Importation of Foxes. 
Of the illustrious philologist, John 
Horne Tooke, I need hardly speak. He 
is acknowledged by all to have been a 
man of transcendent talents, and one of 
the most learned men of the age in 
_ which he lived. Stewart Kyd, an emi- 
nent barrister, much esteemed for his 
integrity and abilities in his profession, 
John Augustus Bonney and John Mar- 
tin, both of them attorneys at law, and 
solicitors of great. repute. 
% * * 
* * * 
* * * i * * 
* #* * * * * 
* * * * * % 
Jeremiah Joyce, a dissenting minister, 
and tutor to the sons of the late Earl 
Stanhope : a man much respected by 
all who knew him. John Richter, a 
banker’s corresponding clerk in the 
foreign department, a young man of 
good education, and much respected, 
Thomas Hardy was, indeed, but a shoe- 
maker, I- will leave his character to 
the vindication of the late Lord Erskine; 
and might appeal to the respect. with 
which that great advocate of the great 
cause of liberty, and the honour of his 
country, always continued to speak of 
him. Such were the low characters of 
Mr. Bayley’s Chronicle of the year 
1794; andif all characters are /ow that 
do not pertain either to royal or noble 
personages, then is the epithet fit for the 
page of the historian. But if the epi- 
thets of history should have reference 
to moral character and conduct, let any 
_ of them be weighed in the balance with 
John Bayley, Esquire. T. H. 
Pimlico, \6th Aug. 1825. - 
— 
Fo the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
Siz: . 
RETHER the facts which I am 
about to communicate to. the 
world, by your permission, are, or are 
not, likely to do any good, I cannot 
pretend to say; but, whatever may 
be the result, I think it the duty of 
every individual, however obscure his 
situation or impotent his means, to 
draw the attention of the public to ex- 
isting public evils. Upon that principle 
alone I appeal to your miscellany, as 
the vehicle to carry my wishes into 
effect. 
Without further preface, I beg to state, 
that the subject to which I wish to draw 
your attention and that of the commu- 
nity, is the notorious’ fact, of not only 
tearing but importing foxes, from fo- 
reign countries, for the purpose’ of turn- 
491 
ing them loose in this, in order to be 
hunted, But, before I enter into the 
detail of this unwarrantable ontrage 
upon the rights, the comforts, and the 
property of the public, I beg to make a 
few observations. 
Every one acquainted with the an- 
cient history of this island well knows, 
that there was a time when wolves 
abounded and were indigenous in Bri- 
tain; but, by a price being put on their 
heads, they were at last, with much 
difficulty, exterminated in England and 
Wales. The last wolf, in Scotland, was 
killed by the hand of Sir Ewin Came- 
ron, about the year 1680: in Ireland, 
the last wus destroyed about the year 
1710. I saw an account very lately, in 
one of the newspapers—and, of course, 
thousands saw it besides. me—of the 
devastations committed by wolves, in 
Russia, in the government of Livonia 
alone, in the year 1823. I mention it 
on the present occasion, that it: may 
stand on record, They devoured horses): 
945; foals, 1,248; horned — cattle, 
1,807; calves, 735; sheep; 15,182; 
lambs, 726; goats, 2,545; kids, 183: 
swine; 4,190; sucking-pigs, 312; dogs, 
703; geese, 673: This is said to be! 
an official account ; but of its correct- 
ness I have no further means of judg- 
ing. If it be at all near'the mark of 
truth, I am sure the account is of a 
most awful nature. I shall apply this 
account—and fact, I have no doubt— 
to the present argument by-and-bye. 
Now, with regard to foxes, the 
maxim is, “ that the law favoureth things 
for the good of the common wealth—such 
as the killing of foxes”” (Noy’s Maxims) ; 
and “ the common law allows the hunt- 
ing of foxes and badgers, being beasts of 
prey, in another man’s ground, because 
the destruction of them is looked upon as 
a public benefit.” (Cro, Jac. 321.) Such 
I understand the law to the present 
hour. 
Now if the law justifies the destruc- 
tion of foxes, because, being beasts. of 
prey, they are injurious to the interests 
of the commonwealth, of course the law 
considers their existence as a positive 
evil; andif a positive evil, every man who 
endeavours to increase such evil is the 
decided and declared enemy of his 
cotintry ; and he that tries to lessen and 
root it out is entitled to its thanks. — If 
not to destroy, but to preserve, and to 
increase this pernicious animal, be an 
evil, what then must be the wilful 
wholesale importation of them? Not 
3R2 only 
