THE GAME LAWS. 305 



had a right to take the plaintiff's gun from him, while he was 

 sporting for the purpose of killing game out of the manor of Ring- 

 wood ? A nd we are all of opinion he had no such right. If he 

 had killed game where he was not a gamekeeper, he might have 

 been convicted in the penalty of 51. but he was entitled to keep 

 and have dogs, gun, and nets, any where ; and a gamekeeper 's 

 gun cannot be seized, either in going to or returning from the 

 manor, or in any other place. 2 Wils. 387. 



The lord of a hundred or wapentake cannot grant a deputa- 

 tion to a gamekeeper. The Earl of Ailesbury v. Pattison. 1 

 Dougl. 28.* 



It seems, gentlemen receiving deputations to be gamekeepers 

 are not chargeable with the duty on servants, under 25 Geo. III. 

 c. 43. Several lords of manors granted deputations to divers 

 gentlemen to be gamekeepers within their respective manors ; 

 and being surcharged for the said gentlemen gamekeepers, they 

 appealed against the surcharge. The surveyor urged, that in 

 the terms of the act, all gamekeepers are rateable without dis- 

 tinction or exception ; and that they, therefore, in their present 

 capacity as gamekeepers, could have no pretence to any exemp- 

 tion : but the commissioners were of opinion, that the said gen- 

 tlemen, considered as gamekeepers, did not come within the 

 meaning of the act as servants, and therefore not rateable ; and 

 with that opinion the judges concurred. 



* Sir Thomas Gage claims and exerciser a paramount free warren over 

 all the extensive manors in Suffolk, from Ipswich nearly to Newmarket. 

 His keepers invariably go upon each at the beginning of the season? 

 and kill a single bird, merely to maintain this singular supremacy. 



2c3 



