HC Deb 07 May 1823 vol 9 cc79-83
Mr. Brougham

rose, he said, to present a petition from a writer of eminent talents, respecting the Game Laws, which contained statements, as he thought, deserving the gravest consideration of the House. It was signed "W. Cobbett," and it prayed, that as there was a motion for bringing in a bill for the alteration of the Game Laws, the House would be graciously pleased to pause before passing an act which, as the petitioner had been informed, was likely to go to legalize the sale of game by lords of manors, and other privileged persons to be designated in the act. It prayed that the House would weigh well and consider the state of the laws, and the severe hardships which were inflicted on the community at present by their operation, which were greater than ever was known in any other country, or at any other period in this country; and that the House might the better judge, the petitioner offered to their consideration the following most alarming facts. The calendar for the ensuing quarter sessions in the county of Berks, contained the names of 77 persons now in Bridewell. Of these 22 were for poaching; and of these 22, there had been 9 committed by clergymen acting as enagistrates in that county. The petition stated further, that, in general, poaching was punished with greater severity than offences punishable with death. In one sessions, an utterer of false silver coin had been punished with 12 months' imprisonment, a housebreaker with 24 months' imprisonment, and a poacher with 24-months' imprisonment and hard labour. Such were the statements of the petition, for which he did not pledge his own responsibility; but yet he thought that they demanded serious consideration, and the case was altogether grave enough without any aggravation. The petition went on to state, that of 16 persons condemned to death at the assizes at Winchester, in the Spring of last year, the only persons who suffered death were two young men who had resisted game-keepers. The petitioner therefore prayed the House to consider well before they passed the bill into a law, which was to give a property in wild animals to the lords of manors and others, which could only be done by oppressions, great in suffering and humiliation to the people at large, and by compelling the country to submit to grievances for the protection of this new property, which, in regard to the power of those who made the laws, and the abjectness of those who were called on to obey them, would be without any parallel in any country westward of Constantinople. These were the remarks and statements of a man of sufficient powers of observation and understanding to make them worthy of attention. And certainly, of all men in the world, Mr. Cobbett was not one likely to treat with leniency this offence of poaching, which took men from their lawful industry, and caused them to waste their time and destroy their morals in forbidden courses; for, as he (Mr. B) had been given by others to understand, no one act, among all those most objectionable laws upon the subject contained in the Statute-book, had half, no, not the hundredth part of the efficacy in deterring men from poaching. This he felt to be due to a man for whom, in other respects, he could not be supposed to have the most friendly feeling.

Lord Palmerston

said, that the two young men in question were executed, not for poaching, but for murder. One of them had killed a game-keeper who was in the lawful exercise of his duty, the other had levelled his piece at another gamekeeper, who received the contents in his body, but from proper treatment recovered. He was able to speak with certainty upon the characters of the young men, as they were servants of his, and he must say a more cruel and deliberate outrage had never been committed.

Mr. Brougham

said, that he did not deny the statement of the noble lord, and yet it would rather go to support the reasoning of Mr. Cobbet. It was not even necessary for him to palliate the offences of the two young men: for the question was, how came they to kill the gamekeepers? and then the answer might be, in consequence of the state of the law. That was the very argument he had used before the court on the trial of 21 persons the other day, charged with murder on the high seas, and it prevailed, too, with the jury: for the men were killed in consequence of that most abominable law, which enabled revenue cruisers to fire shotted guns upon the ships of any nation within two leagues of the British coast.

Mr. Benett,

of Wilts, admitted that the two young men had suffered death very properly in Hampshire. Still he thought that the state of the law demanded reformation. Most of the offences of the country might be considered as results from the severity of the game-laws. Offenders were gradually trained from poaching to shop-lifting, and then to housebreaking, and occasionally murder.

Sir T. Baring

corroborated the statements in Mr. Cobbett's petition. Half the offenders in Hampshire were committed for poaching.

The petition was ordered to be printed. The following is a copy thereof:

To the honourable the Commons of Great Britain and Ireland, in parliament assembled.

"The Petition of William Cobbett, of Kensington, in the County of Middlesex, Most humbly sheweth,

"That wild animals are, according to the law of nature and the common law of England, the property of him, be he rich or poor, who is able to catch or kill them; that, nevertheless, laws have been passed in this kingdom to appropriate the animals to the exclusive use of a few; and that your petitioner has been informed that certain persons intend to apply to, your honourable House to pass a law to make this appropriation more exclusive; rigid and unjust than it now is, by authorizing the selling of the animals aforesaid; and by confining the right of selling to those persons who now claim and exercise a monopoly of the sport of killing those wild animals:

"That your petitioner has now lying before him the quarter sessions calendar of this present month of April, for the county of Berks; that he finds thereto be 77 prisoners in the Bridewell of that county; that he finds 22 of these to be imprisoned for poaching, and that 9 of them have been committed by ministers of the Church of England, acting as justices of the peace; that he finds, in this calendar, that poaching is, in many cases, punished with more severity than theft; that he finds an utterer of base silver punished by twelve months imprisonment, and a house-breaker punished by 24 months; and that he finds a poacher punished with 24 months imprisonment and hard labour:

"That your petitioner thinks it monstrous injustice, that the rest of the community should be taxed to build and repair prisons and maintain gaolers and prisoners, and also the wives and children of so many prisoners, and all this for the preserving of those wild animals which it is a crime in nine hundred and ninety-nine out of every thousand of that community to pursue, or to have in their possession; and he, therefore, prays, that your honourable House, if you should think proper to continue the present game-laws in force, will be pleased to enact, that those who prosecute poachers shall pay all the expenses attending their imprisonment, or other punishment; and also all the expenses attending the support of wives and children rendered chargeable by such punishment:

"That your petitioner, looking at the above-mentioned scale of punishments, and bearing in mind, that, of 16 persons, condemned to death at the assizes at Winchester, in the Spring of last year, the only persons actually put to death were two young men, who had resisted game- keepers; that your petitioner, looking at these things, prays that your honourable House will repeal those terrible laws relating to the game, which were never known in England till the reign of the late king, and that, at any rate, you will not make game saleable without, at the same time, making those who are to have the exclusive profit, pay the expense of punishing poachers and also the expense of keeping their pauper families; for, though it seemed that nothing could add to the injustice of compelling men to feed wild animals and to pay for preserving them for the exclusive sport of others, yet that injustice would assuredly be rendered more odious by the proposed measure for giving the few a monopoly of the sale of those animals, which, to the insolence of feudal pride, would add the meanness of the huckster's shop. Great has been the suffering, great the humiliation to which the people, in different countries, have, at times, been reduced by aristocratic power; but to compel the mass of the community to pay for the preserving of wild animals, to punish them if they attempt to pursue, or touch those animals, and to enable the aristocracy to sell those animals, to have the exclusive sale of them, and exclusively to pocket the proceeds, though the animals have been reared at the expense of the whole community, is, as your petitioner believes, a stretch of power on the one hand, and a state of abjectness on the other, wholly without a parallel in the annals of any country westward of Constantinople.

WM. COBBETT.