Related article: the weapon used in the East to- day for killing birds : a bow with two strings carrying, where the notch of the arrow would meet the string in a long bow, a stiff patch half an inch square on which to rest the pebble or shot. In this Act grouse and blackcock receive their legal status as game, a cir- cumstance for which the Scottish antecedents of the King may account ; and the sanctity which the ancient Forest Laws extended to hawks' eggs is extended to those of game birds. The prohi- bition of setters compels atten- tion : in regard to this we must remember that a good setter would be of inestimable service to the manipulators of nets in long grass or stubble, and as an ad- junct to the net in contradistinc- tion to the gun, might well be regarded as the peculiar ally of the poacher. Charles I., in 1634, issued a Proclamation against keeping and using setters, and authorised their slaughter where- soever and by whomsoever found. As the reservation in paren- theses indicates, concerning game "reared and brought up in the house" pheasants and partridges were at this period reared in con- finement for the table ; it may be remarked that it was usual to rear pheasants in captivity early in the fifteenth century. A curious little treatise in rhyme on " Husbondrie," supposed to have been written in the year 1420, by one Palladius, gives instructions concerning the best method of breeding and rearing pheasant chicks. The practice reduce them to the position of domesDc poultry, and goes somewhat beyond the scope of remarks on sport, and therefore, we do not pause to go into it. We must not, however, leave this Act withon: drawing attention to the earlier clause which tells us that the game-laws were most usually broken by men of such degree that it was useless to sue them for the fines Furadantin Oral Suspension for which their mis- deeds made them liable. The correspondence in the Fidd already referred to indicates ex- istence of the same condition of things at the present day. The Inland Revenue authorities, it is affirmed by men who ought to know, discourage the prosecution of poachers who use unlicensed guns to kill other people's game : and for the same reason that ** few suits were attempted ** three centuries ago, viz., because it is known that to sue for fines would be throwing money away. We might learn a lesson from James I.'s Act in this enlightened age. The laws of earlier days were better devised than administered. It was, in fact, everybody's busi- ness to secure their due observ- ance, and we know that everybody's business is nobody's. There was no machinery to carry them into effect : the first definite mention of police and their powers occurs in another statute of James I. passed in 1609-10 (7, James I. n) This, in its main object, sought again to put an end to the damage inflicted upon crops by unseasonable pursuit of pheasants and partridges with hawks or dogs. It forbade the taking of these birds between July 1st and August 31st, when they were too small to be fairly hawked and not worth eating. It withdrew the exemp- tion conferred upon *' qualified persons" under the former Act to 1899] GAME PRESERVATION IN THE MIDDLE AGES. 351 net game on their own lands, and reserved to owners of £\o free- hold, or owners of ^"400 of pro- perty only, the right to take game between Michaelmas and Christ- mas. Night poaching and the secret conveyance of game to market by night was made punish- able by three months' imprison- ment, and constables were given power to search on warrant sus- pected premises and to destroy dogs and nets found thereon. By the time of the Restoration (sports of whatever kind were flouted during the Commonwealth) the legitimate value of the setter had come to be recognised, and Charles II. (1670-71) passed an Act (22 and 23 Car. II. 25) which, among other provisions, gave persons having lands or tenements of the annual value of /"100 the right to keep guns, bows, grey- hounds, setting dogs, ferrets, " coney dogs " and lurchers. To be strictly accurate, it forbade people who had not that property qualification to enjoy possession of these things and animals. This Act also gave keepers— mentioned in our laws for the first time— the right of search on a J.P.'s war- rant, and made poaching rabbits in unenclosed warrens an offence punishable by three months' im- prisonment. In 1692 another Act (4 Wm. and M. c. 23) again gave con- stables power to search suspected dwellings, and if game were found to carry those in whose custody it was discovered before a Justice of the Peace. If no satisfactory explanation were forthcoming, the Justice could fine the prisoner and send him to the House of Correction for a period of from ten days to one month, and sen- tence him to a whipping in addition. " Unqualified persons " found in possession of greyhounds, setters, ferrets, nets, &c, were liable to the same penalties. By this Act also gamekeepers were authorised to " oppose and resist " night poachers ; and inasmuch as " great mischief ensues by inferior tradesmen and other dissolute persons neglecting their trades and occupations who follow hunt- ing, fishing, and other game to the ruin of themselves and the damage of their neighbours," any such person who presumed to hawk, hunt, or fish, unaccom- panied by his master, was to be held a trespasser. One more old statute and we have done. In 1706 Queen Anne passed a law (6 Anne, c. 18) which made any higlar, chapman (pedlar), carrier, Buy Furadantin inn-keeper, vic- tualler or ale-house keeper liable to a fine of £5 for every head of game found in his possession. Any unqualified person keeping or using a greyhound, setter or lurcher was liable to a fine of £5 or imprisonment for three months ; and Justices of the Peace and Lords and Ladies of manors were empowered to confiscate any dogs, nets or engines they might find in the hands of pedlars and those forbidden to have game in their possession. In this Act, too, we find heather Furadantin Suspension burning made an offence for the first time. Only the forest of Sherwood in Notts and parts adjacent are thus pro- tected, but legislative recognition of the fact that reckless heather burning "destroys the breed of game " is worth notice. The law of 1710 (9 Anne, c. 27) perpetuated the preceding Act, and in addition forbade Lords of