The Sun.
London, England, 1828-02-15 00:00:00

SALE OF GAME.

The Marquis of SALISBURY, in moving the se-
cond reading of the Bill for the sale of Game, did net
think it necessary to occupy the House with many
observation's, as the subject had been repeatedly be-
fore their Lordships; indeed he should not havt'
thoUght it necessary to have said a word,had he net un-
derstood that his Noble Friend opposite (Lord Wham-
chile) intended to move that a Committee should ,
be appointed to consider the whole subject of the
Game. Bill. It was unnecessary for him to advert
to what had.passed on a former occasion, in consi-
dering the appointment of a committee on this sub-
ject. It was now some years ago since he had had
the honour in another place to move for a Committee
to inquire into this very thing, which with some
difficulty he had obtained. The result of the
consideration of the subject on • that occasion
convinced, lie believed, all who lent themselves to
that consideration, that the sale of game would
continue as it. had continued, to the greatest
extent. Nay, he believed, one even went so far
as: to say that game was thrown away, because
no price could be procured for it adequate to
a remuneration for the hazard incurred in get-
ting .Report of • that Committee. Wag
communicate .to this Ilense, and wider such
eire4itifiOs',,,nriless any. of *their Lordships,. were;;
say a national .chatige had... taken,
PrF:l4K—erk • • •
place, ',he .pnsidered Lit perfectly :nnriecessary, to.
go further intQ., 41e ~oue, Again,should-.a Com-
mittee be appointed, he.did not see how it Avouldbe,
possible for that Committee to render-the' BiWprac-,
ticable in all points. Likewise, if a.Cortimittee. Was:,
to be appointed to go, into the whole subjeCts,Pthe
Game Laws, and to,examine witnesses froth. every
part of the country, it would be totally impossible
to bring forward any Bill that could be passed
during these SeSsions ; and as poaching had
got to such au extent as to render it imperative that
some legislative steps should be taken instanter, he
hoped the Noble , Lord would not persist. in. his
intention to move for his Committee, but give his.:
assent to the-Bill now proposed, because he was -sure-
that under such an act no :respectable tradesman
would be found to purchase game of a poacher. -
Lord WHARNCLIFFE was very. far from bein,
opposed to the principle of his Noble Friend's Bill,
but he was quite satisfied that-if carried, so far from
advancing the principle of the general Bill, it would
retard it. What was - the . object of his. Noble.
Friend's ? To legalize the sale of game by.
persons qualified by licence, so' that, instead of termi-
nating all monopolies, a new one was created, ten
times snore grinding than those at present existing ;
and conveying this most objectionable imputation
upon their Lordships, that they would do that for a
base and sordid motive, which they would refuse to
do on sound and liberal princiPles.. But they were
not the great landowners of the- country, who were
anxious for, his Noble-Friend's ,Bill—it was another
and a different class of landowners who were in-
terested in its success—who looked to it as a source.
from whence to draw the means 'of defraying-the
expenses of their game. Did his Noble 'Friend
imagine that- the-IncastireE"then before their Lord-
ships would have the slightest effect in diminish-
ing poaching,. Which ?lid grown to such a for-
midable extent ? If he did he would find him-
self grievously mistaken. Of the alarming pitch,
to which poaching had been carried, their Lordships
might form some idea by a reference to what had taken,
place in the North of England within the last few
years, and of which the Game Laws were the foun-*
dation. :.Of the system to which poaching had been`
reduced, and of the daring manner in which it was
followed up, .• innumerable examples might be cited.
The -poachers, in open day divided the country into
districts, and then proceeded to carry their criminal
plans into execution with incredible daring. One
instance, however, he begged leave to state to.thA
House. Oa the Ist Sept. last, in full moon-light; a
gang of poachers, amounting to forty in number,
assembled in the neighbourhood of Sir John Ram-
say's . Park, (near Pomfret, we believe.) They
made no secret of their business, arranged their plans,
marched along the road to a given point, and then'
proCeeded upon their guilty work. ' Sir J. Ramsay,
at the head' of fifteen gamekeepers and atisistants,-
hearing the firing, directed his footsteps towards`the,
gang. On his approach, one of the poachers called
out to his companions to " cease shooting-Ito draw
the shot from their guns, and to load with ball ;"
upon which, Sir J. Ramsay very properly retired,
and left the poachers in uninterrupted 'possession of
his preserves.—( Hear, hear.)—Another, a more re-
cent and a more fatal incident, demanded their Lord-
ships' attention; he meant the murder of one of Sir
George Armitage's watchers, Who was shot dead
by a gang of poachers. Did . not the outniges, of
which these were specimens; loudly call for arevi-
sion of the whole system of our, Game Laws, in or-
der, if possible, to terminate them, rather than a
partial and trifling measure, the effect of which would
be to draw their Lordships' attention from the gene-.
ral subject? For these.reasons, and for these only,
he 'was opposed to the bill before their Lordships.

The Earl of FALMOUTH could not for the
life of him conceive how his Noble Friend could
e-xpect by his Bill to terminate .or even to check
poaching. On the contrary, to license the sale of
game, would only render concealment more easy.
He should,-however, not oppose the second reading,
of the Bill.
The Duke of RICHMOND thought any altera-
tion of the existing laws would be for the better.
The Earl of CARNARVON condemned .the
whole of the present code of Game Laws, and
mainly supported the Bill. He hid witnessed, with
great pain ,the mai)! depredations that lose out of
the Game Laws ; but althongh ityVas.tlie fashion
to impute to them the, great increase of crinie,,he
felt satisfied that it.was to be accounted foron other
grounds—thost of the general distresS.that still. pre-
vailed throughout the country. Hi could speak, in
particular, of his own neighbourhood, • where,
throughout the winter; scarcely any employment was
to be found by an unmarried man. Such a, state of
things naturally led to a great intrieie.of poaChing.
He had endeavoured "to, put an end'-to it in his, own
.parish by giving employment to all the'younemen,
and although several of them worked in his park,
where there were, at all events, a sufficient number
of pheasants to tempt them, he believed he had
never lost one, while the case was very different in
other parishes. On these grounds he should pause
before he rejected the Bill ; or, at all events, before
he apposed its going into a Committee.
Lord TEYNHAM should certainly rote for the
second reading- of the Bill—believing it, in its im-
portant features, to be a most desirable meaSure.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY meant to
vote.for the second reading of the Bill now before
thet House,i,i but, in so, doing, he wished to be under_
bo pledge to support the motion for
appointing
as
a Committee.
stood
The Earl of DARNLEY -observed, that many
years since he had argued on the necessity of intro-
ducing some such measure as that now before the
House, because he considered:nothing could be more
monstrotis than to prohibit, t! of game bylaw,
When that law was continually.` and openly ViOlated.
He would, therefore, vote for the second reading of
the Bill—whether or not that Bill might afterwards
require modifications ; and he did not wish - to , be
ailderatood as in. any way objecting to the-proposi-
. esa i ii iii Midi ti,,,.;41 ui t:oitimi laiVl

tion of the Noble Lord (Wharncliffe). A Noble
Lord had alluded to the state of distress in tht•
country, but he hoped their Lordships, and espe-
cially the Noble Duke, would consider how much
worse in this respect was the state of Ireland, and
he trusted that a favourable ear would be lent to
proposition on this subjeet,'which he intended shortl
to submit to the House. • _

_
The Marquis of SALISBURY, in reply, ob-
served, that his object was to put, an end to the
existence of a horrid state of war between the pea-
santry and the Jandlords. His intention was, liefore
the close of the Session, to propose a Bill which
might, at least, give to overseers the power of better
employing the poor.
The Earl of CLIFDEN would give his Sup-
port to the Noble Marquis, and also to the Noble
Baron.

On the question being put, Lord %VHARN-
CLIFFE moved, as an amendment, that the Bill
he read a second time on the 20th of March next.
But the Noble Lord said he should not object-to the
Bill being now read, if the Noble Marquis -would
not proceed farther with it for the present.
The Marquis of SALISBURY could not be sa-
tisfied to give any such undertaking. •
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, as the
most desirable object was to ascertain the amountof
crime under the game Laws, and the chief cause of
stich'erimeit appeared to him that the proper course'
_would be the' appointment of, a Committee, 'He
should, however, Vote for the second reading of. the
Bill;, because, as far as it .went,, it was calculated
to- good. „., •
_Tbe Maiqttis 4:SALISBURY:. said; :considering
the great probabilityeithatitiwould be _possible to
bring • the. Co/mitt Pei tti any-decision during the. pre-
sent Sessiori, he.horied that- thOse 'Who thought some
measure; stiCh• as 'the Bill proposed, Would be exPe--
client; would' vote for the second reading.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw; and the
House.then divided on the amendment of the Noble
Lord (Wharncliffe), When the numbers Were
_ _

Contents
Non-Contents...
Majority,...... —2
On our re-admission to the Bar, we found the
Noble Lords conversing-at the table.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE observed, that as some
Noble Lords who.-.voted-for the second reading of
the Bill advocated the appointment of a Commit-
tee; he should forthwith proceed to move it.
Lord FALMOUTH suggested the propriety of a
short delay.
The LORD CHANCELLOR then said, " The
question is, is it your Lordships' pleasure that a
Select Committee be appointed to consider the state
of the laws relating to game, and to report thereon to
the House r
The Bar was then cleared fora division, but (lu-
ring our absence we understand the notion was
agreed to. •
At severe o'clock, their Lordship's adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEISHUM 14.

Mr. Mason, from the Bast-India, House-, brought
up,an account of the annual pensions paid by the.
Company. .„
Mr.. DAVENPORT presented two petitions,
one in, favour of,the_Chester-and Wrexham, and.the
other in favour of the,Chester and Wrotham Road
Bilk -

Mr. SPRING RICE presented a petition from
certain Roinan Catholic Gentlemen of the Town
and County of Galway, praying to be admitted to
the corporate fraachise by Private Bill, similar to the
manner in Which other parties were admitted in
another instance.
Sir IRWARD KNATCAPULL brought up a
report on the Sheerness Improvement Bill, stating
that the Standing Orders of the House had been
complied with, and leave was- accordingly given to-
bring in•the Bill.
Mr. LEONARD presented a petition from-the
Mayor and Burgesses of-Maldon, praying that certain
immunities in their Charter might be restored.

Mr. BYNGpreeented a petition from his Grace
the Diike of Bedford, praying for leave to bring in a-
Bill for the improvement of Covent-garden Market.
Mr. BYNq also presented a petition from the
Independent -,fiaL Company, praying for leave ,to
amend their Act.

Mr. HART 11/W & brought pupa report on the
Bristol Cattle Market Bill, and leave was given to
bring in the Bill.
Mr. HOBHOUSE presented it"Mition from the-
pariah of S IMary, Lambeth, praying foti a Bill for
the erection of the newßridge.—Referred to a"Corn-
,.:.,:
mittee.

Mr. DENNISON presented a petition, complain-
ing of frauds in the Coal Trade, and calling on the
Rouse to pass a Bill to remedy the grievawe,-.:...
Laid on the table. .

Mr. W. SMITH presented a petition frOm,thi
Proprietbrs of the Thames Tunnel, to amend the
Act under which they-actedlleferred to a Com-
mittee. ..•
TEST AND 'CORPORATION ACTS.

Mr. Alderman WOOD presented a petition
from Collumpton, in favour of the Test and Corpo.,l
ration Acts. -Laid on the table.
General KING presented a petition from diffe-
rent parishes in Sligo, in favour of Catholic Enian-
cipation. The Gallant Member said he differed from
the object of the petition.
Lord CHANDOS presented a petition from
Buckingham in favour of the repeal.of the Test and
Corporation 3,11 -
A similar petitiertfii44 pri4infed from the Dissen-
ters
belonging to Gower-street Chapel, Islington.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION,
Mr.'BROWNLOW prOented several petitions
from parishes in the eon* of Londonderry, in
favour of Catholic Emancipation, and fOr the repeal
of all disabilities imposed on persons in consequence
of their religious opinions. Ordered to be printed.
Lord CLIFTON presented . a similar petition
from Athboy, in the county of Meath.
Lord FRANCIS OSBORNE presented a peti-
tion from the Dissenters of Hertford and Cam-
bridge, in favour of the Test and Corporation Acts.
Lord F. GOWER broughf up a petition frein
inhabitants of the Mauritius, relative to the conti-
nuance of the Slave Trade.
TEST AND CORPORATION OATHS.
Mr. J. SMITH rase, for the perpoSe of present-
ing a petition from the Catl.-,lics of Ireland, praying
for the repeal of the Test and Corporation. Oaths.
This petition had no less than three thousand signa-
tures, and contained the most truly christian senti-
ments, such as he thought the House must-ep
prove of. Those sentiments had • made great
progress in this • country during the last few years,
and the right for every man to worship God
as he pleased was generally conceded. The viola-
tion of this right had led to the most serious mis-
chiefs., and to the she:iding of Oceans of blood, and
torrents of tears.--(Cheers)—He had had occasion
when presenting another petition a short time•since,
to state, that the Dissenters came to that Mouse
wholly unconnected with the Roman Catholics ;
in their application to Parliament, they wished to
confine themselves to their own case. There could,
therefore be .no doubt that the petition was not
got up by concert. It was the spontaneons
effort of the Catholics themselves to endeavour to
do away with those restrictions which oppressed the
Dissenters of England.—(Cheers.)
The petition was then brought up, and on the
motion, that it be printed,
MriA.,DAWSON said, that the petition then

-before the House, proved most satisfactOrily that
the religious prejudices formerly entertained agains,
the Protestant Dissenters and Protestants of Ireland.
by the Catholics, are abating, if not wholly ex-
tinguished. They professed their satisfaction that tin
Dissenters of Ireland had been relieved from thos,
disqualifications which were passed
.on the Englisl
Dissenters, and they pointed out the fact that the
admission of the Dissenters to those privileges fifteen
years ago, which were still denied to the Dissenter,.
of England, so far from injuring the Protestant
Church in Ireland, it had rather contributed to in-
security. By their wise liberality the Irish Parlia-
ment had put an end to the religious jealousies pre-
viously subsisting, and since then the utmost har-
mony had prevailed. The petition ought not only to
be printed, but tobe circulatedthrough the kingdom.
It could not fail to tend towards the liberalization of
the whole British empire.. This would be a happy
country if religious dissensions. were done away
with : we should have able men in the Cabinet, and
not have to go about seeking for a Lord of the Trea-
sury or a Chancellor. We would not have to ask.
whether a person was a Catholic or a Protestant
before placing him in the-office he was not eompe-.
tent -to fill. (Hear, hoar.) Nor • would we have
to seek in the ranks of the Army for a first Lord of the
Treasury. (Cheers.) This religious feeling enters
into and destroys the.
,Executive,. the criterion for
eligibility being,— Is he' a Catholic or an Anti-
Catholic."—(Cheers.)—And after all it. was not re,
ligious_ feeling, but the semblance of -religious feel-
ing.---(Cheers,)—A semblance which:-was a pass-
.port -to every hononr.--(Cheers.)—The petition
-was one,:-the sentiments 'of., which he hoped -would
be *idely disieminated.- •
Mr. Ji SMITE! presented siMilar petitions from Chipley,
and frOM paiishin 'Dorsetshire. '
ALEXANDER DAWSON presented three peti-
tions from Athlone, from three parishes in the county o:
Louth, and frorna parish in Cavan.

Mr. WILLOUGHBY presented a petition from the
hlaltatera of Newark.upan. Trent, for the Repeal of the
Malt Act.—Laid on the Table.

Mr. W. PEEL presented a Report from the 'National
'Vaccine Establishment.—Ordered to be printed. -
Mr. SYKES presented a petition frem the Dissenters
of St. Thomas square Chapel, Hull, in favour of the Test
and Corporation Acts.
Sir HENRY HARDINGE brought up the Ordnance
Estimates for 1828.—LOrdered to be printed. .
Mr. VESEY FITZGERALD presented a petition from
a parish in the county of Clare, in favour of Catholic
Emancipation.
Mr. SYKES gave notice of a motion on the State of
the Unrepresented Freeholdeis, for the 11th March.