In the month of May, 1830, Mr. Lang (of the celebrated shooting gallery and excellent gun repository in the Haymarket) lost a favourite setter. He posted handbills, offering two guineas reward; on hearing of which a man came and told him the reward was not enough; but that, if he would make it four guineas, he could find his dog; and the amount must be deposited in the hands of a landlord, who would procure him a ticket-card. He should then be met, to his appointment, in some private field, where he would receive his dog; on condition that no questions should be asked. Mr. Lang sent his shopman, about half past ten at night, to White Conduit Fields, to meet the parties, who, on receiving the ticket, delivered up the dog. But there was great hesitation in transacting this affair, in consequence of the dog having on a lock to a steel chain collar, with Mr. Lang's name; and which therefore induced them to proceed with extreme caution, through fear, as they supposed, of detection for felony. The whole amount, paid for recovering this setter, was 47. 17s. - 21. 10s. of which went to the man who had him. The rest was divided among others of the Fancy." The same person who gave Mr. Lang the information said that, if ever he lost a dog and applied to him, he could undertake to get him back again within thirty-six hours, provided he would make it worth his while to do so; because all dogs taken by the "Fancy" are brought to their office, and regularly booked by the secretary. But if a word is said about law, the dog is immediately put to death; and either buried skin and all, or sent to the bottom of a pond.

66

As an instance of this

A gentleman who had lost a dog offered twenty guineas to recover him; and twenty guineas more for the apprehension of the thief, or even the name of any one concerned in the robbery. In consequence of the latter part of the advertisement, the dog was instantly destroyed. Whereas, had nothing but the first clause been placarded, the dog would have been restored without loss of time. On destroying this dog one of the "Fancy" observed to his associates, "Vot's the wally of twenty pound compared to a man's life?!"

(under an idea, it is presumed, that the theft was aggravated by some very strong case.)

If any one of the society were known to be untrue to his comrades, or, as they call it, not. "blue" to his trade, he would be marked; and if he were discovered in getting any of them apprehended, they would, sooner or later, "settle his hash."

It is somewhat extraordinary, among so many opulent people who have been thus robbed, that no one should have ever set a trap for some of these worthies. Because nothing could be more easily done, by risking a few useless dogs, and expending a little money, without which, of course, no business can be executed in a workmanlike manner. A quarto volume might be filled with anecdotes, specimens of the "march of intellect" the fruits of "a little learning"- under this head. But it now becomes needless for me to say more on this subject; as our uncle, the "Bishop of Bond Street," has, for more than a twelvemonth, been indefatigable in collecting every kind of evidence, preparatory to a bill to be brought before parliament, to which, it is presumed, there can be no dissenting voice; and which, if carried, will put all these rascally dog-stealers down and raise our uncle the said Bishop so triumphantly up, as to give him an eye to the vacant pedestal in Trafalgar Square; or at all events a claim for some monument to perpetuate his victory, with a statue of His Reverence, in his apron, supported by his dog Tiny, and a brace of Westley Richards's best double detonaters.

Having now relieved our attention from the dry subject of the law, by a momentary glance at the manœuvres of the lawless (and I trust a sufficient one to make young sportsmen look sharp after their

૨ ૨

dogs), I will proceed with my other gleanings from the chaos of technical jargon.

TRESPASS.

We have still the old action for trespass against one who goes on land, &c. after notice; or even if the judge shall certify, on the back of the record, that the trespass was wilful and malicious.

An unlicensed person may accompany a licensed sportsman, provided he has neither gun nor dogs of his own.

EXEMPTIONS FROM TRESPASS BEFORE AND AFTER NOTICE.

A person, even after notice, may go on the land of another, to serve a subpoena, legal writ, or, in short, for any lawful purpose.

It was formerly supposed, that any one might go over the land of another (not doing any real damage) while hunting a wild fox, as a "noxious animal ;" but, upon late trials, it has appeared that following foxhounds will in no way justify a trespass.

The defendant therefore stands about the same chance of escaping the verdict by following foxhounds, as the plaintiff (in a case not aggravated) would have of being pitied by sportsmen, if ducked in a horsepond for bringing such an action of trespass!

NOTICES.

[N. B. While (as at present) we have a summary penalty for trespassing in pursuit of game, it may be thought useless to reprint any thing relative to notices. But, as there may be some persons who prefer the old mode of proceeding, I shall let the matter stand, as before, for their information.]

May be personally served, or left at the place of abode of the party. Verbal notices are quite sufficient, if accurately proved.

All notices to come from the tenant, and not from the landlord, who cannot support an action of trespass upon the land, of which he is not the occupier. [Sed quære? since the new act.]

Gamekeepers, or other persons, may be deputed to serve either verbal or written notices, by lords of manors, occupiers of land, &c.

SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS HOW TO WARN OFF A

TRESPASSER.

FORM OF A PROPER NOTICE TO BE SENT TO, OR SERVED ON, ANY PERSON IN PARTICULAR.

To (name the person's Christian and

surnames) of (name his residence.)

I hereby give you notice, not to enter or come into or upon any of the lands, woods, underwoods, shaws, or coverts [or into or upon any of the rivers, ponds, pools, waters, or watercourses] in my occupation, in the parish of (name the parish; or, if the lands lie in more than one, the several parishes), in the county of (name the county or counties), as, in case of your doing so, I shall proceed against you as a wilful trespasser. - Witness my hand this (name the day of the month) day of (name month) 1838.

(Sign your name.)

The sentence, within the crotchet, relative to "waters," may, of course, be adopted or not, as required.

In a case of joint occupation, the notice must, of course, be given in the first person plural, with both signatures.

This written or printed notice had better be served by delivery of a duplicate than of a mere copy: and would be still more unquestionable, if the person serving it was able to prove the signatures to each duplicate, and the identity of the person served.

In case of warning off a trespasser, a second person, for a witness, is sometimes desirable, though not absolutely necessary, unless it may become so by death. This, or any other notice, in a newspaper, is of no avail, unless it can be proved that the defendant had read it.

Suppose, then, a trespasser comes on the land,

when the occupier cannot be found to sign a notice, what is to be done?

The occupier to be guarded against this, should previously and bonâ fide have given directions to any person who is actually his servant, to forbid all trespassers; by which that person, in his absence, must say:

"Sir; by order of my master, Mr.

who is the

occupier of this land, I am directed to forbid all persons from trespassing on it; and I accordingly forbid you from trespassing on it."

To prevent the possibility of mistake, let every servant be taught to say the above as regularly as a catholic would repeat his breviary; and not, as many thickheaded clodpolls do, by saying, "Zur, I've a got measter's arders to farbed ivery body," by which nothing personal is implied.

In case of a verbal notice, a witness, in addition to the one serving it, would be desirable, particularly if this witness also was quite perfect in the preamble. By this means he may, on being cross-questioned, candidly own, that he had learnt it by heart; and if not terrified, or browbeaten into a blunder in the repetition of it, by the modesty or ingenuity of a crossexamination, he would very soon prove the legality of the verbal notice he had given.

With less pains taken to warn persons off than what is prescribed in the foregoing notices, there is little doubt but there would be ground for an action of wilful trespass. From my very humble knowledge in such matters, however, I have thought it best to dictate with extreme, and therefore possibly with unnecessary, caution.