The Sun.
London, England, 1828-05-07 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLI4MENT.

. .
. . , . ..
HOUSE •OF LORDS, MAT' 6.
..
The LORD .CHANC,ELLOR took ; his seat on the
Woolsaek at five minutes past five o'clock. . • • ,
On the motion of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, several
Bills Were' read a second and several a third time.
Sir, E: KNATCHBULL and others brought from the
Commons a Bill, entitled an • Act to .consolidate arid
amend the Laws relating to the conduct of Elections, and
return of Members to . serve in Parliament—the Conso-
lidated- Fund Appropriation Bill—the Sandwich and Mar-
gate- Roads Bill,-..,-the Greenwich .Poor Bill—and the
Banbury Road :Bill. .
The F..irl of .HARROWBY,presentsd a petition fforn
the. Roman Catholics of a parish in Staffordshire, praying
for the removal of the civil disabilities under which they
labour. , : • • .
. Mr. Ctrartrar and others brought up an Inclosure Bill,
and the Grimsby Haven Road Bill, Lincolnshire.
General Ciascorse and others brought up a Bill for
authorizing thei Trustees of the Liverpool Docks to raise a
further sum—a Bill for establishing Markets in Swan,,ea,,
Glamorganshire, and two Road Bills.
Air. Ltianv.i.r. and others brought up the Newaastle,and.
Carlisle•Road,, Bill'. • ..
. Lord W.. Patii.FrT and others brought up the .Steam
Navigation. Company Bill, authorizing the Company to
make a navigation cut.
Lord KENYON 'presented a petition Gam a parish in •
.Ari.nagh, against further concessions to the Catholics.
The Diaise of BEAUFORT presented a petition from the
Ministers 'arid Churchwardens of a parish in Bristol to the
same effect. '
' The Eltfl 'of WINCHILSEA presented a petition from
• Petsriate, Keiti praying for the abolition of slavery.
' Lcird JURANTLWpreeented a petition in favour of the
Stockton Rail-way Road Bill.
Lord CLIFTON• presented a petition from the proprie-
tors of the Hibernian Joint Stock Company, praying that
the Bill now in progress through Parliament might pass
into a WV" ' •
Earl GREY presented'A' petition from the Out-patients
of the Royal Hospital, Chelsea, praying to be reliked from
the tax of five per cep: `on their pay, and stating that the
pensions of the army were 'subject to no such imposition.
Upon the motion of the Earl of SfiAFTESBURY, the
House west into a , Committee, -and reported upon the
Steam Passengers' Repdation Bill.
Earl CANDOR Moved for an account of all sums of mo-
ney belonging to the suitors of Great Britain- and Wales that
bad iverr paid into the Bank of England in the name of the
Agecomptant-General, • respecting suit% . instituted in the
Court of Great th,taions in Wales. In making this motion
the Noble Lord took the opportunity of asking whether it
'was the -intention of his Majesty's Ministers that the Com-
miszioners aPpointed to make enquiriea into tbe practice of
superior Copes; should enquire into the Courts of Great
Session:- in 'Wick -
The LORD CHANCFLLOR did not rise to object to
Vila motion, butito'state that the inquiri3s of the (iommis-
sioners should extend to . the Great Sessions of Wales i
what result those inquiries would lead to, it was inipossi.'
ble for him to anticipate, but he was sure that his Ma-
jesty's Ministers. Wouleldirect their hest attention to that
result, whatever it might be, ”fith a View, if possible, of
'improving the 'practice there.
GAME . LAWS.
\ ..
The Margitti of SALISBURY moved that the Report
'of the GaMe Bill be brought up.
• T he Ffarl ofMADIES BURY did not object to the experi-
'Mental Measure otiginally intended, although he felt that the
Ecility afforded' to the sale of f4ine would increase rather
:than diminish the crime of stealing: At present unquali-
fied persons were liable to conviction far sailing Game,
but under the provistiOS
,nf the' eresent Bill, a man pos-
sessing ten acres of land Might sanction 'any other man's
having game in his pessession, - For the poacher had only
to refer to the farmer holding ten acres' of grown!, and thus
escape punishment. One of the effects of the resent
Bill would he to destroy that OM feeling whirl) had hither-
to subsisted betiVeen Lane/dont and Tenant. Let game be
,nnee considered ari'lirticle'of property anti the farmer would
-look upon his landlord, in cage he shot gam:, upon his
grouted, as actually taking so much money out of hi,i pocket.
It would moreover encouragc litigation.among the farmers :
evil would be contending for lila right to the game. In
Let, it would- convert the formers into gams-keepers, and
induce these. idle liabita which'would he perfectly imp,
resting
with a prcpar cultivation. Of their land. Instead of
rktln.n his hand, g in his bed at night, the farmer would be out with his
gun` in his pheu ants, and in the tl ay-ti time,
if he heard &stint fired near him, lie would desert his busi.
a 'Bill wcboifuthidwnoeili,eldr
regain
netts for' the purpcs=e of seeing who it was that was violating
which hail so long existed. They
'his property. The Noble Lord' conjured the House to
o•hefore they' passed
iially thaistaiteOf things
Alto id bear.
,in 'mind that they
igo°the oteld-
if onee 'they altered it.--(Hear, he ' 1 ' I
syst na .„ ,v,,,0v,,,„ -art atv a laiigh.y
. • The' Marquis' nr 1-.11 ' 1, ,177.11 in' consequence of a.l
• tiiin by a Noble 'Lord tea ' • '
~ aprevious
call trig& upon . even-
ing,,tlumght it necessary to say a few words in rds answer,'
and thereforh.
b, rnse for the purpose ofh giving, not his irn..
'portani,- hur his iri9igniticant, thoug • sincere, support to
P the.ie ill lntroduced'by
Noble Marquis, which he con-
sider/A to be a measure of vast ,cinseipience, and such as to
call for the iiinsideration of tlii,Legislaturei ,''He was sure
that :their :liorilihipik, Were aware that,. ' tinder the existing
law ' the'reinie of'fiaching had considerably ipereased in
when, by returns
this ountry within the last fear' years,
, neje tly colleeted:i, the Public Officers of the. country, it
'year xceeded, hy ;1770,,.the highest return of coniiiiittals
for
•ny preCeding.yedr, and on a 'comparative 'lieu'', .ek-
,spp redttfat thetcoininittals I.& poaching during the. last
1
't'eed hy,S. ici• 006', the' committals for the last six yeara.
..He d' found that within-th'e last few years all crimes hail
ipci'dirtaed;'btitihat the crime bf poaeliing had increased in-
bily' more than .and` other: ' In a part of the country in
which he pos,..T.sed someproperty, he meant the northern

part of Wiltshire, out of two hundred and 'thirty-four '
prisoners confined in the House of Correction for va-
rious offences during 1827, one hundred were i!onfine4 for-
a violation of the Game Laws. To go to the nrighbouring
.county of Hampshire, by means of comparison:between the
increase of crimes of that nature, for each of the years,
1810, 1811, and 1812, the number -of committals to the
House of Correction, for poaching, was 20, whereas the
average for the last three years amounted to 297 ; in other
-words, there was an increase of not lees than 1,000 per
rent. But their Lordships would be taking a narrow view
of the case, if they snpposed that they could judge of the
inc eased crime by the ccirnparative amount of committals
ftir poaching, one year with another, because it afforded a
great nursery for_ other crimes.---(Hear.)—The person
who habituated' himself :to. poaching, naturally became
familiarised with a disrespect for his country, a disregard
for the laws, and with midnight depredations, and was
often Went to make extensive havoc in disturbing the
peace-of.socien in order • to .prove which, he would
instance- the4ase- of. the two adjoining counties of Bed-
fordshire and..-Ifuntingilonshire, the fortner of whiCh
contained a. pepulation of 93,000, and thelatter 0f53,800.
lie found that Bedfordshire produced six times the amount
of. general crimes, and three times the amount of poach-
ing of the othersatinty, which afforded an instance of the
increase of other crimes working their way by means of
this. He wished to state one
.other fact.—A short time.
ago, there was a great quantity of base coin circulated
thri ugh the country, which. caused many of the most
active and intelligent Magistrates to endeavour by every
means to find out_whence the origin of so great a circula-
tion arose, and it was at last discovered, that the whole
of .the money had been . taken by poachers from persons
engaged' in distributingit, in order to circulate it through
the country ; few his own part, he knew- of no species of
crime so dove-tailed into another-as that of poaching. The
present mode of bringing such offendera.to justice: appeared
to him defective; lie found that almost., every attempt at
justice was counteracted,. .either by prejudicing the Judge
or July, er by some other unfair meant,. , Such -a state of
things, -he thought could not exist; it reminded him of
the woods of a beautiful author, why descrtlied penalty
and crime running a race ; the one pursuing the other
until penalty, not being able- fo overtake its- rival, crime
turns round and attacks its breathless pursuer. In fact,
he was convinced .that some alteration should be made,
and, considering.- that the Bill introduced by. his Noble.
Friend would in its operation be .attended with general be-
nefit, he wasinxious to give it all the support in his tower.
Lord MALMESBURY replied..
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE considered that no
practice couldl?e.rnore-injurious than that of paying wages
from alie Poor Rates:- -11 their Lordships would compare
the sir counties u which this was practised, with any other
six counties„ they would find that crime was 80 per cent.
greater there than in all England. .
The Marquis of SALISBURY thought that- legalising
the sale of game would provide the market, without-crime,
which must be provided at all events. He thought his
Noble Friend ought, to suffer the report to he brought up
without opposition, and he might propose or object to
what clauses he thoggist
_peopesr , -
Lord WHARNCIfIFFE swji that although his Noble
Friend had niiiied.'with him, he seemed rather afraid of
connecting "himself
,too cbsely ; he thought he was anxi;
ous to slip the collar. It was better for him to marry him,
thanremein single:all his life.:-;-(Laughter.)
Lord
,SALI4BURY replied,
,Lord GODERICH rose in support of the Bill. lialwith-•
standing what had been said of. the sale of game, he had
reason to know that a great quantity of game was publicly
sold. One individual had last year sold 19,006 head of
game. He appealed -to their Lordships whether it was
fit.to maintain a law,- which it was acknowledged could
never be carried into effect, He considered the clause of.
his Noble 'Friend would have the effect of diminishing
poaching, by giving a greater number of persons an in-
tetest in suppressing it. He thought the Noble Lord
(Malmesbury) was in error in the causes which produced
the crime, for there were some in the South of. England
who resorted.to poaching "filom want of employment. In
the part of the country in which there was the greatest
number of poachers; they *ere of a very differentrclass.,—
principally manufacturers, who earned from 18s.' to 208.
a week. He concurred in what his -Noble Friend had said
of the moral evil which existed, and thought it absolutely
necessary tntitice'Some measure to get rid of 'it.
The Howie them .divided- on the question whether the
Report should be received—
Contents 54,-
,
Non-contents - 29

Majority . ' , • • —25
When we were re-admitted; we found' thititri amend
merit was put and carried, On the ;motion of Marquis
of SAirsiusty, that the Words "-From-whom, and upon
what day the game was ptirchased," should be introduced
into one of the clauses. • • •
It was thenearried, that ' the 'Bill should 'be engrossed
and read a third time on-blandly next. , • - ' •
NIGtIT POACHING. . -'' -"' '..
Lord WHARNCLIFFE moved the Order of the day for
referring thellill for the prevention of Night.Poaiihing:to
a Committee. Me.shonld only detain theirPidiships,hy
explaining his views for-proposing this Bill mid 'altering
the present laws, By the Act entitled 'Battles's Act, any
person found at night With arms in his handi, fokhe pur-:
pose of poaching, was liable to be brought before 'a jury,
tried for a misdernianour; and, if cOnViited, transported for
seven years. The conseveni!e Was; that there wasgreat,
difficulty-in convicting, as the jury were very justly un-
willing to impose so heavz s nonishinentfer what might in
most 'cases 'be a cOMParatwely'trivial iiFfence. ' A person
was likewhe'subjeetin the same.puniabrnen r. for the. first
transgression, as one mho was an old offender. What' his
Bill Proposed was, "that 'any person found armed at night,
should for the first nffence:be brought before a Magistrate
and confined fur three months, and be' obliged to find
security for . his ' good behaviour fora year; "for the.
second, that he should .he . confined six .-toonth4'
and find security- for two years ; and one the repeti-
tion of the crime, that he should be liable-to be tried
for a misdemeanour, and transported -for seven years. It
might, perhaps, be objeCted that in the Southern parts of
England, it would 'be aifficOlt to procure security. He
knew, from his own experience, that in the North nothing'
was more Casy, and they had no difficulty in finding a re-
lative or friend for that purpose. Indeed he thought it
very natural that as. the greater number,of poachers were
young men, who entered ' en - the ociitiPitiort without in-
tending any harm, , when they found: that their friends
were to be in jeopardy if they repeated it, they would aban-
don it He thought that when an individual had been
' guilty of the crime fora third time, there was no..lury
that could feel any reluctance in 'convicting. The Bill
likewise provided, that even on the first commission of the
crime, if the pereon found with arms should use them
against those who attempted to apprehend him, that lee
should be liable to • be -convicted of misdemeanour, and
transported for seven years ; and if more than- three per-
'sons acted conjointly, that they should be considered guilty
of felon;', and transported fOr fourteen years. Ile was not
particular as to the number, perhaps it might be better to-
make it five than three. His object was to put down those
who assembled. in ' gangs, and who spread so much alarm
through'the country, that all the: resident gentlemen were
obliged to abandon .it: The Noble Lord concluded by
saying, that he had no wish to press his ;Bill upon the.
House, tad should leaVe the Matter to the discretion, of
their Lordships. . .
The Marquis of• SALISBURY agreed with his Noble
Friend that a' man should not be 'punished so severely for
the first offenee as for a repetition of the crime. He
thought, however, that tho Dill carried the distinction too
far. Hehelieved that the Security of whieh his Noble
•_,Friend had spoken, could not be produced in the southern
counties. He should propose (though not at present) that
the first commitment should be six months, the. second a
year, and the third be was willing should be as it at pre-
sent *di. 'His' Noble Friend had proposed that the of-
fender should have his choice of Courts ; for his own part,
he did not See why such'an indulgence should be extended
to his crime in preference to any other. The next.. to
which he should allude was, the number of persons that
should be collected to constitute a felony ; he thought two
were as likely to commit an outrage as three or four, and
more frequently. He ahOuld, therefore, move that two be
'the ntimber instead of three.
' ' 'The Earl of CARNARyiON did not agree with the
Noble Lord, that 'the penalties for the first offences Were
too sjandl, Hg likewise considered, that it would not be
so di'ficult to find security as the Noble Lord 'seemed, to
'apprehend. He thought, any additional severities , would
another OhjeCt in view. He thought itlianild be betterreudkr the law. absolutely intolerable. . lie had, however,
for a young man to be obliged to' serve the King, than to
remain so many months in gaol. He knesi that many
connected with the army had an objection to adinit cul-
prits:intO the ranks, but he did not think those objections
held good with regard to poachers, as; in the Commit. 7
, mentl at least, the same degree of turpitude was not con-
! .,
nett With this e s with other crimes. They were in gene-
eil
ral y ung men of spirit, who embarked ii} the occupation
I : from a dislike to lahour, and a habit of roving, and ter-
' and ould make
• i tainl there ,were..' many who were •unfit for ploughmen,
very good sOldiqs-
This, he thought,
[ cool net., take from the character of . the army, while ,it
Iv
• ' Woul prevent those young men front ' going. back from
gaol,l and then, for Want of Occupation or •other" causes:
engaging perhaps iu much worse practices; Withregaril
....

*the Noble Lord's proposal of- inflicting the more severe
penalty on those who went out together to the number of
two, poachers did not go out in thit number for the pur-
pose of resistance; but of convenience, one to carry the
gun, and the other the bag to receive the game. Indeed,
he (Lord Carnarvon) had known of few instances in which
they had offered resistance, or used theii arms against
those who went to apprehend them. If, however, more
than two associated it might be reasonable to suppose that
it was their intention to resist.

Lord TENTERDEN proposed the'omission of the Word
" poaching" in one of 'the clauses ;oil the Bill. He had
often, he said, heard the word fi';om the lips of Noble Lords
in that House, but he never saw it in an Act of rarlia-
ment, and he saw no region foi introducing it as a term in
legal language, especially-as-the clause went on to say, " or
unlawfully destroying tame."'
Lord WHARNCLIFFEiasd no objection-to the omission
of the word " poaching: moseconfess, howiever, tint
he shoidd like to see the lermirn an Act,. of Pailiarnent,Vat,
pomlliing might-be better understood throughout the coun-
try as a criminal offence, He did not agree with the. Noble
Lord opposile (ihe Marquis of Salisbury) that the distinc-
tion in puni•ahment ,betweenthnse who-went out poaching
in numbers, and those who wentnut singly, or by twos, was
not material.
After a few words from Lord -DACRE,
.the AlarqUis of
SALISBURY, Lord CARNAAVON, ind Lord- TIWITRDPN,
the period of punishment on the tread mill, and foe -sureties
to be given, was altered from six to three montlii.,‘;
Some verball9iendments were then adopted, which were
ordered to be ptuaied.--: •
PENRYN DISFRANCHISE TENT BILL.

The examination of wit nfases waa .renewed, and lasted
until Ten o'ClOck, when their Lordships adjoutned.

HOUSE. OF COMMONS, Mir 6, ,
• T
General GASCOYNE moved the third reading of the
I.iverForl Decks Bill ; which 'was agreed to, and the Bill
was passed. , • ' • :
Sir G. HILL moved, that the Chancellor of the
chequer, Mr. liuskisson„ Mr. C. Grant, and the Members
for London, Liverpool, Bristol, awl all the Members for
Ireland, be added.to the Committee upon the Hibernian
Joint Stoek Company
Air. GRATTAN opposed the Bill, and contended that
the object of the motion was to introduce into the
Committee' parties who were interested in i 4 decision.
He, for his own part, thought that the Irish Members aught
to be excluded. • . y"u a

Sir .1. NEWPORT was 49 opposed,tp_thenuitiOn.
Mr. S, RICE was also oppwed io the 'Motion, as being
unjust in principle.
After a few'whilla from Mr. B. CIARE and Mr. DA-
VENPORT, the gallerywas cleared for a division; but none
took place, and the motion was negatived.
Mr. LlDrlELL,tnoved' the third reading of the Bill for
improving the lands in the neighbourhood of Weldon, near
Wisbeacls, in thelsleof Ely. The Bill was read a third
time and passed.
Mr. DUNCOAIBE presented a petition against the 'Aire
and Calder Navigation Bill .from `the Earl of Cardigan, and
other parties to be
of
thereby.
On the motion Mr. CIIAPLIN, the Grimsby Roads'
Bill was read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Lord WM. PAULETT, the Tees
Navigation. Bill was read a third time and passed.
Sir GEORGE ROBINSON said that :he had Some
time since presented a petition from the inhabitant Dis-
senters of Northampton, in favour of general toleration,
and he had now a petition from the; same place,
praying that such alterations may be made in the
laws affecting the Roman Catholics, as will put them in
possession of their civil rights..
Colonel BARNARD presented two petitions from Ire-
land,in favour of the Catholic Claims.

Mr. SYKES presented a petition from the Attorneys of
Hull, relative to clauses in the ,Bankrupt Laws ; al.o a
petitioniroM the members of the York.shire.Fire and Life
Insurance Company,,praying for a 'reduction of the duty
upon insurances.

Mr. C. COOPER presented petitions from Protestants
in three towns in county of Sligo, against any further
concessions ,to the Catholics. • •
Sir E. HARVEY presented a petition' froth the Mayor'
and Aldermen of the town of Saffron-Malden,' against
further concession to the;Catholies ; also a similar petition
from the inhabitant's of Saffron-Walden.
Lord 'MILTON' presented petitions from the Merchants
and Manufacturer* in •the Woollen Trade,' at Bradford. and
fourteen other places in ;Yorkshire, against the imposition
of any duty upon 'Foreign Wool. .
Mr. S. WORTLEY presented petitions from. the
Roman Catholics of Brannby, and Whitby, in Yorliahire,
in favour of the Roman Catholic Claims. • •
Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented petitions froni the
Clergy of the Diocese of. Canterbury, of the
_inhabitants
'of Margate, Shoreham. Hullingstone, and• sixteen other
places in Kent, against the Roman Catholic Claims.
Mr. BASTARD presented similar petition 'from Tor-
..

rington and Little Hampton in Devonshire.
Alderman WOOD moved• for returns of malt imported
into England from Scotland and Ireland, from 1823 th'the
year 1828.
The Narquis of CHANDOS presented a petition from
Winslow, in Buckinghamshire, Against the Roman. Catholic
Claims.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY presented a petition front the Ro-
man Catholics of Stamford, in favour of the Roman' Ca-
tholic Claims.
' Sir 111. W. FIIDLAY moved, for returns of the drawback 3!
paid up,on.Glass eNported from England. to .Iroland;. and
other parts of,the world, from 1825 to 1628. •
Mr. M. FITZGERALD (Knight of Kerry) presented
two petitions from the:Ronorn Catholics of Killarrier'—one
against the Vestry Act, and the, other in favour of the Ro-
lhaft Catholic
'Mr. DICKINSON, presented a . petition from the
Woollen ManufaCturers of Sornersetshirej against.the iia-
position of a duty %mow Foreign= Woof: e • -
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS. •
A Messenger from the Lords announced that their Lord-
ships had agreedtoaeveral Bills.
Lord JAMES STUART presented a petition from the
Roman Catholics of Monmouth, in favour of the Roman
Catholic Claims.

Mr. DAWSON presented the Miscellaneous Estimatei
for the-current year,' which were ordered to be plaited.
Mr. JOHN WOOD presented a petition from The Me-
44ical Students-resident in Preston, Lancashire,. praying the
House to take measures to facilitate the study 'of anatomy.
—Ordered to lie on, the table, and be referred to the Select
Committee on that subject.
Mr. R. MARTIN presented a petition ,frotb Plymouth
against the Friendly-Societies Bill.—Referred to the Com-
mittee on the sill._ _

Mr. WILMOT HORTON presented a petition from
the weavers of,Hamilton, praying for aid to emigrate.—
Ord.red to lie oa the table.

CANADA,

Mr. WILMOT HORTON rose to present a petition,
from certain Presbyterian - Seceders in Canada, as we:
understood, respecting grants of land, in doing which te-
said lie wished to take the present opportunity'of ad-
dressing to the House a few words of 'explanation which,
as it related to a matter purely pelsbnal, he silent' feel
bound to compress' within as narrow a compass as possible.
lie had heard that some of the observations which he let
fall on a late occasion, when speaking of the Union Bill 'of
1822, were supposed to refer to Mr. Ellice, the late Mem-
ber for Coventry, in a manner' considered disrespectful to-
' wards that gentleman. Certainly, do language of his could,
with truth or justice, be supposed to refer to Mr. Ellice—
at least, of this he felt perfectly satisfied, that'nothing of
the strong language int 6 which, during the -Warinth of
debate, he might have been betrayed,, was intended to bear
the slightest allusion to'the charactft or conduct of Mr.
Ellice.
Sir J. MACKINTOSH.—As the explanation given by
the Right Hon. Gentleman had' reference to an occasion,
in which he (Sir J. Mackintosh) was'somewhat concerned,
he wished to know Whether the strong language-in question
applied .
was aieo to him or to any other person.
Mr. W. HORTON could assure the Right Hon. Gen-
tleanan opposite, 'very distinctly, that no language, of his
was it any time, or could be, meant disrespectfully to,
wards him (Sir J. Mackintosh), and I (continued the Right'
Hon.; Member) went to hitn on the occasion referred to,
and told him that if he chose 1 was perfectly willing at
the moment to qualify what I had said. My: opinion al-
ways'hati been that thiallotoie is not the Plate-for strong
language:. (Hear, hear.) If • occasions arise dernanding'
such,; there are abundant opportunities out of doors without
occupying the attention of this House in a manner so Un'pro-
fitable. However, since- ie has been supposed that 'lan-
guage of mine bore tilinn-'"ifie diameter and •condttot of
Hon. Members in, a manner qtilte :opposite to my real in-
tentidns, I feel called upon to enter into a somewhat more.
"detailed explanation than 'would, under different circum-
stances, be at 'all necessary, and before entering on' it
feel it due, in justice to the Right Hon. Gentleman oppo-
site, to declare my present conviction; that one of the
Armes used by me on thatocCasion was quite inapposite—,
I mean in the allusion I made to the Union Bill. ' What I
complained of was this, thati bad had full reason to ittp7
pose that the Right Bon. GentleMan'enposite would have
given his support to the Union itill. Lip to the very boor
at which it was broughtlorWaid' I had every reason to' be-
lieve he would It4Va. supported the hilt It was of this