§ Lord Althorpstated, that before the House went into a Committee on the Game Bill, it was necessary to agree to a Resolution for fixing the rate of duty on Game Certificates, in a Committee of Supply. He would, therefore, move, that the House resolve itself into a Committee.
§ The House resolved itself into a Committee.
§ Lord Althorpwished the discussion on the Game Bill to be taken in a Committee on that Bill. The Resolution he meant to propose was only pro formâ. He moved "that it is the opinion of this Committee, that an annual duty of 2l. shall be paid for every Certificate to empower any person to deal in game."
§ Colonel Sibthorpthought the sum far too small, but he would reserve what he had to say upon the subject until the House should be in Committee on the Game-laws.
§ Lord Althorpsaid, if the hon. Member intended to move, that the amount should be increased, this was his only opportunity for doing so.
§ Colonel Sibthorpsaid, the proposed sum was too little for a license, and would allow every poacher in the country to procure one. The sale of game would become general, and game-stalls would be as common as fruit-stands. The amount ought, at least, to be 8l.; as otherwise certificates would fall into improper hands.
§ Lord Althorpsaid, that as the certificates were to be granted by Magistrates at Quarter Sessions, they would take care that they should not fall into improper hands.
§ Mr. Huntprotested against the Sale of Game Bill altogether, England would 937 indeed be altered, when the landlords of the country would be allowed to make a market of the game, which was bred tip at the expense of the farmer.
§ Mr. Weylandsaid, there ought to be an open market for game, for, at present, it was sold only by the poacher, and the sale was exclusively in his hands. The principle of the Bill was, to open a fair market for game, which had, hitherto, been a monopoly in the hands of the man that took it illegally. Gentlemen who preserved game, must, of course, let their land accordingly. He believed the Bill would be attended with beneficial results, for the existing system had produced the most demoralizing effects. The greater portion of litigation and of punishment in the country, was caused by the infraction of these laws. Every class of the community had reason to rejoice at the proposed alteration. It would lead to the return of that system of sporting which was congenial to the general feeling, and to the re-establishment of that harmony between the different classes which the Game-laws had done so much to interrupt.
§ Lord Althorpsaid, this was not the time for discussing the clauses. The question before the Committee was, that it was expedient a certain sum should be paid for a license to sell game.
Sir Charles Burrellsuggested, that the license to sell ought to be on a par with the license to kill. Those certificates, he thought, ought to be given to persons of respectability only: and he objected strongly to granting them to persons who were also licensed to sell beer. It was at these houses that most of the meetings were held which produced the unhappy disturbances of last winter, and they were the causes of the increase of vice and immorality to a great extent. He should wish to see game shops placed under the supervision and control of the police, or they would become mere receptacles for the fruits of poaching. He should recommend the price of the license to be 3l. 13s. 6d. instead of 2l.
§ Lord Althorpthought, that this was a point which might more properly be discussed in the Committee on the Game-laws. With respect to increasing the amount of the fee on the certificate, he thought they ought not to check the number of persons desirous of becoming dealers, by charging too high a duty. He should be sorry to raise the sum, because 938 he thought it was not a good mode of managing a police regulation. With respect to the granting game-selling licenses to the keepers of beer-houses, that would be a subject for the consideration of the Magistrates, who would have the power to grant them.
The Marquis of Chandoswas sorry to find, that carriers and coachmen were not excluded by this Bill from taking out certificates, as they were by the Bill which he had himself introduced last Session. He hoped the noble Lord would introduce a clause to that effect.
§ Sir Matthew White Ridleythought the charge for a certificate ought not to exceed 2l. It was desirable to bring the sellers of game under the control of Magistrates, and under the eye of the police. These were the reasons for having licenses, and the amount proposed was sufficient for those purposes.
§ Colonel Sibthorpthought, it was far too small, as two days' sale of game would more than pay the expense of any sum, within reason, that might be charged for a certificate. His object was, to have respectable dealers. The proposed sum would allow the very lowest persons to obtain licenses.
§ Mr. Huntwould contend, that this was purely a landlords' bill, and was intended for their exclusive benefit. The game often injured the farmer to a greater extent than the whole amount of his rent. He spoke from experience. The landlords never made a sufficient allowance in the rent. The tenants bore all the expense of rearing the game, and ought to have the benefit of selling it.
§ Mr. Weylandsaid, in Norfolk, where he resided, it was the universal practice to make allowances to farmers who lived near preserves of game. Indeed, it was obvious that no tenant would pay an equal rent for a farm liable to the drawback of a neighbouring preserve, which must diminish the quantity of his produce. He approved of the Bill, because, in his opinion, the sale of game would put an end to poaching.
§ Mr. Huntspoke as a farmer who had felt the injury, and knew that sufficient allowance was not made for it. The hon. Gentleman spoke as a landlord who had not felt it.
Sir Thomas Fremantlehoped the suggestion of his hon. friend, to raise the price of the license, would be adopted. Care ought to be taken that none but the most 939 respectable persons should obtain licenses.
Sir Charles Burrellwould not divide the Committee upon his proposition, if he found the general feeling was against it, but he considered it a matter of importance to take care into whose hands the licenses got. In his opinion, it would prevent smugglers and poachers from obtaining them if the duty was increased.
§ Sir George Warrendersaid, his hon. friend would not obtain the object he appeared to have in view, by the addition of a small amount to the price of a license. Nothing but making it extremely high would have that effect, and then the chances were, that game would be sold without taking out a license.
Sir Charles Burrellsaid, his proposition went to the extent of almost doubling the price of the license.
Mr. Humeregretted there should be any discussion as to the price of a license. He considered it better there should be no license at all; for there was nothing like free trade, as a preventive and remedy for all kinds of smuggling.
§ Mr. Huntsuggested, that persons who used a double-barrel gun, should pay 4l. for a license, and persons using a single-barrel gun, 2l. He himself always used a double-barrel gun.
§ Lord Althorpconsidered the addition proposed in the price of the license most objectionable, and not likely to produce the effect supposed by the hon. Baronet who proposed it. It must be remembered, that the whole of the licensing of these game-shops would be under the control of the Magistrates, who would undoubtedly be cautious not to grant licenses to improper persons.
§ Resolution agreed to and the House resumed.