HL Deb 13 June 1844 vol 75 cc671-2
The Duke of Richmond

presented a Petition from a place in Suffolk, complaining that a number of informations had been laid against the petitioners and others for penalties, for having been present at coursing matches, at which dogs belonging to persons not having certificates had run.

The Marquess of Normanby

presented two Petitions from owners and occupiers of land in Norfolk to the same effect. There were a great number of coursing meetings held in that part of the country, and a great number of persons had been most vexatiously proceeded against by common informers, under the 52nd Geo. III., for penalties, in consequence of certain duties not being paid on some dogs, or in consequence of some informalities with regard to the certificate. Under this Act any one present at a meeting, although he might not have been guilty of any offence, was liable to a penalty of 20l., one half of which only could be remitted. These petitioners complained of having been exposed to great hardships by common informers, where they were not aware that they had violated any law, as the proceedings against them depended on the acts of other parties, over whom they had no control. He trusted that the attention of the Government would be directed to this subject, with the view to apply a remedy.

The Duke of Richmond

wished to know whethere there would be any objection to furnish returns of the convictions under these informations.

Lord Wharncliffe

was not aware that there would be any objection to furnishing the returns.

Back to
Forward to