1 <S27J Letter on Affairs in general. 521 



qnences attendant on their verdict. And what I would ask has been th* 

 result of that particular conviction ? An open contrast between tha 

 punishment awarded to manslaughter and to partridges! aughter, and a 

 public declaration, that, if aggravated manslaughter is to be punished only 

 by a year's imprisonment, and partridgeslaughter, which is the rich man's 

 sport, but the poor raan*s erime, by seven years transportation, the law of 

 England must consider the partridge as the being with a reasoning and 

 immortal soul, and the peasant as the unthinking and irresponsible bird. 

 To remedy the mischief arising from such a notion, Lord Wharncliffe pro- 

 poses to repeal the whole of the act of the 57th of the late King, and to 

 enact instead of it, that a poacher, upon conviction before a magistrate, 

 shall be sentenced for his first offence to hard labour for three months, for 

 his second offence to hard labour for six months, and for his third offence 

 shall be liable to transportation. Now, though I shall rejoice in seeing 

 Mr. Bankes's brutal act repealed, I must here again complain of Lord 

 Wharncliffe's propensity to throw great and extensive power into the 

 hands of an unpaid and irresponsible magistracy. In neither of his Game 

 Bills has he allowed the conviction of a single offence to take place 

 before a jury ; and surely, when no less than 1 ,300 persons are incarce- 

 rated annually in England for breaches of these laws, it is too much to say 

 that the magistracy, and the magistracy alone, shall sit in judgment upon 

 them. Besides the punishment for the third offence is too severe, and will 

 tend to foster a spirit of hostility against the new system, which is one of 

 the most lamentable consequences of the old system, of Game Laws. 

 Surely we have had gamekeepers enough shot by poachers, and poachers 

 by gamekeepers, to warn us against inflicting a disproportionate punish- 

 ment on an offence, which cannot be committed, except the culprit has 

 arms in his possession, nor proved against him, except he is captured 

 fiagrante delicto. 



One word more upon this subject, and I have done. Though Lord 

 Wharncliffe's bills are not calculated to create such a code of Game Laws, 

 as I could wish to see adopted permanently in this country, they are still 

 an improvement, as far as they extend, on the present system. He may, 

 and most probably will, be defeated for the present session in his endeavours 

 to stop by their means the demoralization, which the practice of poaching 

 is now spreading through the rural population of England ; but he is not 

 therefore to despond. The voice, and, what is better, the sense of the 

 country is with him as to the principle, whatever it may be as to the 

 details, of his bill ; and, though a few booby lords and ignorant squires 

 may still protest with Sir John Shelley, that "the Game Laws ought not to 

 be touched, because the country has arisen to the highest pinnacle of glory 

 under them," many years will not elapse, before their impolicy, inconsis- 

 tency, and inutility will be admitted even by their present advocates. 

 When that time arrives, he will be considered as a great public benefactor 

 who shall reduce them into one consistent whole, and shall purge them 

 from those anomalies and imperfections, which are depriving the bold and 

 virtuous cottagers of England of that self-respect, which is the best gua- 

 rantee for integrity of conduct, and are degrading them from their former 

 high moral standard to a level with the reckless and sanguinary peasantry 

 of Ireland. 



By the bye, I hate the present Game Laws so inordinately, that 1 will 

 put into the hands of the poachers a means of bringing the squire-archy a 



M.M. New Series. VOL, III. No. 17. ~3 X 



