The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-11 00:00:00

GAME- LAWS.

Mr. BRIGHT moved for the appointment of the following
Members, as a Select Committee on the game-laws :—Mr.
Bright, Mr. I3urroughes, Lord George Bernina, Mr. Milner
Gibson, Mr. Bouverie, Mr. CripFs, Viscount Clive, Mr. Wil-
liam Mackenzie, Mr. Villiers, Mr. Bankes, Mr. Etwall, Mr.
Grantlev Berkeley, Mr. Manners Sutton, Mr. George Caven-
dish, and Mr. Trelawney.
Mr. C. BERKELEY rose to move as an amendment—
That the names of Viscount Palmerston and Mr. Gregory be
inserted in place of Mr. George Cavendish and Mr. Beuverie.
The Hon. Member said he thought he had reason to complain
of the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the
Home Department with regard to the constitution of the
Committee. It would be,in the recollection of the House that,
daring the discussion which took place on the motion of the
lion. Member ft- Durham, he told the Right Hon. Baronet
(Sir J. Graham) that he would accede to the appointment,
provided the appointments were constituted in a fair and im-
partial manner. Now he must say that a more unfair
or partial Committee he could not conceive. It was
perfectly true that the names of three gentlemen
had been taken from the list, and three others substituted.
He thought it requisite that three of those Members should be
omitted and three others substituted. Of two of those three
he knew nothing, but of the other he happened to know some-
thing, he meant the Hon. Member for Lynn (Lord G. Ben-
tinck ), of that Hon. Member he must say that he d •emed him
a very improper partial person. Her never attended quarter
sessions.—(Hear, hear.) He knazittttle and cared less about
the circumstances of the country
(Laughter on all sides of Li Hotioswe. were conducted.
they
yHe (Mr. Craven
Berkeley) thought this Committee
( Hear, ought to be put on an im-
partial and equitable footing—(lleac, hear)—and r)e at nu
turf
hareiddriadeni
racing
think that that Noble Lord's partiality f
went at all to tit utralze his hostility to that little
animal for whose mining operations the Hon Member for
Durham (Mr. Bright) the other night expressed such a regard.
He He did not wish to see the Committee composed of Anti-
law leaguers and game preservers, but lie thought that other's
ought to be added who were known for their impartiality, at-
tention, and ability. For this reason be should move that the
name of the Hon. Member for Kiltnarnock should be erased,
and that of the Member fir Dublin substituted.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that he did not think that
there was any reason to complain of his conduct in the nomina-
tion of this Committee. It had been his earnest desire, bath in
public and private, and in everything he had said, that this
Committee shou!d he impartial. And he must say that in
this matter the Hon. Member for Durham (Mr. Bright) had
met him in a spirit of similar good will and right feeling.
lie said, in ju-tice to that Hon. Gentleman, that he had never
been concerned in the formation of a committee which had
been proceeded with in so unexceptionable a manner as it had
teen conducted by the Hon. Gentleman. The Hon. Gentle-
man moved the Committee. It was usual that the mover of a
( ounnittee shouldidemand that a majority of Members of his:own
w_y of thinking should be placed on that Committee. He (Sir
James Graham) wished that a Herber of the Government
should bean the Committee. His position precluded him from

being on the Committee, and he expressed a wish to the Hon.
Member for Durham that the Under-Secretary of State should
be on the Committee. To this the Hon. Gentleman at once
agreed. He then requested that six Gentlemen sitting on that
(the Ministerial) side of the House should be on the Commit-
tee, and to that the Hon. Member acceded, and he (Sir James
Graham) named Lord Marsham, Mr. Hope Johnstone, and
Mr. Bramstcn. He al2o nominated Mr. Grantley Berkeley to
serve on the Committee. It turned out that Lord Marsham,
Mr. Bramstone, and Mr. Hope Johnstone could not attend on
the Committee, and he then nominated Lord G. Bentinck, Mr.
Cripps, and Mr. Mackenzie. The Hon. Member bad fallen
into these arrangements, and had done all in his power to assist
the Government, and if the Hon. Gentleman should oppose
the motion for the rejection of Mr. Cowper, he ( Sir J. Graham)
should support him.
Mr. BRIGHT could not accede to the proposition of the
Hon. Member for Cheltenham. The Hon. Member had said
that six members of the Anti-Corn-law League were on the
Committee. This was not the fact, as only three were on the
Committee who were connected with that association. lie
(Mr. Bright) could not understand why the Hon. Member
objected to the name of Lord George Bentinck, seeing that he
himself had put a notice on the paper on the 3d of March to
nominate that Noble Lord on the Committee.
Mr. G. BERKELEY believed the Committee was formed
in a manner likely to give satis'action.
After a few words from Mr. VILLIERS,
Mr. C. BERKELEY said he had resisted the appointment
of the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn, because ho believed
he entertained the same views as the Hun. Member for Dur-
ham. He should divide the House.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided. The numbers were—
For the motion
Against it
Majority for the original Committee —B7
Mr. C. BERKELEY then moved that the name of Lord
Palmerston be nominated as a Member of the Committee, in-
stead of Mr. Thomas Cavendish.
Mr. BRIGHT, knowing that Mr. Cavendish would attend
the Committee, declared he should not accede to the proposition.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment
Against it
Majority against the Amendment
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at a Quarter past One o'clock.