§ On the motion of Viscount Melbourne, the House resolved into Committee on the Spring Guns Bill.
The Earl of Carnarvonobserved, that according to the provisions of the Bill, no occupier of land could set spring guns in those places which were specified in the Bill, without having first obtained the license of two Magistrates at Quarter Sessions. He thought that such a regulation was likely to be productive of much inconvenience. It was well known, that the time of Magistrates assembled at Quarter Sessions was very much occupied in deciding on the claims of paupers, and he feared that the application of a farmer, at such a moment, for liberty to set spring-guns, might suggest to those paupers, who might be in a state of excitement, the very crime which it was the object of the Bill to prevent. He therefore suggested, whether it would not be preferable to allow farmers to set spring guns on the authority of one Magistrate.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that his first impression was, that the license of Magistrates for setting spring guns was wholly unnecessary, but he understood that great objections were entertained by certain parties whose opinions deserved consideration, to allow the setting of spring guns without such controlling power in order to prevent the rash and improper setting of those destructive machines. He however thought, that if a license was considered necessary, it might as well be granted by one Magistrate as by two; and, on the other hand, should the authority of a Magistrate not be thought requisite at all, he was of opinion that the operation of the Bill should not extend over the whole country, but should be limited to those districts where that species of crime which it was the purpose of the Bill to check was prevalent.
Lord Suffieldwould give his support to the clause as it stood, to place the power of licensing the setting of spring guns in the hands of two Magistrates. He was anxious that every application for leave to lay down those horrid instruments of destruction should be attended with as much publicity and formality as possible.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that there was this evil attending the publicity of these applications—that the parties who meditated the commission of the crime sought to be guarded against, were made aware of what property was protected, and what was not, by spring guns; and they would naturally attack those places where they were exposed to the least danger. He thought that it would be better to leave it doubtful whether every spot in the specified districts was not protected by spring guns.
§ An Amendment empowering one Magistrate to grant a license for the setting of spring guns, was adopted—House resumed.