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

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 pro- protested on the scaffold, with 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 have done the
which had been practised, and he could as easily have brought same at the age of sixteen ?—( Hear, hear.) But for this he
a hundred such cases as one. One ease took place at the Petty was threatened with the law, 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 House would 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 fourteen in all. He further stated 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.—(Heae,
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 individually)
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 of the
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 was 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, great charms for
the poacher.—( Hear. hear.) There was something adventu-
rous inihtiheanlidfe
tohfeletth, which
know that at one time more murders, were committed under
the revenue laws than were ever committed under the game-
laws ?—( Hear, hear.) The lion. Member could not be igno-
rant of the fact that more' violence was perpetrated, more
murders were committed, tinder the former than under the
latter. But did the Government, on discovering the extent of
crime which prevailed under the revenue-laws, immediately
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 turn 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 earth its attention was to be directed to he could 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 but one feeling on that side of 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 statements made by the 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 his noble relative from Ireland,' 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? Throuch 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 great evils
dial exist, and these evils cried aloud for remedy. 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 those 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 which he had already 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 the landlords. 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 grievances 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 reports on the 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 he did not:allude to him.;
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 too
c anyo-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 of
summary convictions. It would not do to leave the la.!, in the
hands
ofin thtoeoffseectw.ho hltad the
wasa dgirdleactuelstt iss
,suebieibcl interest in a
,iatocupreryo:
he and becausetrusted
itof
wouldtha very t
beourteearseo,ni anu inquiryponwi was calledicefoorr,
and
ill-
feeling to those poachers or to those who gave rise to poaching
by preserving game. He would not wish to put down field
sports, but he believed with the Hon. Member who had last
spoken, that there was nothing 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 farm.—(Cries of " 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
immediatelyeciryepealed ; and to give notice that
he would bring it on on the 13th of March.
EMPLOYMENT IN WORKHOUSES.
tobo 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