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