"My Lord Chief Justice can see no distinction between the case of tenter

utterly at a loss to distinguish between | terror; and if he does not put a bullet the two cases. Does it signify whose there, he never can be the subject of hand or whose foot pulls the string argument in this Court. which moves the trigger ?-the real murderer is he who prepares the instrument of death, and places it in a posi-hooks upon a wall, and the placing of tion that such hand or foot may touch spring guns, as far as the lawfulness of it, for the purposes of destruction. My both is concerned. But the distinctions Brother Holroyd says, the trespasser I take between the case of tenter-hooks who has had a notice of guns being set upon a wall, and the setting of spring in the wood is the real voluntary agent guns, are founded,-1st, in the magniwho pulls the trigger. But I most tude of the evil inflicted; 2dly, in the certainly think that he is not. He is the great difference of the notice which the animal agent, but not the rational trespasser receives; 3dly, in the very agent-he does not intend to put him- different evidence of criminal intention self to death; but he foolishly trusts in in the trespasser; 4thly, in the greater his chance of escaping, and is anything value of the property invaded; 5thly, but a voluntary agent in firing the gun. in the greater antiquity of the abuse. If a trespasser were to rush into a wood, To cut the fingers, or to tear the hand, meaning to seek his own destruction- is of course a more pardonable injury to hunt for the wire, and when found, than to kill. The trespasser, in the to pull it, he would indeed be the daytime, sees the spikes; and by day agent, in the most philosophical sense or night, at all events, he sees or feels of the word. But, after entering the the wall. It is impossible he should wood, he does all he can to avoid the not understand the nature of such a gun-keeps clear of every suspicious prohibition, or imagine that his path place, and is baffled only by the supe- lies over this wall; whereas the victim rior cunning of him who planted the gun. of the spring gun may have gone How the firing of the gun then can astray, may not be able to read, or may be called his act—his voluntary act-I first cross the armed soil in the nightam at a loss to conceive. The practice time, when he cannot read;-and so he has unfortunately become so common, is absolutely without any notice at all. that the first person convicted of such a In the next place, the slaughtered man murder, and acting under the delusion may be perfectly innocent in his purof right, might be a fit object for royal pose, which the scaler of the walls mercy. Still, in my opinion, such an act cannot be. No man can get to the top must legally be considered as murder. of a garden wall without a criminal "It has been asked, if it be an in- purpose. A garden, by the common dictable offence to set such guns in a consent and feeling of mankind, conman's own ground: but let me first tains more precious materials than a put a much greater question-Is it wood, or a field, and may seem to murder to kill any man with such in- justify a greater jealousy and care. struments? If it be, it must be indict- Lastly, and for these reasons, perhaps, able to set them. To place an instru- the practice of putting spikes and glass ment for the purpose of committing bottles has prevailed for this century murder, and to surrender (as in such past; and the right so to do has becases you must surrender) all control come, from time, and the absence of over its operation, is clearly an indict- cases, (for the plaintiff, in such a case, able offence. must acknowledge himself a thief,) de-inveterate. But it is quite impossible, because in some trifling instances, and in much more pardonable circumstances, private vengeance has usurped upon the province of law, that I can, from such slight abuses, confer upon private vengeance the power of life and death.

"All my brother Judges have livered their opinions as if these guns were often set for the purposes of terror, and not of destruction. To this I can only say, that the moment any man puts a bullet into his spring gun, he has some other purpose than that of

On the contrary, I think it my impe- I strays into the neighbouring field, and rious duty to contend, that punishment there worries the man, there wants, in for such offences as these is to be measured by the law, and not by the exaggerated notions which any individual may form of the importance of his own pleasures. It is my duty, instead of making one abuse a reason for another, to recall the law back to its perfect state, and to restrain as much as possible the invention and use of private punishments. Indeed, if this wild sort of justice is to be tolerated, I see no sort of use in the careful adaptation of punishments to crimes, in the humane labours of the lawgiver. Every lord of a manor is his own Lycurgus, or rather his own Draco, and the great purpose of civil life is defeated. Inter nova tormentorum genera machinasque exitiales, silent leges.

this case, the murderous and malicious spirit. The dog was placed in the yard for the legal purpose of guarding the house against burglary; for which crime, if caught in the act of perpetrating it, a man may legally be put to death. There was no primary intention here of putting a mere trespasser to death. So, if a man keep a ferocious bull, not for agricultural purposes, but for the express purpose of repelling trespassers, and that bull occasion the death of a trespasser, it is murder: the intentional infliction of death by any means for such sort of offences constitutes the murder: a right to kill for such reasons cannot be acquired by the foolhardiness of the trespasser, nor by any sort of notice or publicity. If a man were to blow a trumpet all over the country, and say that he would shoot any man who asked him how he did, would he acquire a right to do so by such notice? Does mere publication of an unlawful intention make the

"Whatever be the law, the question of humanity is a separate question. I shall not state all I think of that person, who, for the preservation of game, would doom the innocent-or the guilty intruder, to a sudden death. I will not, however (because I am silent re-action lawful which follows? If nospecting individuals), join in any undeserved panegyric of the humanity of the English law. I cannot say, at the same moment, that the law of England allows such machines to be set after public notice; and that the law of England sanctions nothing but what is humane. If the law sanctions such practices, it sanctions, in my opinion, what is to the last degree odious, christian, and inhumane.

:

tice be the principle which consecrates this mode of destroying human beings, I wish my brothers had been a little more clear, or a little more unanimous, as to what is meant by this notice. Must the notice be always actual, or is it sufficient that it is probable? May these guns act only against those who have read the notice, or against all who un-might have read the notice? The truth is, that the practice is so enormous, and the opinions of the most learned men so various, that a declaratory law upon the subject is imperiously required.* Common humanity required it, after the extraordinary difference of opinion which occurred in the case of Dean and Clayton.

"The case of the dog or bull I admit to be an analogous case to this and I say, if a man were to keep a dog of great ferocity and power, for the express purpose of guarding against trespass in woods or fields, and that dog was to kill a trespasser, it would be murder in the person placing him there for such a purpose. It is indifferent to me whether the trespasser be slain by animals or machines, intentionally brought there for that purpose: he ought not to be slain at all, It is murder to use such a punishment for such an offence. If a man put a ferocious dog in his yard, to guard his house from burglary, and that dog

"For these reasons, I am compelled to differ from my learned brothers. We have all, I am sure, the common object of doing justice in such cases as these; we can have no possible motive for doing otherwise. Where such a superiority of talents and numbers is against me, I must of course be wrong; but I think it better to publish my own *This has been done.

errors, than to subscribe to opinions of of Commons. It may be right, or it the justice of which I am not convinced. may be wrong, that the chargeable To destroy a trespasser with such ma-poor should be removed; but why inchines, I think would be murder; to troduce such a controverted point into set such uncontrollable machines for a bill framed for a much more importhe purpose of committing this murder, tant object, and of itself calculated to I think would be indictable; and I am produce so much difference of opinion? therefore of opinion, that he who suffers Mr. Scarlett appears to us to have been from such machines has a fair ground not only indiscreet in the introduction of action, in spite of any notice; for it of such heterogeneous matter, but very is not in the power of notice to make much mistaken in the enactments which them lawful." that matter contains.

SCARLETT'S POOR BILL.

(E. REVIEW, 1821.)

1. Letter to James Scarlett, Esq., M.P., on
his Bill relating to Poor-Laws. By a
Surrey Magistrate. London. 1821.
2. An Address to the Imperial Parliament,
upon the Practical Means of gradually
abolishing the Poor-Laws, and Educating
the Poor Systematically. Illustrated by
an Account of the Colonies of Fredericks-
Oord in Holland, and of the Common
Mountain in the South of Ireland. With
General Observations. Third Edition.
By William Herbert Saunders, Esq.
London. 1821.

"And be it further enacted, that from and after the passing of this Act, it shall not be lawful for any Justice of Peace or other person to remove, or cause to be removed, any poor person or persons from any parish, township or place, to any other, by reason of such person or persons being chargeable to such parish, township or place, or being unable to maintain him or themselves, or under colour of such person or persons being settled in any other parish, township or place, any law or statute to the contrary notwithstanding: Provided always, that nothing in this Act shall in anywise be deemed to alter any law now in force for the punishment of vagrants, or for removing poor persons to Scotland, Ireland, or the Isles of Guernsey, Jersey, and Man. And be it further enacted, that in all cases where any poor person, at the time of the passing this Act, shall be resident in any parish, township or place, where he is not legally settled, and shall be receiving relief from the Overseers, Guardians,

3. On Pauperism and the Poor-Laws. With a Supplement. London, 1821. WE are friendly to the main principle of Mr. Scarlett's bill; but are rather surprised at the unworkmanlike man-or Directors of the Poor of the place of his ner in which he has set about it.

To fix a maximum for the Poor-rates, we should conceive to be an operation of sufficient difficulty and novelty for any one bill. There was no need to provoke more prejudice, to rouse more hostility, and create more alarm, than such a bill would naturally do. But Mr. Scarlett is a very strong man; and before he works his battering ram, he chooses to have the wall made of a thickness worthy of his blow-capable of evincing, by the enormity of its ruins, the superfluity of his vigour, and the certainty of his aim. Accordingly he has introduced into his bill a number of provisions, which have no necessary, and indeed no near connection with his great and main object; but which are sure to draw upon his back all the Sir John's and Sir Thomas's in the House

legal settlement, the said Overseers, Guardians, or Directors are hereby required to continue such relief, in the same manner, and by the same means, as the same is now administered, until one of His Majesty's Justices of the Peace, in or near the place of residence of such poor person, shall, upon application to him, either by such poor person, or any other person, on his behalf, for the continuance thereof, or by the said Overseers, Guardians, or Directors of the Poor, paying such relief, for the discharge thereof, certify that the same is no longer necessary.' - (Bill, pp. 3, 4.)

Now, here is a gentleman, so thoroughly and so justly sensible of the evils of the Poor-laws, that he introduces into the House of Commons a very plain, and very bold measure to restrain them; and yet, in the very same bill, he abrogates the few impediments that remain to universal men

dicity. The present law says, "Before | crowds of houseless villagers, driven you can turn beggar in the place of from their cottages by landlords renyour residence, you must have beendered merciless by the bill. In the born there, or you must have rented a mud-all in the mud (for such cases farm there, or served an office;" but made and provided) would they have Mr. Scarlett says, "You may beg any-rolled this most excellent counsellor. where where you happen to be. I will Instigated by the devil and their own have no obstacles to your turning beg-malicious purposes, his wig they would gar; I will give every facility and have polluted, and tossed to a thousand every allurement to the destruction of winds the parchment bickerings of your independence." We are quite Doe and Roe. Mr. Scarlett's bill is so confident that the direct tendency of powerful a motive to proprietors for Mr. Scarlett's enactments is to produce the depopulation of a village-for prethese effects. Labourers living in one venting the poor from living where place and settled in another, are uni- they wish to live,-that nothing but formly the best and most independent the conviction that such a bill would characters in the place. Alarmed at never be suffered to pass, has prevented the idea of being removed from the those effects from already taking place. situation of their choice, and knowing Landlords would, in the contemplation they have nothing to depend upon but of such a bill, pull down all the cotthemselves, they are alone exempted tages of persons not belonging to the from the degrading influence of the parish, and eject the tenants; the most Poor-laws, and frequently arrive at vigorous measures would be taken to independence by their exclusion from prevent any one from remaining or that baneful privilege which is offered coming who was not absolutely necesto them by the inconsistent benevo-sary to the lord of the soil. At prelence of this bill. If some are removed, sent, cottages are let to anybody; after long residence in parishes where they are not settled, these examples only insure the beneficial effects of which we have been speaking. Others see them, dread the same fate, quit the mug, and grasp the flail. Our policy, as we have explained in a previous article, is directly the reverse of that of Mr. Scarlett. Considering that a poor man, since Mr. East's bill, if he ask no charity, has a right to live where he pleases, and that a settlement is now nothing more than a beggar's ticket, we would gradually abolish all means of gaining a settlement, but those of birth, parentage, or marriage; and this method would destroy litiga-power of living where they please, and tion as effectually as the method pro- going where they please, entirely deposed by Mr. Scarlett.* pends upon the possibility of their removal when they become chargeable. If any mistaken friend were to take from them this protection, the whole power and jealousy of property would be turned against their locomotive liberty; they would become adscripti gleba, no more capable of going out of the parish than a tree is of proceeding, with its roots and branches, to a neighbouring wood.

Mr. Scarlett's plan, too, we are firmly persuaded, would completely defeat his own intentions; and would inflict a greater injury upon the poor than this very bill, intended to prevent their capricious removal. If his bill had passed, he could not have passed. His post-chaise on the Northern Circuit would have been impeded by the *This has since been done.

because, if they are burthensome to the
parish, the tenants can be removed.
But the impossibility of doing this
would cause the immediate demolition
of cottages; prevent the erection of
fresh ones where they are really wanted;
and chain a poor man for ever to the
place of his birth, without the possibi-
lity of moving. If everybody who
passed over Mr. Scarlett's threshold
were to gain a settlement for life in his
house, he would take good care never
to be at home. We all boldly let our
friends in, because we know we can
easily get them out. So it is with the
residence of the poor.
Their present

thrown upon their Rates by the causes alleged."—(Bill, pp. 4, 5.)

Now this clause, we cannot help saying, appears to us to be a receipt for universal and interminable litigation all over England—a perfect law-hurricane-a conversion of all flesh into plaintiffs and defendants. The parish A. has pulled down houses, and burthened the parish B.; B. has demolished to the misery of C.; which has again misbehaved itself in the same manner to the oppression of other letters of the alphabet. All run into parchment, and pant for revenge and exoneration. Though the fact may be certain enough, the causes which gave rise to it may be very uncertain; and assuredly will not be admitted to have been those against which the statute has denounced these penalties. It will be alleged, therefore, that the houses were not pulled down to get rid of the poor, but because they were not worth repair

The remedy here proposed for these [ has been improperly or unnecessarily exevils is really one of the most extraor-pended by the Overseers of the poor praying dinary we ever remember to have been for such order; and that a separate and distinct account has been kept by them of introduced into any Act of Parliament. the additional burden which has been "And whereas it may happen, that in several parishes or townships now burdened with the maintenance of the Poor settled and residing therein, the owners of lands or inhabitants may, in order to remove the residence of the labouring Poor from such parishes or places, destroy the cottages and habitations therein now occupied by the labourers and their families: And whereas also it may happen, that certain towns and villages, maintaining their own poor, may, by the residence therein of labourers employed and working in other parishes or townships lying near the said towns and villages, be charged with the burden of maintaining those who do not work, and before the passing of this Act were not settled therein; For remedy thereof, be it enacted by the authority afore said, that in either of the above cases, it shall be lawful for the Justices, at any Quarter-sessions of the peace held for the county in which such places shall be, upon the complain of the Overseers of the poor of any parisn, town, or place, that by reason of either of the causes aforesaid, the Rates for the relief of the poor of such parish, town, or place, have been materially increased, whilst those of any other parish or place have been diminished, to hear and fully inquire into the matter of such complaint; and in case they shall be satisfied of the truth thereof, then to make an order upon the Overseers of the Poor of the parish or township, whose Rates have been diminished by the causes aforesaid, to pay to the complainants such sum or sums, from time Another of the many sources of to time, as the said Justices shall adjudge reasonable, not exceeding, in any case, to- litigation in this clause is as follows:gether with the existing Rates, the amount A certain number of workmen live in limited by this Act, as a contribution to- a parish, M., not being settled in it, wards the relief of the poor of the parish, and not working in it before the passing town, or place whose Rates have been in- of this Act. After the passing of this creased by the causes aforesaid; which Act they become chargeable to M., order shall continue in force until the same whose Poor-rates are increased. M. is shall be discharged by some future order of sessions, upon the application of the Over- to find out the parishes relieved from seers paying the same, and proof that the the burthen of these men, and to prooccasion for it no longer exists: Provided secute at the Quarter-sessions for relief. always, that no such order shall be made But suppose the burthened parish to without proof of notice in writing of such in- be in Yorkshire, and the relieved tended application, and of the grounds there- parish in Cornwall, are the Quarterof, having been served upon the Overseers sessions in Yorkshire to make an order of the poor of the parish or place, upon of annual payment upon a parish in whom such order is prayed, fourteen days at least before the first day of the Quarter- Cornwall? and Cornwall, in turn, sessions, nor unless the Justices making upon Yorkshire? How is the money such order shall be satisfied that no money to be transmitted? What is the easy

because they obstructed the squire's view-because rent was not paid. All these motives must go before the sessions, the last resource of legislators,-the unhappy Quarter-sessions, pushed to the extremity of their wit by the plump contradictions of parish perjury.