GAME LAWS AMENDMENT BILL. (Hansard, 6 May 1828)

The Earl of Malmesbury
merely wished to say, that his noble friend who had brought the measure in its original state before their lordships, had brought it forward as a temporary measure,—a bill to continue two years,—to try whether the sale of game would produce any effect on the crime of poaching. Whatever objections he might have had to that bill, he should nevertheless have given his assent to it as an experiment; but since the bill had been first brought forward, an alliance had taken place between his noble friend and another noble lord, in consequence of which the bill had been totally altered. He confessed he could not consider, that facilitating the disposal of game would diminish the crime of poaching. Under the existing law, a person might be seized, and was liable to conviction, for having game in his possession; but under the present act, with all the precaution which his noble friend had used, a man having ten acres of land might sanction any one for having game in his possession. In his opinion, the measure would operate very much to disturb society, and produce litigation. For, in districts where property was divided among a number of tenants, and where each began to be a game-preserver, what would be the result? There would immediately spring up a great deal of jealousy: the farmers would be out at night looking after the game when they ought to be in their beds, and, instead of going on with the plough, they would be running to see who was shooting at what would not be game, but property; for it became a question of pounds, shillings, and pence. With respect to their lordships' tenants, in how different a light would they see their lordships going over their farms to what they did before? They used to be glad to see their lordships amuse themselves, as they always got a share in the amusement: but how different would be the case, when any of their lordships, after having killed ten head of game, 361 sent his gamekeeper to the licensed house, and sold them. The idea created in the mind of the tenant would be, that he was having a new description of rent levied upon him. The bill would, in his opinion, lead to a variety of results of a very pernicious nature, and he entreated their lordships to consider well before they passed it. If his noble friend should fail, as he trusted he would, in bringing up the report, and should afterwards bring forward a temporary measure, it was not his intention to object to it.

The Marquis of Lansdowne
said, he was one of those who sincerely supported the present measure, with the deep conviction that the subject was peculiarly entitled to the attention of their lordships, as affecting the morals of the country from one end to the other. He hoped their lordships were aware, as he was sure they ought to be, that they were dealing with the question at a time when, from some cause or other, there had been an increase of crime, progressively advancing in this country, of a nature most appalling to every man who felt an interest in the religion, morality, and prosperity, of the country; which prosperity depended on the presence of religion and morality. Their lordships were dealing with a measure at a time when, by the returns recently made up in the public offices, it appeared that the amount of committals in England and Wales last year exceeded by one-hundred and seventy the amount of committals in the preceding year; and not only that, but it exceeded, by a third or a fourth, the amount of the committals on the average of six years. He knew that the noble earl, who was much alive to these considerations, was of opinion that the extent of poaching and the system of the Game-laws had no connexion with that state of things. If he looked at the state of the country generally—if he went into the prisons, his noble friend would find, that though all other crimes had increased, the crime of poaching had increased in an infinitely greater proportion than any others. He would refer particularly to the northern part of Wiltshire. In the House of Correction in Devises, he found, in February 1827, that one hundred persons, out of two hundred and twenty-seven, had been committed to that gaol for offences against the Game-laws. He had thought it possible that this might have arisen from accidental circumstances, and he had, therefore, taken the 362 trouble last week to procure an account of the number of persons now in that gaol, and he was able to state that of two hundred and thirty-four persons, one hundred were confined on account of offences against the Game-laws. In proportion to other crimes, there was, within the last two years, an increase of from forty to fifty per cent in crimes under the Game-laws. He found that, in the House of Correction, at Winchester, during the years 1810, 1811 and 1812, the average number of commitments for poaching was twenty, while the average number of commitments for poaching during the last three years, was two hundred and seventy-seven, making an increase of not less than one thousand per cent in the crime of poaching between the two periods. But their lordships would take a very narrow view of the question, if they supposed that a dry detail of the number of persons committed to gaol for poaching during a series of years, gave a correct idea of the whole mischief. It went far beyond this; and was, he believed, the cause of a great increase in other crimes. The business of a poacher furnished the person who followed it with much information. The poacher was gradually taught, by the practice of poaching, how to execute other crimes; he was taught to lose all respect for property; he was inspired with a love of nocturnal adventure; and in his exertions to overreach the law, he was strengthened in that spirit of gaming and adventure which, in every class, was a very great evil, but which, when it prevailed among the lower classes, led to a violation of all their duties. He was able to confirm this by a comparison of two adjacent counties, similar in all respects, except that in one the Game-laws were rigidly enforced, in the other, they were not. In Bedfordshire, containing ninety-three thousand inhabitants, these laws were enforced; in Huntingdon, containing fifty-two thousand three hundred inhabitants, they were not; and their lordships would perhaps expect, that in the former county the number of crimes should not be more than double the number in the latter. He was able, however, to state, from a comparison of three years, that the number of commitments in Bedfordshire under the Game-laws was six times greater, in proportion to the number of inhabitants, than in Huntingdonshire, and there were three times the amount of other crimes. It appeared, 363 therefore, that other crimes increased as the crime of poaching increased. He begged leave to state one fact which threw great light on the instrumentality of poaching in leading to other crimes. In a county of England there was, sometime ago, a great inundation of false money, which had suddenly got into circulation. An active magistrate, who had communicated the fact to him, undertook to investigate its source, and he found that it all proceeded from strangers, who had gone down from London, and who were coiners, and who, on arriving in that neighbourhood, had, as their first step, inquired into the character of all the poachers, and when they had found out this, they immediately applied to them to put the bad money into circulation, which they accordingly did; so that the money which the strangers could not of themselves put into circulation was put into circulation by the poachers. This was a proof of the manner in which one species of crime was dovetailed into another. He might multiply instances of this kind to infinity, proving in the clearest manner that poaching ought not to be considered by itself, but also in regard to its consequences. As to the clauses introduced by the noble baron, they had unquestionably made it a very different bill, and gave it substantially a new character; but of these clauses his opinion differed very much from that of his noble friend. He should pay the noble baron a bad compliment were he to say that the bill wanted nothing to make it complete; but he was sure that it wanted no perfection which great assiduity and extensive information could give it; and in his opinion, as far as it went, it was good, and went to the root of the evil. The great fault of the present system was, that there were but very few persons interested in upholding it, while the great bulk of the community was interested in opposing it; and it afforded a great temptation to poaching by enhancing the price of game. The measure of the noble baron met, he thought, both these evils; on the one hand, it gave a check to poaching, by facilitating the sale of game; and on the other, it interested all the farmers of the country in checking poaching: it introduced, if he might so speak, the great bulk of the community into the garrison, and gave them an interest in defending it. At present no poacher, not even when found in the woods, could be seized with- 364 out the greatest trouble; and it was found that there was an emulation not to support the law, but to render it inoperative. The whole peasantry of the country were opposed to the system. Juries would not convict under it; and not only juries, but judges, found a leaning in favour of the criminal. Such a state of things could not be suffered to exist: it was a disgrace to the country, and reminded him of what an eloquent orator had said of another country, and of another state of things: "they had made penalty and crime run a race together, and each had grown weaker in the conflict, till at last penalty had not been able to keep pace, and the fugitive had turned round on his breathless pursuer." In that state the law could only be enforced by bringing public opinion round, and by making a large and respectable body of men interested in enforcing the law, by founding it on a principle of property, and not upon any ancient rights, which were rendered odious to the community; upon that principle of property which was recognized by all, and which prompted a man to defend, not only that which was his own, but that which belonged to others. That was the principle upon which the present bill came recommended to their lordships; and, as far as it went, he gave it his cordial assent.

Lord Goderich
contended that, whether they passed the bill or not, it would be impossible to prevent the sale of game; and in proof of his argument, he referred to the evidence of a man before the committee, from which it appeared that that individual had sold nineteen thousand head of game in one year alone. The question was, then, whether or not it was fit to maintain a law which could not be enforced. The only effect of so doing would be, to destroy all respect for the laws generally, but more especially for the laws connected with this subject. With respect to the clauses proposed by his noble friend (lord Wharncliffe), he thought they would tend to diminish the crime of poaching, and facilitate the detection of crime when it was committed, by giving a greater number of persons an interest in the preservation of the game. His noble friend near him (lord Malmesbury) was mistaken in attributing the increase of poaching to the operation of those causes to which he ascribed the depression of agricultural property. The persons who were most frequently engaged in the offence of poaching 365 in the northern parts of England, were not agricultural labourers out of employment, but manufacturers, who were earning at the same time 18s. or 20s. a week, and who went out in bodies of fifteen or twenty. The moral mischiefs which this crime engendered were so extensive, that it had become absolutely necessary to adopt some measures for getting rid of this crying evil. There was no man more attached to the sport of shooting than he was, or more anxious to preserve it. But he was quite satisfied that the measure of his noble friend would not interfere with it; and even if it did, it was the duty of parliament to do something to put down so prolific a source of crime.