302 THE GAME LAWS. 



, in the county of Lancaster, esquire, lord of the manor j 

 of , in the same county, have nominated, deputed, au- 

 thorized, and appointed, and by these presents, do nominate, 

 depute, authorize, and appoint, GEORGE GRABBM, of , 



to be gamekeeper of and within my said manor of , with 



full power, licence, and authority to pursue, take, and kill any 

 hare, pheasant, partridge, or other game whatsoever, in and 



upon my said manor of , for my sole and immediate use 



and benefit ; and also to take and seize all such guns, bows, 

 greyhounds, setting-dogs, lurchers, oc other dogs, ferrets, tram- 

 mels, low-bells, hays, or other nets, harepipes, snares, or other 

 engines, for the pursuing, taking, or killing of hares, rabbits, 

 pheasants, partridges, or other game, as shall be used within the 

 precincts of my said manor, by any person or persons, who by 

 law are prohibited to keep or use the same. In witness whereof, 

 I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 24?th day of July, 

 1819. 



"SIMON SULKY." (Seal) 



" Sealed and delivered in the presence of 

 TIMOTHY TWIST, of aforesaid." 



If a gamekeeper be qualified in his own right, he has no occa- 

 sion to enter his deputation. But a gamekeeper is not author- 

 ized, by any statute, to seize game which he may find in the 

 possession of poachers, even on his manor, though it is lawful 

 for him to take their dogs, nets, or other implements. Also, 

 gamekeepers, if found killing game off the manors for which they 

 were appointed, are liable to the same penalties as unqualified 

 persons. The only difference, in this case, between them is, 

 that a gamekeeper's gun and dogs are not seizable ; while those 

 of an unqualified person may be taken. 



Vere v. Lord Cawdor and King. M. 50. G. 3. In this, 

 which was an action of trespass for shooting and killing a dog 



