The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1878-01-08

2befUrU bnG IEt OF iof6s W W tts1cif
up, with nm amendment proposed by the
COMMITTEES on O Offices, Co.. to- strike out the
1st of Febr1laFg and to insert the 10th OF
February. 1873.
Mr.. ATKfssoN spoke in favor OF the adop-
tion or tie resolution. arguing that the
money would be well expended, and that
the result would probably be grent saving
to the State. 1t was necessary, he thought,
to have experts for the work.
MIR. FAuNTLERoY did not clearly under
stand the scope OF the resolution, and he
asked that it be passed by until tomorrow.
II he understood Alright, the resolution was
an exceedingly important one. 1t, how
ever. had just been reported lie wished
the resolution to be passed by and printed.
Mr.. ATKIssoN asked that the House vote
down the motion, because time was Inn
ted, ind II the commissioners were not
set to work at once they would not have the
necessary time.
Mr.. FAUNTLERor's motion prevailed
ayes, %; noes, SO.
CHARTER OF RICHMOND.
House bill amending the charter OF the
city OF Richmond in relation to the correc-
ton OF assessments heretofore published in
full in this paper) was passed. -
PROTECTION, OF PARTRIDGEs OR QuA1Ls.
House bill No. IA, amending the act Of
1S76-'77, and providing that 1t shall not be
lawful for any person to Kill or capture, or
offer for sale or buy any cartridges or quahs
between the 1st day OF January and the 18th
of October OF each year within this State,
nor that it shall be lawful to capture par
|tridges or quail at any time by means OF nets
or trups of any kind until after the expira-
ton OF two years from the passage OF this
act, came up.
| Mr.. MCMILLAN had heretofore offered the
| following amendment: .'IroriGed, this Sec
| ton shall not apply to the owner OF tenants
OF lands in capturing partridges or quails
| by means OF nets or traps on his own prem
| iscs at any time between the 10th OF Octo-
Der and the 1st OF January in said years un-
! less for SALE"
Mr.. MCMILLAN spoke in support OF his
amendment.
Mr.. MoFFETT opposed it, and declared
that it would. destroy the best protective
feature OF the law.
| Mr.. ROBINSON OF Portsmouth took the
| like position. lie stated that in Eastern
| Virginia the colored people, who were not
very expert with the gun, were destroying
birds in great numbers with nets and traps:
Mr. HUNTER opposed the amendment, and
read extracts from the game laws OF va
rious States, showing what they were doing
to protect birds. s...r .G.t..
| Mr.. MCMILLAN held that the law without
the amendment was principally for the
| benefit OF the sportSmen from the cities. 4
Mr.. HUNTER argued oppositely to this.
Mr.. HENKEI. offered an amendment to the
amendment that not more than two par
| tridges be caught in trap at one time.
! [Laughter.] Rejected. s...
The amendment Of Mr.. MCMILLAN was
agreed to-ayes, 81: noes, A.
! Mr.. WALKER OF Northumberland moved
| to reconsider the amendment. he thought
| the House had voted under some misapprc-
| hension. He held that the owner OF the
land had no right Of property in the wild
game; that the wild game belonged to the
| Common wealth, and it ought to be, as far
as possible, equally enjoyed by the citizens
OF the Commonwealth. To give the land
owners a privilege not enjoyed By others
was class legislation. The landowners have
an advantage any way, is they can prohibit
others from coming upon their lands to
hunt the birds. Such a provision as this
would produce an inequality that should
not be permitted. for as the game belongs
to the Commonwealth we should not give
landowners special rights in its enjoyment.
Mr. SuELBURNE said he thought some
members had been mised by the remark OF
Mr.. MCMILLAN that the law was for the
advantage CT the sportsmen OF the cities. He
thought it was coed for the country people.
He was q friend OF the birds, and did not
permit them to be killed upon his farm.
He thought them more valuable rs scavcn-
gers than on the table. ..a........
The motion to reconsider failed.
The bill was ordered to engroSsment and
third reading. Motion to reconsider re-
iected.
A number of motions made on the con-
| sheraton or this bill ere omitted as not
necessary to q proper understanding Of the
proceedings.
| JURISDICTION OF JUSTICES.
House bill No. % reported adversely,
giving justices Jurisdiction OF amounts up
to 800, was taken up.
| Mr. j. D. JOHNSTON moved to recommit,
as there were some kindred subjects soon to
be reported upon, and all the propositions
should be considered together.
AIr. CoGHILL favored Mr.. JoHNsTOS's mo-
ton, as q means of bringing the whole SUBJ
ject before the House in Il better shape.
The bill was recommitted.
| .u. -. ~ PASSED BY. a..
4 number OF bills were passed by, owing
| to the absence OF their patrons, or the
tthnness OF the House, or for other
such causes.
Adjourned at 1:5O O'Clock.
/