( 34i ) 



to the laws of Edward I. and Edward III. concerning the 

 bounds of the forefts. The oppreflions of Charles in the 

 execution of the foreft laws were tyrannies which did not 

 require a formal aft to declare them illegal. 



Since the failure of this attempt, the royal prerogative 

 in forefts has not been ufcd by the princes on the throne 

 for opprefiive purpofes, altho individuals may have fuf- 

 fered from the mifbehaviour of foreft officers, and perhaps 

 from the general difpofmon of little men in authority to 

 fliew their importance. The prefervation of the deer, 

 and of the timber, has not been an object of much atten- 

 tion ; and the neglect of the timber has been highly detri- 

 mental to the country. 



The fwainmote courts are ftill regularly held in fome 

 of the forefts, and particularly in the New-foreft : but 

 the eyres having been wholly difufed, it has been thought 

 neceflary to provide for the punifhment of deer-ftealing 

 and wood-ftealing by the ordinary jurifdictions of the 

 country. Thefe punifliments are fevere ; and feyerer, 

 perhaps, than the puniftiments prefcribed by the ancient 

 Jaws of the foreft ; but not in general fo fevere as the 

 punifhments for other offences of the fame degree pf 

 moral turpitude. 



After this view of the rife and prpgrefs of foreft la\v 

 and its ftate at various periods till it fell nearly into difufe 

 by difcontinuance of the eyres, we may venture to fay 

 that it does not merit all the odium which it has excited. 

 To fmugglers the revenue laws are odious : and perfons 

 who refided, in or near a foreft, being frequently tref- 

 paffers ; or encouraging for their amufement, their 

 indulgence, or their intereft, the trefpafles of others i 

 all became a fort pf contraband dealers, and caught the 

 cry of the trade. It is not therefore furprifing that the 

 foreft-law ftipuld have been generally odious. The 

 principal real grievance has generally been the illegal 



z 3 extenGon 



