§ MR. J. ROWLANDS (Finsbury, E.)I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will inquire into the case of William Jervis and George Harrison, who were summoned and fined £1 and costs at Stanford-le-Hope, Essex, the charge being that on the 1st October they were out unlawfully using two guns for the purpose of taking hares and rabbits; whether he is aware that they both held gun licences and were in their legal right, being on the foreshore to shoot wild fowl; and whether he will obtain from the Justices, who have sentenced in this and other cases, a statement of what evidence they require before convicting for poaching?
§ MR. ASQUITHThe defendants William Jervis and George Harrison, who were summoned and fined £1 and costs at Stanford-le-Hope, Essex, were convicted under 1 & 2 William IV., c. 32, s. 3, on a charge of using guns for purposes of taking game on a Sunday. They had licences, but were heard and seen to shoot on land where they had no right by a police officer, and no evidence was given that they were on the foreshore. The farmer reported that there was game on the land. It is impossible to lay down any general rule as to the evidence which will warrant a conviction. Each case must be determined upon its own facts.
§ MR. J. ROWLANDSIs not this a similar case to one I brought forward some time since, where the defendants were on the foreshore, which, when there is a high tide, is covered by water? Are hares and rabbits in the habit of inhabiting that portion of the foreshore? Will the right hon. Gentleman lay down some distinct definition as to the right of persons who hold gun licences, for which they have paid 10s., to carry guns in such places?
§ MR. ASQUITHAs the facts are stated by the Justices none of those questions arise. These men were convicted of using guns for the purpose of taking game—not on the foreshore, but on a farm.
§ MR. J. ROWLANDSWill the right hon. Gentleman inquire whether there is any game on this particular land? That is part of a question I asked him some time ago, and he then promised to get further information. The whole question has now again come to the front. Is it not a fact that a number of persons, having paid for gun licences, are being prosecuted for being in search of game on land where only wild fowl are to be shot?
§ MR. ASQUITHI can only tell the hon. Member what the Justices have reported to me. These men were shooting on a farm, and not on the foreshore, and the farmer reported that there was game on the land. If these were the facts, then of course the conviction was justified.
§ MR. J. ROWLANDSI have taken the trouble to get information. I will submit it to the right hon. Gentleman.