GAME LAWS AMENDMENT BILL. (Hansard, 17 February 1824)

§ Mr. Stuart Wortley
rose, in pursuance of notice, to move for leave to bring in a bill to amend the laws for the preservation of Game; and, though he knew, he; said, that the House was anxious to get to the very important business that was fixed for the evening, he could not pass over his motion without some remarks; for there could be no subject more important to the comfort, to the morals, and the well being of the people of this country, than that to which it related. He professed himself, from his station in life, to be a country gentleman, and had been a strict preserver of game in a part of the county where it was extremely difficult to preserve it; yet he was persuaded, that the fears of his brother country gentlemen on 188 this subject were perfectly unfounded, and was convinced that these laws might be so amended, as to enable individuals, who were anxious to preserve their game, to preserve it with greater ease and satisfaction to themselves, and with less prejudice and detriment to the country, than they could ever hope to do under the present system. Game had hitherto never been considered in this country as property, but had been protected by a code of law peculiarly its own. Now, the first principle of his bill was, to bring game as near to property as it was possible, consistently with the nature of it, to do. From this first principle followed a permission to dispose of game in open market; for, after the evidence which had been submitted to a committee of that house, and which had since been promulgated throughout the country, it would be madness to suppose that game, was not sold, and as regularly supplied to the market as any other luxury. Indeed, after the report of the game committee, no delicacy of feeling could prevent any man from purchasing game; and it was quite evident that no blame could possibly attach to any of their friends in large towns, who thought fit so to purchase it. He did not apprehend any of the evil consequences which some gentlemen anticipated from legalizing the sale of game. His bill would make game the property of those who were owners of the land; his intention, however, was, that no persons should kill it but those who had licenses to do so. His intention also was, to do away with all qualifications, or rather to reduce the law respecting them, as nearly as possible, to the state of the law in Scotland, which he had never heard complained of by any one connected with that country. By the law of Scotland, every man who had a plough-gate of land, had a right to give other persons leave to come and shoot on it. He should not now enter into the inquiry what quantity of land should give this right. He should also propose that every person having a certain quantity of land might appoint as many persons as gamekeepers to kill game, as he pleased. At present, lords of manors only, had a right to appoint game-keepers; and a lord of a manor could only appoint one gamekeeper, with a right to kill game, though he might appoint others to preserve it. Persons who trespassed to kill game he should make liable to a pecuniary penalty, to be levied summarily: and 189 if, when warned to leave a property, they did not go off, they would be liable to be apprehended. If they refused to give their names they would be liable to be apprehended; and if they gave false names, they would be liable, on information, to severer penalties. He placed much reliance on the change of feeling which would be produced by making game property saleable in a lawful manner; and it would, he imagined, ere long, become as disreputable to steal game as it was to steal wood or turnips. The house might be desirous of knowing how the bill would deal with those persons who now carried on an occupation which led them into more vice and misery than any other occupation, he meant poaching. On those who went out at night to kill game he would impose a penalty, or imprisonment, which would go on increasing till the third conviction, which would subject the offender to transportation. After the first offence, he proposed that the offender should be bound in recognizances, and securities of his friends, that he would not again offend in like manner. The same plan was resorted to in other cases, and it was always found to have the best effect; for nothing was so likely to prevent a man from violating the law, as the idea that his friends were bound over for his good behaviour, as well as himself. He was not aware that it was necessary for him now to enter further into details. The guiding principle of the bill, he repeated, would be, that game should be brought as nearly as possible to other property. He saw an hon. friend of his (Sir J. Shelley) opposite to him, and he entreated him and others who thought, that because there was game now, there was not likely to be any if any alteration were made in the law, to consider whether the present mode was likely long effectually to preserve it, whether poachers were not daily and hourly increasing, and in spite of their heaping law on law, and severity on seventy. He knew some gentlemen had said respecting the evidence taken before the committee, that it might be all very true, but that they heard nothing of the kind before. Now, he took leave to assure them, that the more they made inquiries on the subject, the more they would find the evidence to be strictly true. He concluded by moving "for leave to bring in a bill, to amend the laws for the preservation of Game." [Hear, hear.]

§ Sir J. Shelley
did not rise to oppose the bringing in of the bill; but he must in the outset, protest against the principle on which it proceeded. If this bill was carried, game would soon disappear, and those field sports to which country gentlemen were so much attached, would be effectually destroyed. On the second reading, he should certainly take the sense of the House upon it. He begged of his hon. friend to put off the second reading for some time. Gentlemen in various parts of the country were extremely anxious on the subject, and an opportunity ought to be afforded them to state their sentiments. Let not gentlemen suppose that game alone would be affected by the proposed alteration. The fact was, that if it were carried, fox-hunting also would be destroyed.

Mr. S. Worthy
was desirous to obtain the opinion of all persons who were concerned in the measure, and with that view would allow as much time as he could conveniently. But his hon. friend would recollect, that besides the class he had alluded to, there was a very large body of persons, namely, the public, who were interested in this measure. It was undoubtedly of importance to that body, that the question should be decided as early as possible.