362 



THE LIABILITIES OF PARTIES HUINTING, ETC. 



Two persons 

 engaged in a 

 common pur- 

 pose. 



Trespass in 

 search of 

 Grame. 



Hunting with 

 Hounds or 

 Greyhounds. 



Jurisdiction 

 of Justices 

 ousted. 



may be continued as well as spoiling, consuming or cutting 

 grass (a) . 



When two persons are engaged in a common purpose, 

 wliat one does is the act of Loth. Therefore, in a case in 

 which A. and B. were driving in a trap along the turnpike 

 road for a lawful pm-pose, and A. got out of the trap, went 

 into a field, and shot a Hare, which he gave to B., who 

 had remained in the trap, it was held that there was suffi- 

 cient evidence that B. was present Aiding and Abetting A. 

 in a trespass in pursiiit of Game (under 11 & 12 Vict. c. 43, 

 s. 5), and that he was not the less an Aider and Abettor, 

 because he might have been convicted as a Principal (h). 



Under 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 32 (c), trespassers in pursuit of 

 Game may be required to quit the land, and to tell their 

 names and abodes, and in case of refusal may be arrested 

 and brought before a Justice within twelve hours. And 

 any trespasser, on conviction before a Justice, is to forfeit 

 a sum not exceeding o/., together with the costs of con- 

 viction (c). 



But Hunters in fresh pursuit of Deer, Hare or Fox 

 (with Hounds or Grreyhounds) started on other lands, 

 are exempted from the provisions of 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 32, 

 against trespassers (d). 



By 1 & 2 AVill. 4, c. 32, s. 30, it is provided that " any 

 person charged with any such trespass shall be at liberty 

 to prove, by way of defence, any matter which would have 

 been a defence to an action at law for such trespass." But 

 the Jurisdiction of the Justices is not ousted by the claim 

 of a prescriptive right in gross to kill Game on the land, 

 there being no coloiu' for such a claim ; nor by the asser- 

 tion that the land is not in the occupation of the Lord of 

 the Manor, but is vested in other persons, as the claim of 

 title to oust the jurisdiction of the Justices must be a claim 

 of title in the party charged, and not in a third person [e). 

 In a case in which a prescriptive right in gross to kill 

 Game is set up, which is an impossible right, unkno^vm to 

 the law, the bona Jides is immaterial; but where a hona fide 

 and 25robable right of property is set up, the Justices are 

 bound to hold their hands (/). The mere belief, however, 



(ff) Monldon v. Tasldey, 2 Salk. 

 639. 



(i) Staccy V. Whitchurst, 13 W. 

 R. 384 ; Mai/hcw y. Jf'ardie!/, 14 C. 

 B., N. S. 5.30. 



(e) 1 &2 WiU. 4, c. 3_>, s. 31. 



[d) Ibid. s. 35. 



((') CunuceU V. Sanders, 3 B. & S. 

 206. 



(/) Hrff. V. KaJ/h'!/, 10 L. T., N. 

 S. Sod. See also JFatkius v. Major, 

 L. R., 10 C. P. G62; 44 L. J., M. 



