The Statesman. — 1823-05-08 (London, England)

GAME L %WS. Mr. BROUGHAM said he rose to present a petition from Mr. Cubbett, which called the attention of the House to the present-state of the Game Laws, and prayed that it would not suffer the Bill now in progress through tke House for authorising the sale of game by the Lords of manors and other persons qualified, to pass into a law without further consideration. Mr. Cobhett in his petition called the attention of the House to the severe hardships of the Game Laws, and the disastrous effect they had upon the morals and jurisprudence of the country, and in doing so he stated a fact which could not fail to convince the House of the truth of his assertion. The Sessions Calendar of the County of Berks contained the names of 77 persons who were confined in Bridrwell, 22 of whom were for poaching, and nine of them were committed by Clergymen, who were Justiies of the peace; and these men were absolutely punished with greater severity than those who had been convicted of crimes deserving death. Several guilty of such crimes bad been punished only with an imprisonment of twelve months, and a housebreaker with 24 mouth•, while a poacher was condemned to a punishment of 21 tii.mths and hard labour. It wag monstrous that out of 77 persons imprisoned, 22 should be fur poaching. The petitioner also stated that in the County of Hants, of 16 persons who were condemned to death, only two young men suffered punishment, and that for residing gamekeepers. He implored the House to well consider the monstrous injustice of these laws, before they aggravated the evil, by passing the Bill now io progress through the House.— Mr. Cobbett states that great evils were endured in other counties Iron. the privileges of the aristocracy ; but laws which gave toe aristocracy the exclusive possession of wild animals, though reared up at the public expense, and enabled theta atone to sell them, showed a stretch of power on the one bawl and a degree of abjectness on the other, which were unparalleled to any country westward of Constantinople. These facts, stated with the usual perspicuity of that able writer, were certainly entitled to the serious attention of the House ; and it could not be said that Mr. Cobbett in any way encouraged poaching; for he ventured to say that no Act of Parliament had a greater tendency to prevent poaching than his writings. ►Vhatever might be his difference of opinion with Mr. Cobbett, he felt it his fluty to present the petition. Lord PALMERSTON said that the Hon. sod Learned Gentleman stated that two men were condemned to derail for resiitiag game-keepers. That was true, but one of those men had shqually committed mauler, and the other had maliciously fired a gun at so unarmed man, aid lodged the contents in his body, at a distance of ten yards. The man WPM a servant of his (Lord Palmerston), but he fortunately recovered.  Mr. BROUGHAM said that be had no doubt PII the Noble Lord stated was perfectly true, but still it was not conclusive as to the petition. He could not justify the men who had committed such acts, but he condemned the laws. which placed men in a state that rendered the commission of such acts likely. He would now use the same argument he used the other day in defence of the twenty-one men who were tried for murder on the high seas. Why did they kill the men ? because the Legislature passed an abominable law, giving Custom-House crukers the power of shocting at smugglers to a distance of 1111 leagues from the English coast. Ile did not mean to justify the men for killing others, but why were they shot at? Without denying the statement of the Noble Lord, it was no argument against the prayer of the petition.  Mr. J. BENNET said It was lamentable that so many murders should yearly take place in consequence of the Game Laws, and hoped some alteration would be made In them.  Sir T. BARING corroborated the statement in the petition, that the greater part of those in prison in the county of Hants were confined for poaching. Mr. W. SMITH presented a petition from the inhabitants of the Borough of Evesham, praying for the abolition of Slavery.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. J. MARTIN presented a similar petition from the inhabitants of Tewkesbury.—Ordered to be printed. Sir M. RIDLEY presented a similar petition from Neweastle-upon-Tyne.—Ordered to be printed. Col.