDICATURE BHA,
• On the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR, thelfousa
went into a Committee on the Scotch Judicature Bill.
The Earl of ROSEBERRY said, that he intended to
make some observations on the Bill, but be would. defer
them until the second reading, as lie understood it was. hi-
tended to make several alterations, some of which he mightluiye
himself proposed.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that what he pyopos-
ed to do was to let the Bill go through the Committee, pro
forma, and on Wednesday next he would appoint a stay,
when it was most convenient to their Lordships, to have rt
again committed. - '

-The Earl of LAUDERDALE moved the insertion of A.
clause, that Copies of all Acts ofSederunt of the Court of Ses-
sion should be transmitted to both Houses of Parliament. -
Lord _MELVILLE. did not see any objection to the motion
of the Noble Earl.--The Report was then received.
" IRISH UNLAWFUL ASSOCIATIONS
On the motion of the Earl of LIATERPOOL, the Nbu•se
went into a Committee on the ,Irish Unlawful • Associations
Bill.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH said, he felt very strongly on
the subject of the Bill, and should certainly conceive•it' leis
duty to oppose it on the third reading, whenever that might:be.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL—On Ilonday next.
The Report was then received, and the Earl of 1.117.14R-
P00L unwed the third reading of the Bill Un Monday next.

SPRING GUNS.
Lorti SUFFIELD rose to move the second reading °flits
Bill for declaring. Spring guns illegal. The Noble Lon': said,'he
meant briefly to, refer to certain cases on this subject, AVliich had
been decided in. Courts of Law; but in doing so he was happy
it would not be necessary for him to occupy lunch of their Lord-
ships' time. He thought, however, that it would not h treat-
ing their-Lordships with proper respect if he did not submit 10
them his view of the state of the law as it now exists.. Awlie
had already observed, there was no distinct law respecting ihe
employment of spring guns. In most-of the cases which had
come before. the Courts, theF.Tudges hail heel] guided in their'ae-
cisions by analogy and inference. ;From an examination of the
law books and eases which have been reported, it would appear
that the setting of spring guns was considered illegal ; and se-
condly, that in those cases in which the setting of these w&a-
pons had been supposed to be legal, their use had been regard-
ed as contrary to humanity, and those principles of moral .jus-
tice on which all law ought to be founded. The Noble Lord
then cited the case of Beer v. Lord Cawdor's game-keeper, and
several other cases, in which Lord Ellenborough had ~hekk
that persons were not justifiable in inflicting by the.inealis
of such weapons, the penalty of death, tudess the indivi-
dual who might expose himself' to the hazard of destrug-
tion was in the act of committing•a capital felony. Ile
also mentioned the case of a boy, who, thOugh guilty of a
trespass in cutting a stick from a hedge,.. got 1601. damages
for being wounded by a spring gun. A man was tried-some
years ago at the Old Bailey for shooting another who petz,:on.-
ated a ghost. The Jury wished to bring in .a Verdict of inapt_
slaughter, but the Judge refused it, and told them it• must'
either be "murder" or" as the personating a ghost
was not a felony. In a case in which damages were recovered
for the loss of a dog, which, in pursuing a hare, had run Upon
spears so placed that a hare could pass under•thern,the Judge
held that damages must be given.on the same principle...asa:
the defendant had speared the uog with his own hand ;! because
the law did not permit a man to do that indirectly which he
might not do directly. In a late case the Chief 'Justice.. arid
other Judges of the Court of King's Bench had held, thaba
defendant was not liable to damages because it was proved
that the plaintiff who had been injured was ,aware or- spriag-
guns being set in the grounds into which he.voluntarily ; -
but the Judges came to this decision with- reluctance. ... The
only ground on which lie had heard the practice of settittg
spring-guns defended, was the advantage of collecting-a gfeat
quantity of game ; but a great quantity of game was collected
solely for the purpose of committing an extensive and unna-
tural Slaughter. The only inducement,. then, width a landed
proprietor had to place murderous engines in woods was, thlit
he or his friends might have two or three days' shooting. Fair
this object innocent persons as well as poachers were expoSed to
death. It appeared.from a review of the 'law. reports, th4t the
only case in favour of spring-guns was one in which it had been
proved that the person injured had received notice of !their
being set. In this case, however, the law was at varitincewitb
itself; for this decision of the Judges was contrary to othePs
in which they had held that a man could not do indirectly that
which the law did not allow him to do directly: Theide..
fendant in this case certainly could not have legally
the gun to his shoulder, and fired it at the plaintiff; though
it must be confessed that in this way the latter would have
had a greater number of chances for his life, as the former, while
his finger was at
,the trigger, might still relent; but a spripg7-
gun was sure to execute the purpose for which it was set on any
one who might come in its way. Two very melancholy acci_
dents occasioned by the use of spring guns had come to his
knowledge. These, however, lie forbore to state; one in tie,
cordance with his own feelings, and the other because a Mein-
her of the other HouSe, who represented a county, had request-
ed that he would not mention it. These gims, it :was 44d,
were meant to be employed only against poachers. He, Itow,
ever, thought it extremely cruel that they should be used in
that way ; but if it were humane and. just to use thenrin
that way, it would be impossible to. confine their . action to
poachers only: A notice, it was said, mightbe seen.. In the
day-time it could, hut not 'at night ; and might not a man trar
yelling along a road go over a hedge without any criminal -de-.
sign ? A gentleman told him, that while riding on the rAirrri.
road, in a snow. storm, his bat was neatly blown off; he put
his hand to save it, and at the same time observed a uOti"7):'
spring guns and man-traps. If his hat 'hid blown off,: .1,02 f:
either have left it in the wood,•or run the risk of being
gunshtd the.pokelseirS
by seeking it in the wood. It was always ack
ed this
it was better that culprits shouldeticape, than tliat'P,teiti'lljit‘ieuiinininoctivganst
should suffer; but with respect to spring.
reversed, for the innocent were
.the ;victtms4.';
a-r;persons whti this
of the live of men ; but he believed: there e.
escaped. He had- appealed to humanity. A
reference to anit-u;&.
rist this sacrifice,
liked to - hear of 'humanity, except g ,uns on a princiet
Others even pretended that they set PT'
of humanity, and that by doing soegirtGrdships and he-public
•llewas, however, willing that
rho
barbarous a wretch as to wish
of " Wolf" where w
should be informed that he trinniikenhief was prevOttcl
;here were none- hut t where •
of spring guns were for
persons were left its douht.jl% Li the
only increased the evil,P es spractice. In some cases notice.
;•xistence of the guns,ea
to put an end.! to this 11n,innils'avncary
.by some:persona. to give• a .vati• t
houghs necessaiY.
uns were set ;and he had lately
,nce that spring-ty-- seen notice
a persons, into'danger; ~ •ji Ais,tkira‘4.27.
wolf, only tended to.l

-I,to effect—" Spring-guns here. N. B. This is no joke."—
.4 !..aughter.)—The Setting of spring-guns had been defended by
stens on the ground of necessity, because it was said that with-
out them game could not be preserved ; but he would rather
dtety the necessity of preserving the game, than adndt that of the
epiing-guns. It was certain, however, that game could be pre-
served, and was preserved in many parts of the country, with-
out the assistance of spring-guns. Since he came into the
House that evenin, he had been informed that some persons
were in the habit of setting spring-guns for the preservation of
their lives and property. He did not approve of such a practice,
tot, as he was only opposing the use of spring-guns for the
preservation of game, if any Noble Lord would tianie a clause
£0 except spring-guns used for the purpose which had been de-
scribed to him, he should have no objection to the insertion of
that clause in the Committee. For his own part, he should
-bave only to propose one verbal amendment, which had been
suggested to him by the Noble and Learned Lord on the
iiroolsack.
Lard ORFORD asked the nature of the clause which the
Ncble Lord had sigoitiedhis.willingness to insert.
Lord SUFFIEIM repeated, that it was a clause excepting
hero, the operation of the Bill, spring-guns which might be
set for the preservation of the lives and property of individuals ;
titer property being so situated that it would be capital felony to
ttea:sde it.
The Bill was then read a second time.—Adjourned.