422 GAME LAWS. 



had even been found in his possession: and, if a dog or gun (or other 

 engine) was used in the destruction of game, he would also be liable 

 to 201. penalty, provided he had not taken out a sporting certificate*. 



If a person go in pursuit of game with a dog and gun, he can only 

 be charged with one offence, and convicted in one penalty for both. 

 (7 Term Reports, 152.) 



Killing, from seven o'clock at night to six in the morning, between 

 the 12th of October and the 12th of February; and from nine at 

 night to four in the morning, from the 12th of February to the 12th 

 of October (besides the other penalties before named) j first offence, 

 not more than 201. nor less than 101.; second offence, from 30/. to 

 201. ; third, and subsequent, 501. 



Servant of the lord of a manor may kill, and yet the lord of the 

 manor may not, unless he is qualified ! I ! 



EGGS OF GAME. 



[Taking, or wilfully destroying, the eggs of game, subjects the 

 offender to the following penalties for EACH EGG.] 



. s. d. 

 Pheasant, partridge^ swan . . . 5 ? t . , 1 



* The following abstract from a report of the assizes at Salisbury 

 affords a useful precedent for detecting poachers, and also gives us 

 an admirable observation on the subject, by that most able and ex- 

 cellent judge, Sir Allan Park. 



An action was brought against a man, named Pithouse, for having 

 in his possession a snare for the destruction of game ; and also for 

 having in his possession a pheasant (which is deemed by law an ex- 

 posing thereof to sale): he was fined 57. for each offence. Another 

 man named Bundy was fined 51. for having a snare in his possession. 

 A man named Lovelock was also fined 51. for keeping and using a 

 gun, and for exposing to sale a hare. In all these cases of poaching, 

 the judge expressed great disapprobation of any person suffering 

 similar offenders to elude the penalties of the lawj and he commented 

 strongly on the dreadful consequences resulting to the community 

 from the too great prevalence of this crime. His lordship assured 

 the jury, that he should always punish the crime wherever he could 

 do so, because he was convinced it led to enormities of the darkest 

 hue, and frequently to an ignominious death at the gallows. 



