Lords Sitting of 31 May 1833

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a second time:—Dramatic Authors; and Soap Duties.
Petitions presented. By the Marquess of LANSDOWN, from Wiltshire; and by Lord LYNDHURST, from several Places, against the 19th Clause of the Local Jurisdiction Bill.—By Lord POLTIMORE, from Halwell, for the Amendment of the Laws relative to Highways.—By the Marquess of WESTMINSTER, from a Wesleyan Congregation at Lynn, to Exempt all Places of Religious Worship from the Payment of Rates.—By the Bishop of CARLISLE, from his Diocese, against the Irish Church Reform Bill.—By the Archbishop of YORK, from Nottingham, for the Better Observance of the Lord's Day; and by the same, and the Manquess of WESTMINSTER, from a Number of Places, against Slavery.—By Lord SEGRAVE, from Slim-bridge; and by the Bishop of BATH and WELLS, from Northwich, against the Sale of Beer Act.—By the Earl of SEFTON, from several Places, for an Alteration in the Law relating to Catholic Marriages.—By the Earl of ABERDEEN, from the Medical Practitioners of Kingston-upon-Hull; and by the LORD CHANCELLOR, from the Royal College of Surgeons, Edinburgh, for an Alteration in the Apothecaries Act.—By the LORD CHANCELLOR, from two Places, for a Better Observance of the Lord's Day; from the Jews of Portsmouth, for a Removal of their Civil Disabilities; from Harrowgate, against the Assessed Taxes; from a Unitarian Congregation of Sal-ford, for Improvements in Education; from Newcastle-upon-Tyne, for the Revision of Petty Courts.

GAME LAWS.
The Duke of Wellingtonpresented a Petition against the Game Laws from the operative Gun-makers of London and Birmingham. His Grace expressed his conviction that, since the passing of the last Act, poaching had increased in the part of the country in which he principally resided, and this he attributed to the fact that persons who had game were enabled to sell it without any inquiry being made as to the way in which it came into their possession. He was so certain that the evils of poaching had increased, that he had determined to give up preserving game, and he was only prevented by knowing that his keepers would then be thrown out of employment. He had lost one servant in an affray with poachers, and he thought therefore that it was time to give up preserving game. He repeated, that he attributed, the increase of poaching to the last Game Act.
The Marquess of Westminsterdefended the law in its present state. In fact, the Act had not been passed long enough to allow of a fair estimate being made of its merits. As far, however, as he was acquainted

167
with its operation, it had not increased poaching.
The Earl of Malmesburyobserved, that all his anticipations with respect to the effect of the recent measure had been realized. Two-thirds of the gun-makers in the kingdom were out of employment. The poacher now brought his spoil to an open market. All shooting upon sufferance was at an end. The value of the game was now looked at in shillings and pence, and nobody was allowed to shoot. It was not his wish to return to the old system; but he certainly thought that some modification of the existing law on the subject was exceedingly desirable.
Lord Segravesaid, that, as far as his experience went, the late Bill was a complete failure. Not only had it not remedied the existing evils, but it had increased them an hundred fold.
The Duke of Richmond, as the individual who proposed the Amendment in the Game-laws, felt it to be his duty to defend it. The whole gravamen of the charge against it seemed to be, that it allowed game to be sold. It had always been sold. As to poachers, he could not believe that they had been increased. It appeared, that the gun-makers complained of want of employment. What was the cause? That they asked eighty guineas for a gun. Let them return to reasonable prices, and gentlemen would again buy of them.

COLONEL FITZGERALD.
Viscount Melbourne, seeing in his place a noble Earl who had some time ago put to him a question respecting the removal of Colonel Fitzgerald from the Magistracy of Ireland, wished to say a few words on the subject. Certain charges against Colonel Fitzgerald had been made to Government, at first anonymously, but of so extraordinary a nature, that the Lord Chancellor thought it necessary to institute a particular inquiry into the circumstances of the case; and the result was, a conviction that there was some foundation for the charges. It was then thought proper to lay a case before the law officers of the Crown, for their opinion whether or not it would be proper to institute criminal proceedings against Colonel Fitzgerald. The Attorney General's opinion was, that, under the present circumstances of the case, it would not be expedient to take any steps of that kind. The case then reverted into the
168
hands of the Lord Chancellor, who wrote to Colonel Fitzgerald, requesting explanation. The answer was so unsatisfactory, as to warrant the Lord Chancellor in removing him from the Commission of the Peace.

SUNDAY NEWSPAPERS.
The Bishop of Londonsaid, that on a former occasion, in presenting a petition upon the subject of the better observance of the Sabbath, he had taken the opportunity of expressing himself in rather strong language with respect to Sunday newspapers; and, as might be expected, his observations had called forth the indignation of the Sunday Press. However that might be, he should consider it his duty to omit no opportunity of stating his strong reprobation of those publications. The defence which had been set up on behalf of the Sunday newspapers was, that they were printed on Saturday, and, therefore, that they did not involve any infringement on the due observance of the Sabbath. His common sense was quite sufficient to inform him, that the printing of Sunday newspapers must take place on a Saturday; he was therefore quite aware of that at the time of making the remarks to which he now referred; but what he complained of was the publication and circulation of these papers on the Lord's Day. He (the Bishop of London) held in his hand two Petitions, which completely justified him in the view which he had taken of the subject. The one was from 110 of the master newsvenders in the city of London, and the other was signed by the servants of those newsvenders. The petition of the master newsvenders called upon their Lordships to put an end to the evils arising from the publication of those journals on Sunday, and stated their opinion, that the entire suspension of all Sunday trading would be highly beneficial. Sunday newspapers had been, in a great measure, superseded in some of their most useful purposes by the publication of The Gazette on Friday, and the petitioners thought that they might be discontinued without any inconvenience. The petition of the servants of the news-venders was the same verbatim as that of the masters.