LIST

OF

THE LONDON PRESERVERS OF BIRDS.

Alder, E. H., 12 Rufford's Row, Islington. N.

Andrewes, Thomas, 17 Old Compton Street, W; and Pantheon Conservatory, Oxford Street. W.

Argent, J., 32 Bishopsgate without. E.C.

Arnold, John, 81 Vauxhall Walk, Lambeth. S.

Ashmead, G.B., 10 Duke Street, Grosvenor Square. W.

Askew, J., 30 Orchard Street, Portman Square. W.

Atherton, Thomas, 1 Howland Mews, West Fitzroy Square. W.

Baker, J., 32 Frederick Place, Hampstead Road. N.W.

Baker, T., 6 Edward Place, Ball's Pond Road. N.
Bennett, James, 40 Fenchurch Street. E.C.

Brace, R., 26 Henry Street, East Portland Town. N.W.

Bramley, J., 9 Winchester Street, Bethnal Green.

N.E.

Buffon and Willson, 391 Strand. W.C.

Butterfield, W., 38 Seymour Place, Bryanston Square.

W.

Cooper, J., 28 Radnor Street, St. Luke's. E.C.

Daws, James, 88 Southwark Bridge Road. S.E.

Gardner, James, 52 High Holborn, W.C.; and 159 Oxford Street. W.

Gardner, James, 426 Oxford Street. W.

Gilles, Mrs. Maria, 6 Ray Street Clerkenwell. E.C.

Grinonneau, Alfred, 12 Cambridge Road, Mile End. N.E.

Hall, Thomas, 75 London Wall. E.C.

Harrison, J., 46 Upper Rosoman Street, Clerkenwell. E.C.

Holloway, Richard (wholesale), 20 Sun Street, Bishopsgate. E.C.

Jamrach, Charles, 180 St. George Street, E; 394 Old Gravel Lane,
Wapping, E; and Ship Tavern Passage, Leadenhall Market. E.C.
Keilich, Henry, 9 Buttersland Street, Hoxton New Town. N.
Leadbeater and Son, 19 Brewer Street, Golden Square. W.
Leigh, Robert, 27 Catherine Street, Commercial Road East. E.
Marriott, S., and Co., 54 King William Street. E.C.

Mears, James, 33 King David Lane, Shadwell. E.

Miers, Mrs. Amelia, 88 Dean Street, Soho. W.

Moss, Alexander, 19 Great Alie Street, Goodman's Fields. E.
Newill, T., 47 Southwark Bridge Road.

S.E.

Norman, John Thomas, (microscopic), 14 Fountain Place, City Road. E.C.

Simmonds, Jeremiah, 6 Frances Street, Newington Butts. S.

Spencer, Thomas, 38 Great Portland Street. W.

Topping, Charles, M. (microscopic), 4 Winchester Street, Pentonville.

N.

Turvey, J., 1 Upper Queen's Row, Cambridge Road. N.E.

Wade, Frederick, 5 East Road, City Road. N.

Ward, Henry, 2 Vere Street, Cavendish Square. W.

Warwick, J., 23 New Street, Kennington Road. S.

GAME LAWS.

So little was the prospect of our ever getting rid of the diabolical old Game Laws, notwithstanding almost every Member in both Houses admitted their absurdity and inconsistency that we are highly indebted to Lord Althorp for having carried, as a ministerial measure in 1831, any thing like an amendment on them. By a reference to my "Suggestions for New Game Laws," which I published in the earlier editions of "Instructions to Young Sportsmen," it will be seen that the present Bill, though similar to what was therein suggested, is, in many clauses, open to great improvement. But never mind!-any thing in lieu of the old and inconsistent statutes is an acceptable pledge for further alterations, till the legislature shall be less occupied with matters of more importance to the country.

The General Qualification is good; but the Sporting License should have been increased to 5l.; or, at all events to that amount for those who use double guns.

Every thing between Landlord and Tenant had better have been settled by themselves. The legislature will do more harm than good by this interference. And with regard to the tenant being liable not only to the penalty of 21. for allowing people to shoot, but also to that of 17. for every head of game killed!-the clause, to say the least of it, is not one calculated to put the farmers in good humour-and if they are in a bad humour, the poor game I fear, will be in a bad way!

The PENALTY for trespass is the best law that was ever enacted, but at present it is inefficient. The grand object that I had in recommending a penalty for TRESPASS ONLY, was to have the power of taking up a man whom you knew to be a poacher, but who was too well versed in his art to suffer himself to be detected in the "PURSUIT OF GAME;" and also to have the means of trouncing a dandified marauder, to whom the paltry sum of 21. would be no more an object than a bottle of champagne or a bundle of cigars. But, on the other hand, giving fair play to both of these worthies by making them subject to a penalty only as WILFUL trespassers; or, in other words, for continuing or repeating the trespass after they had been warned off by the proprietor or occupier of the land. To be more fully understood, however, I shall now take the liberty of reprinting a part of what I before published under the head of "Game Laws;" and by a reference to which, it will be seen precisely how far the suggestions therein contained are analogous to the Bill that has since passed, and the Abridgment of which (with that also of the old laws still in force) shall conclude the following pages.

In Dec. 1832, I had the very best authority for saying that the ministers admitted several provisions (of which they entirely disapproved) to be introduced in the new Bill; and, in short, were obliged to compromise with their opponents, on the best terms they could, for the sake of attaining two great objects-legalising the sale of game and the general qualification. The one, to say the least of it, an act of common justice to all gentlemen who are not possessed of landed property or sporting rights- the other the extinction of a law that subjected even the second sons of noblemen to the same penalty as the lowest trades

man when shooting on the property of their own fathers -not to say a word of its gross absurdity and inconsistency!-What objections there are to these two clauses I am at a loss to know! But as to the other sections of the present Act-it becomes quite a mystery to learn from whence they emanated! Certain, however, it is, that almost every one is exclaiming most violently against the new game laws; and affirming that unless they are altered, field sports will soon cease to be the amusement of gentlemen. But is there any such great difficulty in discovering the evil that now exists, and renders the new game laws (which might be made excellent) even worse than the old ones? See how the matter at present stands - we have on the one hand, legalised the sale of game, and thereby opened the market an hundred fold; without, on the other, having taken any one additional step against the wholesale destroyer of it-the poacher. We may proceed against the fair sportsman, like a common felon, if by chance, or absolute mistake, he crosses one little strip of land, without a formal permission; while the poacher, unless you can prove him to be "in search or pursuit of game," is wholly exonerated from the penalty of the present Act. No man should be subject to a penalty unless he has received a notice, and then let the penalty be made even more severe than that in the new game laws. And, above all, let the PENALTY be for WILFUL TRESPASS, WHETHER IN PURSUIT OF GAME OR NOT. How could the poacher then go to reconnoitre-or to set his wires-or to take the eggs of game?-But as the law now stands, it destroys the sport of the gentleman, whose interest it is to preserve the game; and by an enlarged market, affords additional facility to the wholesale destroyer. As the law was (ex