GAME LAWS. (EDINBURGH REVIEW, 1823.)

again. We have got game this season as low as half-a. crown a brace (birds), and pheasant as low as 78. a brace. A Letter to the Chairman of the Committee of the House of It is so plentiful, there has been no end to spoiling it this Commons, on the Game Laws. By the Hon and Rev. Wil-season. It is so plentiful, it is of no use. In war time it is liam Herbert. Ridgway, 1823. worth having; then they fetched 78. and 88. a brace.'-Report, p. 33.

ABOUT the time of the publication of this little phamphlet of Mr. Herbert, à committee of the House of Commons published a Report on the Game Laws, containing a great deal of very curious information respecting the sale of game, an epitome of which we shall now lay before our readers. The country hig glers who collect poultry, gather up the game from the depots of the poachers, and transmit it in the same manner as poultry, and in the same packages, to the London poulterers, by whom it is distributed to the public; and this traffic is carried on (as far as game is concerned) even from the distance of Scotland.The same business is carried on by the porters of stage coaches; and a great deal of game is sold clandestinely by lords of manors, or by gamekeepers, without the knowledge of lords of manors; and principally, as the evidence states, from Norfolk and Suffolk, the great schools of steel traps and spring guns. The supply of game, too, is proved to be quite as regular as the supply of poultry; the number of hares and partridges supplied rather exceeds that of pheas ants; but any description of game may be had to any amount. Here is part of the evidence.

state, that it is absolutely necessary they should All the poulterers, too, even the most respectable, carry on this illegal traffic in the present state of the game laws; because their regular customers for poultry would infallibly leave any poulterer's shop from whence they could not be supplied with game.

I have no doubt that it is the general wish at present of the trade not to deal in the article; but they are all, of course, compelled from their connections. If they cannot get game from one person, they can from another. 'Do you believe that poulterers are not to be found who would take out licenses, and would deal with those very they would have dealing as you would do? I think the persons, for the purposes of obtaining a greater profit than poulterers in general are a respectable set of men, and would not countenance such a thing; they feel now that they are driven into a corner; that there may be men who would countenance irregular proceedings, I have no doubt. Would it be their interest to do so, considering the penalaware that they are committing a breach of the law at prety? No, I think not. The poulterers are perfectly well sent.-Do you suppose that those persons, respectable as they are, who are now committing a breach of the law, tered? No, certainly not; at present it is so connected would not equally commit that breach if the law were al with their business that they cannot help it.-You said just now, that they were driven into a corner; what did you mean by that? We are obliged to aid and abet those men who commit those depredations, because of the constant demand for game, from different customers whom we supply with poultry.-Could you carry on your business as a poulterer, if you refused to supply game? By no means; because some of the first people in the land require it of me.' -Report, p. 15.

'Can you at any time procure any quantity of game? I have no doubt of it.-If you were to receive almost an unLimited order, could you execute it? Yes, I would supply the whole city of London, any fixed day once a week, all the year through, so that every individual inhabitant should have game for his table.-Do you think you could procure a thousand pheasants? Yes; I would be bound to produce ten thousand a week.-You would be bound to provide every family in London with a dish of game? Yes; a partridge, or a pheasant, or a hare, or a grouse, or something or other. How would you set about doing it? I should, of course, request the persons with whom I am in the habit of dealing, to use their influence to bring me what they could by a certain day; I should speak to the dealers and the mail-guards, and coachmen, to produce a quantity; and I should send to my own connections in one or two manors where I have the privilege of selling for those gentlemen; and should send to Scotland to say, that every week the largest quantity they could produce was to be sent. Being but a petty salesman, I sell a very small quantity; but I have had about 4000 head direct from one man.-Can you state the quantity of game which has been sent to you during the year? No I may say, perhaps, 10,000 head; mine is a limited trade; I speak comparatively to that of others; I only supply pri-tary to that committee.-What was the consequence of that vate families.'-Report, p. 20.

When that worthy errorist, Mr. Bankes, brought in his bill of additional severities against poachers, there was no man of sense and reflection who did not anticipate the following consequences of the measure.

'Do you find that less game has been sold in consequence of the bill rendering it penal to sell game? Upon my word, it did not make the slightest difference in the world.-Not immediately after it was made? No; I do not think it made the slightest difference.-It did not make the slightest sensation? No, I never sold a bird less.-Was not there a resolution of the poulterers not to sell game? I was secre

resolution? A great deal of ill blood in the trade. One Poachers who go out at night cannot, of course, like gentleman who just left the room did not come into my ideas. I never had a head of game in my house; all my regular tradesmen, proportion the supply to the de- neighbours sold it; and as we had people on the watch, mand, but having once made a contract, they kili all who were ready to watch it into the houses, it came to this, they can; and hence it happens that the game market we were prepared to bring our actions against certain indiis sometimes very much overstocked, and great quan-viduals, after sitting, perhaps, from three to four months tities of game either thrown away, or disposed of by Irish hawkers to the common people at very inferior prices.

'Does it ever happen to you to be obliged to dispose of poultry at the same low prices you are obliged to dispose of game? It depends upon the weather; often, when there is a considerable quantity on hand, and owing to the weather, it will not keep till the following day, I am obliged to take any price that is offered; but we can always turn either poultry or game into some price or other; and if it was not for the Irish hawkers, hundreds and hundreds of heads of game would be spoiled and thrown away. It is out of the power of any person to conceive for one moment the quantity of game that is hawked in the streets. I have had opportunity more than other persons of knowing this; for I have sold, I may say, more game than any other person in the city; and we serve hawkers indiscriminately, persons who come and purchase probably six fowls or turkeys and geese, and they will buy heads of game with them.-Report, p. 22.

Live birds are sent up as well as dead; eggs as well as birds. The price of pheasants' eggs last year was 88. per dozen; of partridges' eggs, 2s. The price of hares was from 3s. to 3s. 6d. ; of partridges, from 1s. 6d. to 2s. 6d. ; of pheasants, from 5s. to 5s. 6d. each, and sometimes as low as 1s. 6d.

What have you given for game this year? It is very low indeed I am sick of it; I do not think I shall ever deal

every week, which we did at the Crown and Anchor in the
Strand, but we did not proceed with our actions, to prevent
ill blood in the trade. We regulariy met, and, as we con-
Iceived at the time, formed a committee of the most respect-
able of the trade. I was secretary of that committee. The
game was sold in the city, in the vicinity of the Royal Ex-
change, cheaper than ever was known, because the people
at our end of the town were afraid. I, as a point of hồn-
our, never had it in my house. I never had a head of
game in my house that season.--What was the conse-
quence? I lost my trade, and gave offence to a gentleman;
a nobleman's steward, or butler, or cook, treated it as con-
tumely; "Good God, what is the use of your running your
head against the wall?"-You were obliged to begin the
trade again? Yes, and sold more than ever.-Report, p. 18.

of every person before the committee.
These consequences are confirmed by the evidence

All the evidence is very strong as to the fact, that dealing in game is not discreditable; that there are a great number of respectable persons, and, among the rest, the first poulterers in London, who buy game would never dream of purchasing any other article knowing it to have been illegally procured, but who procured by dishonesty.

Are there not, to your knowledge, a great many people in this town who deal in game, by buying or selling it, that would not on any account buy or sell stolen property?Certainly; there are many capital tradesmen, poulterers, who deal in game, that would have nothing to do with stolen

property; and yet I do not think there is a poulterer's shop | break into a house, or to rob a person, or to steal his in London where they could not get game, if they wanted poultry, or his sheep, they are committing a crime it. Do you think any discredit attaches to any man in this town for buying or selling game? I think none at all: and against that man's property; but I think with respect I do not think that the men to whom I have just referred, to the game, they do not feel that they are doing any would have any thing to do with stolen goods.-Would it thing which is wrong; but think they have commitnot, in the opinion of the inhabitants of London, be con- ted no crime when they have done the thing, and their sidered a very different thing dealing in stolen game, or sto- only anxiety is to escape detection.' In addition, Mr. len poultry? Certainly.-The one would be considered dis- Stafford states that he remembers not one single congraceful, and the other not? Certainly; they think nothing viction under Mr. Bankes's Act against buying game; of dealing in game; and the farmers in the country will not and not one conviction for buying or selling game give information; they will have a hare or two of the very within the last year has been made at Bow Street. men who work for them, and they are afraid to give us information.-Report, p. 31.

The inferences from these facts are exactly as we The evidence of Daniel Bishop, one of the Bow have predicted-that to prevent the sale of game is ab predicted, and as every man of common sense must street officers, who has been a good deal employed in solutely impossible. If game is plentiful, and cannot the apprehension of poachers, is curious and impor- be obtained at any lawful market, an illicit trade will tant, as it shows the enormous extent of the evil, and be established, which it is utterly impossible to prethe ferocious spirit which the game laws engender in vent by any increased severity of the laws. There the common people. The poachers,' he says, never was a more striking illustration of the necessity 'came sixteen miles. The whole of the village from of attending to public opinion in all penal enactments. which they were taken were poachers; the constable Mr. Bankes (a perfect representation of all the ordinaof the village, and the shoemaker, and other inhabi-ry notions about forcing mankind by pains and penaltants of the village. I fetched one man twenty-two ties) took the floor. To buy a partridge (though still miles. There was the son of a respectable gardener; considered as inferior to murder) was visited with the one of these was a sawyer, and another a baker, who very heaviest infliction of the law; and yet, though kept a good shop there. If the village had been game is sold as openly in London as apples and oranalarmed, we should have had some mischief; but we ges, though three years have elapsed since this legiwere all prepared with fire-arms. If poachers have a slative mistake, the officers can hardly recollect a spite with the gamekeeper, that would induce them single instance where the information has been laid, to go out in numbers to resist him. This party I or the penalty levied: and why? because every man's speak of had something in their hats to distinguish feelings and every man's understanding tell him, that them. They take a delight in setting to with the it is a most absurd and ridiculous tyranny to prevent gamekeepers; and talk it over afterwards how they one man, who has more game than he wants, from exserved so and so. They fought with the butt-ends of changing it with another man, who has more money their guns at Lord Howe's; they beat the game- than he wants-because magistrates will not (if they keepers shockingly.' 'Does it occur to you (Bishop can avoid it) inflict such absurd penalties-because is asked) to have had more applications, and to have even common informers know enough of the honest detected more persons this season than in any former indignation of mankind, and are too well aware of the one? Yes: I think within four months there have coldness of pump and pond to act under the bill of the Loen twenty-one transported that I have been at the Lycurgus of Corfe Castle. taking of, and through one man turning evidence in each case, and without that they could not have been identified; the gamekeepers could not, or would not, identify them. The poachers go to the public house and spend their money; if they have a good night's work, they will go and get drunk with the money. The gangs are connected together at different public bouses, just like a club at a public house; they are sworn together. If the keeper took one of them, they would go and attack him for so doing.'

The plan now proposed is, to undersell the poacher, which may be successful or unsuccessful; but inc threat is, if you attempt this plan there will be no game-and if there is no game there will be no conn try gentlemen. We deny every part of this enthymeme-the last proposition as well as the first. We really cannot believe that all our rural mansions would be deserted, although no game was to be found in their neighbourhood. Some come into the country for health, some for quiet, for agriculture, for economy, Mr. Stafford, chief clerk of Bow Street, says, 'All from attachment to family estates, from love of re the offences against the game laws which are of an tirement, from the necessity of keeping up provincial atrocious description I think are generally reported to interests, and from a vast variety of causes. Patridgthe public office in Bow Street, more especially in ca-es and pheasants, though they form nine-tenths of buses where the keepers have either been killed, or dan man motives, still leave a small residue, which may gerously wounded, and the assistance of an officer be classed under some other head. Neither is a great from Bow Street is required. The applications have proportion of those whom the love of shooting brings been much more numerous of late years* than they into the country of the smallest value or importance were formerly. Some of them have been cases of to the country. A colonel of the Guards, the second murder; but I do not think many have amounted to son just entered at Oxford, three diners out from murder. There are many instances in which keepers Piccadilly-Major Rock, Lord John, Lord Charles, have been very ill treated-they have been wounded, the colonel of the regiment quartered at the neigh skulls have been fractured, and bones broken; and bouring town, two Irish peers, and a German baron; they have been shot at. A man takes an hare, or a-if all this honourable company proceed with fustian pheasant, with a very different feeling from that with jackets, dog-whistles, and chemical inventions, to a which he would take a pigeon or a fowl out of a farm-solemn destruction of pheasants, how is the country yard. The number of persons that assembled togeth- benefited by their presence? or how would earth, air, er is more for the purpose of protecting themselves against those that may apprehend them, than from any idea that they are actually committing depredation upon the property of another person; they do not consider it as property. I think there is a sense of morality and a distinction of crime existing in the men's minds, although they are mistaken about it. Men feel that if they go in a great body together, to

*It is only of late years that men have been transported for shooting at night. There are instances of men who have been transported at the Sessions for night poaching, who made no resistance at all when taken; but then their characters as old poachers weighed against them-characters estimated probably by the very lords of manors who had lost their game. This disgraceful law is the occasion of all the murders committed for game.

or sea, be injured by their annihilation? There are certainly many valuable men brought into the country by a love of shooting, who, coming there for that purpose, are useful for many better purposes; but a vast multitude of shooters are of no more service to the country than the ramrod which condenses the charge, or the barrel which contains it. We do not deny that the annihilation of the game laws would thin the aristocratical population of the country; but it would not thin that population so much as is contended; and the loss of many of the persons so banished would be a good rather than a misfortune. At all events, we cannot at all comprehend the policy of alluring the bet ter classes of society into the country, by the temptation of petty tyranny and injustice, or of monopoly in sports. How absurd it would be to offer to the higher

pose himself to the loss of liberty, property, character, game, which the love of gain does in the farmer to and license. The persons interested to put a stop to multiply poultry. Many gentlemen of small fortune such a practice, would not be the paid agents of go- will remember, that they cannot enjoy to any extent vernment, as in cases of smuggling; but all the gentle- this pleasure without this resource; that the legal men of the country, the customers of the tradesman sale of poultry will discountenance poaching; and for fish, poultry, or whatever else he dealt in, would they will open an account with the poulterer, not to have an interest in putting down the practice. In get richer, but to enjoy a great pleasure without an all probability, the practice would become disrepu. expense, in which, upon other terms, they could not table, like the purchase of stolen poultry; and this honourably and conscientiously indulge. If country would be a stronger barrier than the strongest laws. A gentlemen of moderate fortune will do this (and we few shabby people would, for the chance of gaining think after a little time they will do it), game may sixperce, incur the risk of ruin and disgrace; but it is be multiplied and legally supplied to any extent. probable that the general practice would be otherwise. Another keeper, and another bean-stack, will produce For the same reasons, the consumers of game would their proportionable supply of pheasants. The only rather give a little more for it to a licensed poulterer, reason why the great lord has more game per acre than expose themselves to severe penalties by purcha than the little squire is, that he spends more money sing from a poacher. The great mass of London con- per acre to preserve it. sumers are supplied now, not from shabby people, in whom they can have no confidence-not from hawkers and porters, but from respectable tradesmen, in whose probity they have the most perfect confidence. Men will brave the law for pheasants, bnt not for sixpence or a shilling; and the law itself is much more difficult to be braved, when it allows pheasants to be bought at some price, than when it endeavours to render them utterly inaccessible to wealth. All the licensed salesmen, too, would have a direct interest in stopping the contraband trade of game. They would lose no character in doing so; their informations would be reasonable and respectable.

If all this is true, the poacher would have to compete with a great mass of game fairly and honestly poured into the market. He would be selling with a rope about his neck, to a person who bought with a rope about his neck; his description of customers would be much the same as the customers for stolen poultry, and his profits would be very materially abridged. At present, the poacher is in the same situation as the smuggler would be, if rum and brandy could not be purchased of any fair trader. The great check to the profits of the smuggler are, that, if you want his commodities, and will pay an higher price, you may have them elsewhere without risk or disgrace. But forbid the purchase of these luxuries at any price. Shut up the shop of the brandy merchant, and you render the trade of the smuggler of incalcuable value. The object of the intended bill is, to raise up precisely the same competition to the trade of the poacher, by giving the public an opportunity of buy ing lawfully and honestly the tempting articles in which he now deals exclusively. Such an improvement would not, perhaps, altogether annihilate his trade; but it would, in all probability, act as a very material check upon it.

For these reasons, we think the experiment of legalizing the sale of game ought to be tried. The game laws have been carried to a pitch of oppression which is a disgrace to the country. The prisons are half filled with peasants, shut up for the irregular slaughter of rabbits and birds-a sufficient reason for killing a weasel, but not for imprisoning a man. Something should be done; it is disgraceful to a government to stand by, and see such enormous evils without interference. It is true, they are not connected with the struggles of party; but still, the happiness of the common people, whatever gentlemen may say, ought every now and then to be considered.

Ir has been the practice, all over England, for these last fifty years,* not to compel prisoners to work be fore guilt was proved. Within these last three or four years, however, the magistrates of the North Riding of Yorkshire, considering it improper to support any idle person at the county expense, have resolved, that prisoners committed to the house of correction for trial, and requiring county support, should work for their livelihood; and no sooner was the treadmill brought into fashion, than that machine was adopted The predominant argument against all this is, that in the North Riding as the species of labour by which the existing prohibition against buying game, though such prisoners were to earn their maintenance. If partially violated, does deter many persons from com- these magistrates did not consider themselves empow ing into the market; that if this prohibition were re-ered to burden the county rates for the support of primoved, the demand for game would be increased, the soners before trial, who would not contribute to support legal supply would be insufficient, and the residue themselves, it does not appear, from the publication would, and must be, supplied by the poacher, whose of the reverend chairman of the sessions, that any trade would, for these reasons, be as lucrative and opinions of counsel were taken as to the legality of so flourishing as before. But it is only a few years since putting prisoners to work, or of refusing them maintethe purchase of game has been made illegal; and the nance if they choose to be idle; but the magistrates market does not appear to have been at all narrowed themselves decided that such was the law of the land. by the prohibition; not one head of game the less has Thirty miles off, however, the law of the land was dif been sold by the poulterers; and scarcely one single ferently interpreted; and in the Castle of York large conviction has taken place under that law. How, sums were annually expended in the maintenance of then, would the removal of the prohibition, and the idle prisoners before trial, and paid by the different alteration of the law, extend the market, and increase Ridings, without remonstrance or resistance.t the demand, when the enactment of the prohibition has had no effect in narrowing it? But if the demand increases, why not the legal supply also? Game is increased upon an estate by feeding them in winter, by making some abatement to the tenants for guarding against depredations, by a large apparatus of gamekeepers and spies-in short, by expense. But if this pleasure of shooting, so natural to country gentle. men, is made to pay its own expenses, by sending superfluous game to market, more men, it is reason able to suppose, will thus preserve and augment their name. The love of pleasure and amusement will produce in the owners of game that desire to multiply

Such was the state of affairs in the county of York before the enactment of the recent prison bill. After that period, enlargements and alterations were necessary in the county jail; and it was necessary also for these arrangements, that the magistrates should know whether or not they were authorized to maintain such

* Headlam, p. 6.

readers that the practice of condemning prisoners to work
before trial has existed in some parts of England; for in ques-
tions like this we have always found it more difficult to prove
the existence of the facts, than to prove that they were mis-
|chievous and unjust.

We mention the cases of the North Riding, to convince our

prisoners at the expense of the county, as, being accounted able and unwilling to work, still claimed the county allowance. To questions proposed upon these points to three barristers the following answers were returned:

2dly, I am of opinion, that the magistrates are empowered, and are compelled to maintain, at the expense of the county, such prisoners before trial as are able to work, unable to main tain themselves, and not willing to work; and that they have not the power of compelling such prisoners to work, either at the treadmill, or any other species of labour.

Lincoln's Inn Fields, 2d September, 1823.'

J. GURNEY.

I think the magistrates are empowered, under the tenth section (explained by the 37th and 38th), to maintain prisoners before trial, who are able to work, unable to maintain themselves by their own means, or by employment which they themselves can procure, and not willing to work; and I think also, that the words "shall be lawful," in that section, do not leave them a discretion on the subject, but are compulsory. Such prisoners can only be employed in prison labour with their own consent; and it cannot be intended that the justices may force such consent, by withholding from them the necessaries of life, if they do not give it. Even those who are convicted cannot be employed at the treadmill, which I consider as a species of severe labour.

• September 4th, 1823.'

J. PARKE.

compel an untried prisoner to a species of labour which would
disgrace him in his own mind, and in that of the public.
"York, August 27th, 1823.'
S. W. NICOLL.

In consequence, we believe, of these opinions, the North Riding magistrates, on the 13th of October (the new bill commencing on the 1st of September), passed the following resolution:-That persons committed for trial, who are able to work, and have the means of employment offered them by the visiting magistrates, by which they may earn their support, but who obstinately refuse to work, shall be allowed bread and water only.'

By this resolution they admit, of course, that the counsel are right in their interpretation of the present law; and that magistrates are forced to maintain prisoners before trial who do not choose to work. The magistrates say, however, by their resolution, that the food shall be of the plainest and humblest kind,— bread and water; meaning, of course, that such pri soners should have a sufficient quantity of bread and Water, or otherwise the evasion of the law would be in the highest degree mean and reprehensible. But it is impossible to suppose any such thing to be intended by gentlemen so highly respectable. Their intention is not that idle persons before trial shall starve,but that they shall have barely enough of the plainest food for the support of life and health.

In

lam, as chairman of a Quarter Sessions, but as the writer of a pamphlet. It is only in his capacity of author that we have any thing to do with him. answering the arguments of Mr. Headlam, we shall notice, at the same time, a few other observations commonly resorted to in defence of a system which with the worst consequences; and so thinking, we we believe to be extremely pernicious, and pregnant contend against it, and in support of the law as it now stands.

2dly, As to the point of compelling prisoners confined on criminal charges, and receiving relief from the magistrates, to the old law was very reasonable and proper; that it is Mr. Headlam has written a pamphlet to show that reasonable labour; to that of the treadmill for instance, in quite right that prisoners before trial, who are able to which, when properly conducted, there is nothing severe or unreasonable; had the question arisen prior to the act, I should support themselves, but unwilling to work, should be with confidence have said, I thought the magistrates had a compelled to work, and at the treadmill, or that ail compulsory power in this respect. Those who cannot live support should be refused them. We are entirely of without relief in a jail, cannot live without labour out of it. an opposite opinion; and maintain that it is neither Labour then is their avocation. Nothing is so injurious to the legal nor expedient to compel prisoners before trial to morals and habits of the prisoner as the indolence prevalent in work at the treadmill, or at any species of labour,— prisons; nothing so injurious to good order in the prison. The and that those who refuse to work should be supportanalogy between this and other cases of public support is exceedingly strong; one may almost consider it a general prin- ed upon a plain healthy diet. We impute no sort of ciple, that those who live at the charge of the community shall, blame to the magistrates of the North Riding, or to as far as they are able, give the community a compensation Mr. Headlam, their chairman. We have no doubt but through their labor. But the question does not depend on that they thought their measures the wisest and the mere abstract reasoning. The stat. 19 Ch. 2, c. 4, sec. 1, enti- best for correcting evil, and that they adopted them tled "An act for Relief of poor Prisoners, and setting them on in pursuance of what they thought to be their duty.work," speaks of persons committed for felony and other mis-Nor do we enter into any discussion with Mr. Headdemeanours to the common jail, who many times perish before trial; and then proceeds as to setting poor prisoners on work. Then stat. 31 G. 3, c. 46, sec. 13, orders money to be raised for such prisoners of every description, as being confined within the said jails, or other places of confinement, are not able to work. A late stat. (52 Č. 2, c. 160) orders parish relief to such debtors on mesne process in jails not county jails, as are not able to support themselves; but says nothing of finding or compelling work. Could it be doubted, that if the justices were to provide work, and the prisoner refused it, such debtors might, like any other parish paupers, be refused the relief mentioned by the statute? In all the above cases, the authority to insist on the prisoner's labour, as the condition and consideration of relief granted him, is, I think, either expressed or necessarily implied; and thus, viewing the subject, I think it was in the power of magistrates, prior to the late statute, to compel prisoners, subsisting in all or in part on public relief, to work at the treadmill. The objection commonly made is, that prisoners, prior to trial, are to be accounted innocent, and to be detained, merely that they may be secured for trial; to this the answer is obvious, that the labour is neith meant as a punishment or a disgrace, but simply as a compensation for the relief, at their own request, afforded them. Under the present statute, I, however, have no doubt, that poor prisoners are entitled to public support, and that there can be no compulsory labour prior to trial. The two statutes adverted to (19 Ch. 2, c. 4, and 31 G. 3) are, as far as the subject is concerned, expressly repealed. The legislature then had in contemplation the existing power of magistrates to order labour before trial, and having it in contemplation, repeals it; substituting (sec. 38) a power of setting to labour, only sentenced persons. The 13th rule, too, (p. 177) speaks of labour as connected with convicted prisoners, and sec. 37 speaks in general terms of persons committed for trial, as labouring with their own consent. In opposition to these clauses, I think it impossible to speak of implied power, or power founded on general reasoning or analogy. So strong, however, are the arguments in favour of a more extended authority in justices of the peace, that it is scarcely to be doubted, that Parliament, on a calm revision of the subject, would be willing to restore, in a more distinct manner than it has hitherto been enacted, a general discretion on the subject. Were this done, there is one observation I will venture to make, which is, that should some unfortunate association of ideas render the treadmill a matter of ignominy to common feelings, an enlightened magistracy would scarcely

We will not dispute with Mr. Headlam, whether his exposition of the old law is right or wrong; because time cannot be more unprofitably employed than in hearing gentlemen who are not lawyers discuss points of law. We dare to say Mr. Headlam knows as much of the laws of his country as magistrates in general do; but he will pardon us for believing, that for the moderate sum of three guineas a much better opinion of what the law is now, or was then, can be purchased, than it is in the power of Mr. Headlam or of any county magistrate, to give for nothing-Cuilibet in arte sua credendum est. It is concerning the expediency of such laws, and upon that point alone, that we are at issue with Mr. Headlam; and do not let this gentleman suppose it to be any answer to our remarks to state what is done in the prison in which he is concerned, now the law is altered. The question is, whether he is right or wrong in his reasoning upon what the law ought to be; we wish to hold out such reasoning to public notice, and think it important it should be refuted-doubly important, when it comes from an author, the leader of the quorum, who may say with the pious Æneas,

Et

-Quæque ipse miserrima vidi, quorum pars magna fui.

If, in this discussion, we are forced to insist upon the plainest and most elementary truths, the fault is not with us, but with those who torget them; and