Lords Sitting of 20 March 1827

NAVIGATION" LAWS—STATE OF THE MINISTRY.
The Marquis of Londonderrypresented a Petition from the Master Ship-carpenters, Hope, Sail, and Mast makers of Sunderland, in the county of Durham, against any alteration in the Navigation Laws. He stated, that those laws under which the shipping interest had been protected were now to be put aside; and he certainly wished to know where the changes in the fundamental principles of the constitution were to end. Those fundamental principles had been changed in many very serious and important points. When untoward fate took away a much lamented statesman, a beloved relation of his, the councils of this country, both at home and abroad, were directed on principles of perfect security, through all parts of our establishments. Both as regarded foreign and internal policy, the Navigation act of Charles 2nd had been infringed upon, step by step, and he did not know to what extent, these new experiments might go. It, therefore, became the duty of persons connected with the shipping interest, and also of those who were connected with landed property, to see if any stop was likely to be put to these new experiments. Me hoped the time was not far distant when he should know who was at the head of his majesty's government, and see upon what principles it was to be conducted. At present, there was a schism in the government which he should be glad to see healed. It was a melancholy circumstance, that at the time when an illustrious individual had been prevented, by the decree of Providence, from attending to his duties in parliament (which no man could lament more than he did), to think that, by the decree of the same Providence, those individuals who ought to be at their post answering for all those principles, were equally unable to attend. He hoped that the illness of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and of the President of the Board of Trade, would not be of long duration; and that the country would soon have a government to which it could look up with confidence. Unless something was soon done with respect to the state of his majesty's government, he should feel it to be his humble duty, possessed as he was of inferior abilities, to ask a distinct question upon the subject.

ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.
The Duke of Devonshirepresented a Petition from the Roman Catholics of Dungarvon, praying for the removal of the disabilities under which they laboured. He was desirous of shortly expressing to their lordships the deep regret he felt, that the consideration of the Catholic claims had been rejected, by a decision come to in another place. From principle, and from justice, he had invariably felt a strong conviction of the expediency of complying with the prayer of the Roman Catholics; and, if any thing could have added to the weight of that conviction, it would have been the events of the past year, which had established beyond all doubt, that the Catholics feel as one man on this great question. Instances of intemperance, and even of violence, produced by the determination not to consider the claims of the Catholics, showed the propriety and necessity of looking to the cause which produced them. That cause was Catholic exclusion, or a denial of those constitutional rights, of which, in his opinion, no man ought to be deprived, unless for reasons far more strong than those which had ever been urged in support of the exclusion of the Catholics. The restriction which existed opposed itself not only to the improvement of Ireland, but kept up a feverish excitement which produced animosity and destroyed all the charities of social life; and there was no alternative but for the Catholics to obtain their just rights, the granting which he urged, not for the sake of the Catholics, only but also of the Protestants of the South and the West. He addressed their lordships as one who had been exposed to the sneers of those to whose cause he had been attached; but, conscious of the sincerity of his own views, he had disregarded their attacks. He had not, however, abandoned their cause; on the contrary, he desired more than ever to see justice done to them, and whatever means he had in his power should always be exerted for that object. While he made that declaration, he also wished to express the regret he felt at the determination which had been shown, not even to consider the claims of the Catholics; which determination was likely to weaken the efforts of those who might have been disposed to follow an even and temperate course; who might have been powerful in conciliating the respective parties that were in collision. It had pleased those who had power elsewhere, to
1282
take a course which was much to be regretted, and all who were connected with Ireland must now act as to them seemed best. Rejected by the parliament, the condition of the Roman Catholics was not the less strong, though it was that of a defeated multitude.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, he could not permit the observation, that the disinclination of the legislature to take into consideration the claims of the Roman Catholics was a thing to be lamented, to pass unnoticed; and he would call to their lordships' recollection the history of a few past years. The first motion which was proposed by the friends to Roman Catholic emancipation, was a motion to take the petitions of the Roman Catholics into consideration. The objection made to that proposition was by persons, who, he would venture to say, were as much attached to the constitution, and as favourable to civil and religious liberty, as any who had ever entered that House. The objection turned upon this point—that a motion of so general a nature had no other tendency but to raise, in the minds of the Protestant subjects of his majesty, apprehensions with respect to their safe enjoyment of civil and religious liberty, and which might therefore create great uneasiness, when perhaps there was no occasion, and on the other hand give hopes to the Roman Catholics, which no Protestant legislature, and no Protestant king at the head of it, ought to encourage. Such motions had been made year after year, and repeatedly rejected; and at last a motion was brought forward for the purpose of carrying- into execution, not the general consideration of the subject, but of some specific measure. This bill had also been rejected repeatedly; and the motion made this session, to take into consideration the state of the Catholics, was a motion which came to the same proposition which had been often before parliament, when, after all the attention given to the subject, it had been considered to be a measure which parliament ought not to adopt. He had taken the liberty to state these circumstances, because he thought it necessary, when a motion had been made, to take into consideration the state of the Catholics, to refer back to the frequent attempts which had been made for effecting that purpose. With respect to what ought to be the particular measure brought forward, he could only say on that subject, that whenever

1283
the noble duke or any other noble lord who entertained the same opinions with him—and no man living could entertain for him more sincere regard than he did—called upon him, and other noble lords who were of the same opinion as he was, to state what measure they would propose which was likely to produce conciliation, he must be allowed to say, on the other hand, that there were men who thought that they would be sacrificing civil and religious liberty, if they passed any motion that had been proposed to them on the subject of the Catholic claims. For his own part, he must be allowed to say, and he most solemnly declared it, that after what had passed, it was infinitely more difficult that these measures should be considered now than it was three years ago.
The Marquis of Lansdownsaid, he had no intention of offering any observations on the petition which his noble friend had presented, had it not been for the unexpected remarks which had just fallen from the noble and learned lord. But after those remarks, directed as they were to the form of the motion to which he had intended to have endeavoured to induce their lordships to agree, had it not beau for circumstances over which he had no control, he felt himself bound to say a few words; without entering at that moment into the merits of that motion, and without attempting any vindication of the form which the motion had assumed in another place. He should not, therefore, now state the grounds upon which he should have called upon their lordships to consider the claims of the Roman Catholics before they adopted any specific measure on the subject; but the circumstance, that time after time, specific measures had been brought forward, which had been, under the influence of the noble and learned lord, repeatedly rejected, formed a reason for introducing a measure of a general nature. And, what more natural or more parliamentary course—what course more directly applied to the arguments used by the noble and learned lord—than when their lordships had been induced to reject, nay, to treat with contempt, every suggestion which the wisest and most able men had offered for security, after specific motions had been brought forward, which had been disapproved of by the noble and learned lord, and rejected by parliament, and after the increasing dis-
1284
satisfaction consequent upon those rejections—what more natural or proper course, he repeated, could be pursued, under these circumstances, than to ask parliament to take into consideration what was the state of the people of Ireland? That consideration had been rejected; and he now called upon those who had rejected that measure to say what measure they had to propose to parliament. But the noble and learned lord stated that, time after time, these propositions had been brought forward. Let him recollect that, time after time, those propositions had been rejected; and that, time after time, the condition of the country had become worse under that state of the government which the noble and learned lord supported, and under that state of the law, which he seemed, by his determination, to suffer no alteration in it, to think the most perfect.—He should now address himself particularly to the noble and learned lord; and if that noble and learned lord really believed that no circumstances had arisen, in the course of the last year, which gave to this question a new form, and furnished new grounds for deliberation; if he really believed that dangers to the constitution of this country—that dangers to the church, and to the future prosperity of this country—had not manifested themselves in the course even of the last Summer, in a way to impose upon every thinking man the duty of reflecting upon that which parliament had decided not even to take into consideration—if the noble and learned lord really supposed that no such circumstances had arisen, it could only proceed from his not having been acquainted with the circumstances of that country; which forced themselves upon the attention of every man connected with it, and which had displayed, in their bitterest and most mischievous form, those elements of confusion, which threaten to dissolve society in that country; but which dissolution their lordships were to await, without even considering what the elements of danger were. He thought that parliament, in not considering the state of Ireland, abandoned their duty. He was aware of the impossibility of knowing what was the opinion of the government in its present state; but, when there should be a government—when a government should exist—then it would be their lordships' duty to consider well this question; and he then intended to state those circumstances which were un-

1285
known to the noble and learned lord, but which had appalled the understandings and alarmed the apprehension of every man who looked to the future. He thought it his duty to state thus much, after what he had unexpectedly heard from the noble and learned lord; and to repeat his deep conviction of the justice of those sentiments which his noble friend had expressed, who had presented the petition.
The Lord Chancellorobserved, that if the noble marquis meant to state, that the decisions of that House were made under the influence of the person whom he called the "noble and learned lord," applying to himself, he could only say, God forbid that that should be the fact! His own confident opinion was, that their lordships' decisions were those of a Protestant House of parliament in a Protestant empire, paying only a proper attention to the honest declarations of the opinion of one of the members of that House; for he was too well acquainted with his own imperfections and defects—and he said that, as a man approaching to his grave—to suppose that their lordships had thought proper to adopt his opinion on a matter of such great importance. He only wished so to conduct himself, that the subjects of a Protestant king and a Protestant parliament might be convinced that he went to the grave without having lessened the security which the country had for the enjoyment of civil and religious liberty. He did not presume to state or to think that the sentiments of the humble individual, convinced of his imperfections, who now stood before their lordships, could have such influence as to direct their decisions; and he thought that the noble marquis, who stated that he had influence, paid no compliment to their lordships. With respect to security for a Protestant country and for a Protestant church, he had long made up his mind, that their lordships must do either of these two things—they must grant what was asked without any securities at all, or they must have much better security than those which had hitherto been offered. Such security was the most weak and ineffective that could possibly be offered to parliament. He could assure the noble marquis, that he should be ever foremost to express the respect which he felt was due to him; but he thought he had a right to expect that that noble lord would have given him credit for perfect conviction of the justice of the part he had acted, with
1286
respect to the Catholic claims. No man in the kingdom was a greater friend to toleration than he was; and it was upon that ground that he hoped and trusted—and he should say so, if these were the last words he should utter—and he was approaching quickly to the end of his days—he hoped and trusted, that their lordships, both for the sake of the Protestant subjects as well as the Catholic subjects of this empire, would preserve that constitution which had been earned by the exertions of their ancestors at the time of the Revolution; and would state to the Roman Catholics that, with his consent, they should have every thing except power in a Protestant state.

GAME LAWS.
Lord Wharnclifferose to move the order of the day on the subject of the Game Laws Amendment Bill. He should not detain their lordships at any length, in moving for the second reading of the bill, because he had already called their lordships' attention to the subject. He would rather wait to see what arguments would be adduced against the measure, and take an opportunity afterwards of endeavouring to answer them; but he was anxious, before the House proceeded to the discussion, to entreat of their lordships not to be drawn into a discussion on any of the clauses. What he wished to know was, whether their lordships would agree to the principle upon which the bill was formed. That principle was a very simple one: it merely went the length of saying, that every man should have power to do what he pleased on his own land: that no person should be allowed to trespass on another man's grounds, and it proposed to legalize the disposal of game. Those were the principles to which he wished to draw their lordships' attention. After a consideration of the subject for many years, he could submit that principle to their lordships with a perfect conviction, that, as far as respected their amusements or their privileges, it would effect no change, and could only be beneficial in restoring the law to the standard of common sense.
The Earl of Falmouth, in rising to oppose the second reading of the bill, observed, that if he understood the proposed measure rightly, it was founded on three grounds. The first with a view to alter the present qualification for killing game; the second, to enable small proprietors of

1287
land to kill game on their own estates; and thirdly, what he supposed was the principal object, the legalizing the sale of game, in order to prevent poaching, by taking away the temptation. With regard to the first, the noble lord had stated, that one object of the proposed alteration was, to extend the qualification for killing game to the fundholder, a right which, by the existing laws, had been exclusively given to the landowner. Now, he was not disposed to agree to that alteration, as fundholder had always the power of acquiring that right by purchasing land. With regard to the second object, that of conferring the right of killing game on the, land of small proprietors, he was not disposed to say much on the arguments which had been urged in favour of the measure, as he thought the House would hardly be disposed to make such innovations on the right of property, as would be introduced by the adoption of such an alteration. They had heard that small proprietors in Scotland enjoyed the privileges which it was thus intended to bestow; but it did not follow, because that right was attended by beneficial results in that part of the kingdom, that the same end would be attained here. In Scotland the laws with regard to the management of the poor were very different to what they were in this country, and when any alteration hail been proposed, we had been told it was impracticable. In Scotland we were told that the labourers worked well, looked well, and when we wanted them for soldiers, fought well, though brought up and fed upon oatmeal; but he did not know what sort of workmen or soldiers we should have in England, if a similar diet was introduced.—He then came to the principal ground on which the noble lord founded his bill; namely, the prevention of poaching by destroying the temptation, and he must say that he had never heard any thing more visionary than that, by rendering game saleable, the inducement to poaching would be destroyed. It was not contended that turning poultry into the woods would prevent depredations on that species of property; how, then, by making game saleable property, would poaching be prevented? A licenced dealer would breed and feed pheasants for the purposes of sale but he could not breed and feed them for less than the expense of rearing common poultry; therefore still the temptation would be the same for poachers, and
1288
in large towns they would ever find a market. He could not, therefore, look at this bill but as an experiment; and whatever might be the power of parliament to make such experiments, he considered it an improper exercise of that power, to bestow on a certain class of persons a right one year which they would find it necessary to take away the next.
The Earl of Rosebery,after detailing the evils and inconvenience of the present Game Laws, concluded by declaring his intention to vote for the second reading of the bill.
The Earl of Hardwickealso expressed his opinion in favour of the proposed alteration.
The Marquis of Salisburysaid, he was not opposed to the sale of game under proper regulations, but objected to the general innovations which the proposed bill would introduce. There was, he contended, no sufficient means of detecting or punishing poachers or trespassers; and he could not, therefore, consent to a repeal of all the present laws on the subject, without enacting some protection in return.
Lord Redesdaleobjected to the proposed alterations, as interfering with the right of property in such a way as would produce actions on actions without end. Every one at all acquainted with the way in which property was in this country divided into small parcels, must be aware of the difficulties attendant on such a measure. Proprietors of land not wider than the table between their lordships, would bring actions for trespass, and the whole country would be involved in unceasing litigation. He was quite certain that the game was mostly stolen by the gamekeepers themselves; and hence, "according to the old maxim, that two of a trade can never agree," arose the contests betwixt them and the other poachers; the gamekeepers contending not so much for the preservation of the game for their employers, as for their own monopoly in the stealth of it. As to the existing qualifications, he was of opinion that their removal would tend to prevent poaching. He had always observed, that when a farmer obtained the privilege of shooting, he was invariably found to be a most active enemy to the poachers. Under this impression, he would vote for the second reading of the bill; but would suggest the omission of the first part of it, and make it a bill merely

1289
for legalizing the sale of game, and putting an end to the present qualifications.
The Marquis of Butehoped that no objection would be made to the second reading of the bill. He thought that the new rights given by this bill would be found much more advantageous to the great landed proprietors as well as to the country at large, than the privileges which they at present enjoyed. The existing laws against poaching were most unjust and oppressive in their operation. If a man was convicted of stealing poultry, or potatoes, or other property of that description, he was punished by, perhaps, a month's imprisonment; but if he was convicted of stealing game, he was sentenced to imprisonment for three times that period. Since the complaints against the principles of these laws were so general and so notorious, he trusted that their lordships would show their compliance with the public feeling on this subject, by voting in favour of the bill.
The Earl of Westmorlandrose to oppose the principle of this measure. He was surprised that his noble friend could give his sanction to it by voting for the second reading. If he thought that it was calculated in the slightest degree to prevent poaching, or its consequences to those misguided men who were engaged in poaching, or was likely to produce advantages to any class of mankind, he would most cheerfully give it his support. But in his opinion, the only effect it could possibly have was to increase the grounds of every one of those complaints which existed against the present system. The noble lord who introduced the bill, had acted very fairly; for he held out no expectation that it would put an end to the existing grievances; nor was it in the power of law to put an end to them, unless it were a law of such severity as to merit their lordships' reprobation. He contended, that this was an aristocratical act, calculated to promote the privileges of the great landed proprietors, to the injury of every man of moderate fortune in the country; and therefore it should meet with his opposition. What advantage was it to a man of small property to be subject the moment he stepped off it, to be taken before a magistrate? Was it this that was to put an end to all quarrels? A hunter might go after a hare into another man's ground, but a shooter might not: it was true the hunter must have started
1290
the hare first, and then came a question for the lawyers, whether or not it was the real identical hare which he had so started? He thought that the ancient law upon this subject was the best; and he wished they could get back to it. No man lamented the present state of the law more than he did, or was more anxious to alter it, if it could be amended; for he thought that game was not worth all the punishment that protected it. He, therefore, wished that the law could be restored to its ancient state: but he feared that that would be a pretty difficult task; for persons must have game for amusement, and, therefore, some law must be in force for its protection. He would only further say, that he could not give his consent to a measure founded on the principles of this bill, which gave powers to those who had them not at present, and took them away from others who had.
Lord Ellenboroughwas convinced, that the time would soon come; when their lordships would be obliged to prevent, by legislative enactment, the numerous crimes which grew out of the present system of our Game-laws. With respect to the bill before the House, he thought that the noble lord who introduced it had been most unfortunate in the hands in which he had placed it to be manufactured. Without touching any of its clauses or provisions, he could engage to strike out between six and seven hundred words which were perfectly useless. In another place, a most useful operation was at that moment going on; namely, the consolidating and abridging the criminal laws, and drawing them up in simple and straightforward language. Now, it was most desirable that the present bill should be couched in language that was intelligible to poachers and country magistrates—the two classes of individuals who most required to understand it. One of its objects was to make game property; yet, in no part of it was the word "property" to be found. Another object was, to prevent poaching by punishment; but no where was the punishment intended set forth. In one place it was provided, that a body collegiate was entitled to younger game, and the eggs thereof; but how great must be the despair of that collegiate body, when they turned over a leaf, and found, that if any member of it was a lord of a manor, he must not break the shell of the egg. In short, the bill was full of ab-

1291
surdities. However, the existing evil must have an end; and he hoped, therefore, that game would be made property. He did not see why it should not, as well as turkeys, chickens, pigeons, &c, which were not far removed in their nature from it. He trusted, therefore, that the bill would be allowed to go into a committee; but, when there, it must be nearly re-cast. Something must be done to check the mass of crime produced by the present Game-laws; and unless their lordships protected the smaller proprietor, who could not afford to keep a gamekeeper, they could not protect those of larger properties; because the poacher always commenced with the smaller, and thus first acquired his poaching habits.
Lord Kingobserved, that the House was actuated by a great many fears at that moment. There was, first, the fear of being late for dinner; there was, then, the fear of a free trade in game. Some noble lords apprehended a millennium of poachers: There was a strong attraction between the mouth of an alderman and the wing of a pheasant; but the difficulty was to find a safe conductor. He recommended the House to follow the example of some parts of Germany on this subject. The elector of Hesse, who was only known iii this country as a soldier-seller, was also a strict contractor in game and wild pigs. As we had imported whiskers, and tight uniforms, and other good things from the Germans, might we not also adopt their notions on this subject? In France, numerous laws had been enacted to preserve the game. One was a very curious restriction, which was intended to prevent persons from manuring bishops' land with night-soil, for fear of injuring the flavour of the game. He believed there was not much difference between the reverend bench there and here. Arthur Young, who was a great agriculturist, inferred a strong similarity between a pheasant and a prince of the blood; because they were both fed at the public expense. Now, he thought the observation equally applied to the bishops: the only difference was, that the one was supported on the nett produce, and the other on the gross produce of the country. It had been said, that this embraced a question of morality; if so, it was strange that the right reverend prelates were so indifferent to it; for, although the benches opposite had been shortly before filled, there now re-
1292
mained only two of that reverend body to support this measure of morality; in which, however, he should be most happy to join them, although he believed it would be the first time he would have had the happiness of voting along with them.
The Lord Chancellorreferred to some of the observations of his noble and learned friend (lord Redesdale), and said that he must be considered better authority on this subject than his noble friend, because he had never, he believed, had a gun in his hand in his life, whilst he (the lord Chancellor) had never one out of his, whenever he could have one in it. One of the greatest delights he enjoyed in the autumn was afforded by his dogs, whom he could not help contrasting with those learned friends who entertained him, but not quite as delightfully, for the remaining ten months of the year. He was particularly pleased at observing how well his dogs knew how to mind their points, and when to stop—which was more than he could say for his learned friends at the bar [a laugh]. He considered it rather unfair in a noble lord to object to the clauses of a bill, instead of speaking to its principle. Perhaps it would be more advisable for that noble lord himself to set to work, and endeavour to manage it differently. He wished to be understood not to be pledged to a particular line of conduct, even should he vote against the bill in its presented form. There were some clauses in the bill which could not stand as they were, and which were too bad for correction. There would, he was convinced, be game enough in the country for every gentleman, provided they would keep on good terms with the farmers. In consequence of the good feeling existing between himself and his farmers, and from his having no gamekeeper, he, at least, had never been in want of game. A noble lord near him would recollect a circumstance which occurred at Lancaster when they were on the circuit together. An individual who, for the present purpose, he would designate as A. B., had been constantly tried for stealing salmon out of a river, and as often as he was brought up for this offence, so often did all the judges declare it as their opinion, that the salmon in the river were bona, vacantia, and consequently every body's property. A learned gentleman, however, purchased a salmon in the market, and having made a certain

1293
mark upon what was technically called its snout he put it in a place where A. B. was known to cast for fish. The next morning, among others, he took this identical salmon, which being found in his possession, he was tried, and transported for the offence; the judges being of opinion, that the salmon, having been in the market, could no longer be ranked among bona vacantia [a laugh]. This, however, was probably a solitary case. The principle of the present bill ought, in his opinion, to be wholesomely applied; and he could not help thinking, that if the noble lord who was the author of it, and the noble lord near him (lord Redesdale), were to lay their heads together, and make a bill, it would be better than pushing the present bill any further.
Lord Wharncliffeshortly replied. He had not, he said, by this bill taken away any old rights, and he had created no new ones, except that of allowing every one to kill game on his own land; and that he believed to be a right which every one ought to exercise. It had been erroneously stated, that, by the law of Scotland, no person could kill game on his own land without a qualification; there were many decisions upon this point, which put beyond a doubt the right of every body in this particular. By the law of Scotland, qualifications were only necessary upon another person's land. A noble baron opposite had descanted upon the many absurdities contained in the bill; but when it came before a committee, he should endeavour to convince that noble baron, that he had talked many more absurdities than he had ever accused him of writing. He bogged their, lordships to believe that he was not so fond of his own child as to regret its loss, simply because it was his; and if any other and better measure were submitted to their lordships, he would cheerfully relinquish his. At the same time, he was convinced that many years could not pass over with the present absurd, oppressive, and unjust laws in force.
The House divided: Contents 38; Not-Contents 17: Majority 21.