Star.
London, England, 1827-03-29 00:00:00

GAMS LAWS.

Mr. LYTTLETON presented a Petition,nomeronsly
and respectably signed, from Wolverhampton, praying
that an alteration might be made in the Game Laws.
The Petitioners complained of having to support those
j persons in prison who were the victims of these laws.
The Hon. Member expressed his entire concurrence in
the prayer of the Petition. He could see no justice
in the law which prevented a person havinit 994 a year,
in landed property from killing the game upon that
land. In such a country as this the sale of game could
not be prevented, and he trusted that the House would
shortly see the necessity of some legislative remedy for
the grievances of the present system:
Sir J. SEBRIGHT concurred in what had fallen
from the Hon. Member, as to the necessity of legalising
the sale of game. He wished for no alteration of the
laws, which would not secure the property of the land-
owner in his game ; but, rather than that the present'
unfortunate state of the Game Laws should continue,he
wished there was not a head of game in the country.
Sir. C. BURRELL thought that the persons confined
in prison for poaching were the victims of their own
acts. They knew the consequences of their crime, and-
had therefore no right to complain. He was favourable
to such an alteration of the law of qualiffcation, as
would give those who rented large farms the power of
killing game as long as they held the farms.
Mr. ESTCOURT pressed opoo the House the neces-
sity of•payipg immediate attention to this fruitful source
of crime and disorder. The Hon. Member alluded so
the state of the prisons of Wiltshire, where at one period
out of 280 persons confined, 100 were imprisoned for
poaching.'He hoped some Hon. Member or the House
would take up the subject without delay.
Sir J. WROTTESLE Y said, it was essential that the
legislature should come* once to the determination of
putting an end to tails of such magnitude as those
which Arose from the Game Laws. A Noble Lord
(Wharncliffe) had undertaken the subject, three years
ago, in that House, but he mixed up the measure
with clauses which it was found imPossible for the
House to agree to. The mestere was accordingly lost,
and owing to a mistaken courtesy of the House, no
Honourable Member would bring it forward, the
Noble Lord having failed in his object. A measure
was now in progress, he believed, in the other House
of Parliament, to which he wished success. He
begged to suggest, however, the propriety of disin-
cumbering any Bill for the repeal of the Game Laws
of a number of useless clauses, which would only
have the effect of rendering abortive the inten-
tions of those who wished for the success of the
measure. He conceived that the only safe and prac-
tical course would be, simply to repeal those parts of
the existing law which prohibited the sale of game. If
his Hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Lyttleton) would bring in
a Bill to repeal those laws by which the sale of game
was prohibited, and include in it any other provisions
that would equally protect the landholders, his Hon.
Friend migght be sure of success.
Mr. L LETON said he should decidedly object
to removing the laws which prevented the sale of game.
before a change was mfile in the qualification which
entitled persons to kill it ; otherwise the exclusive
right of selling it would remain with the few now qua-
lified by law.

Sir J. WaOnseLev and Mr. LITTLETON explained.
Mr. Secretary PEEL said, he should have a decided
objection to making the sale of game legal by way of
experiment, without first altering the law of qualifica-
tion. He believed that the country was willing to re-
cognise a sort of feudal right in the large landowner
for killing his game, but it would not extend the same
feeling to an exclusive right of selling it. He thought it
extremely desirable that the landed interest should stand
well with the country, and in the present state of society
it would become game preservers to consider whether
they ought not to make some concessions, and agree to
remedies which were se evidently demanded by the state
of the law. No one, he was sure, wished to disturb the
property of the landowner in his game. He often heard
mistaken and inconsiderate view; expres ed upon the
subject, such as the- wish that there was no game in
existence. Now he thought that the destruction of
game must lead to very serious evils. In the first place,
if it was to be destroyed by poachers, the proprietors
of game would necessarily defend their property, what-
ever might be said there or elsewhere, and much blood-
shed and disturbance must be the consequence of such
struggles. At present the poacher had the entire sup-
ply of the market, and he would continue to have it
until the legal power of sale was placed in other hands.
Hi did not mean to say that such a change would put
down poaching, but it would lessen the profit, and
' consequently the temptation to the crime. He was
convinced that whatever was done now, it must
come to this at last—and within ten years—that the
persons who support the game should have the right
to kill it—(Hear, hear). He was aware many Gentle-
men would say that if you gale the right of killing
game to the proprietor of five acres of la:id, he would
tempt all the game of the Gentleman who posses-
sed 300. Even if this sfiduld be the case, he would
still say, that if such a person supported all the game,

let him have it. Bat he did no; believe that any such I
consequeneerwould ',snit fretful a change of that nature.
Hefelt convinced, that by allowing the small proprietor'
some 51. a year fir the right of sporting over his land,
he would be in the same sitaatims as 'how. In aWnost,
all cases he believed that that soot of amicable arrange
rent would be made. He thought it m-st desirable
that the two Houser of Patliament should not be con.
sidered by the county as disunited upon this question.
There was now a measure before the Hou.e of Lords,
and it would be better to wait the result of that before
any other steps were taken.
Sir J. SEBRJGHT expressed his great satisfaction at
what hid fallen from the Right Honourable Secretary.
S r C. BURRELL explained, and the Petition was
ordered to be printed.

StAnl4l 011/111S.

the Marquis of BLANDFORD moved for a IRetam of all
Coroners' Inquests then in England and Wales within the last See
years. upon the bodies of persoos whose deaths have been oecasiowed
by Spring Guns.—Ordered.