Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-15T13:59:16.289Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Gamekeeper and English Rural Society, 1660-1830

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2014

P.B. Munsche
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Among the individuals who populated rural England in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, few were more unloved than the gamekeeper. That he was regularly damned at the village alehouse is not, perhaps, all that surprising. The gamekeeper was, after all, responsible for enforcing the highly unpopular laws “for the preservation of the game.” It was he who searched laborers' cottages for snares, nets and illicit game; it was he too who hauled poachers before the local justice of the peace for summary trial and punishment. But if the gamekeeper was hated by the poor, his standing in other quarters was not notably higher. Stewards questioned his honesty, foxhunters denounced him as a vulpicide, and the press was always eager to brand him as a rank hypocrite. Defenders were rare and cautious. Even Richard Jefferies, author of a very sympathetic portrait of a keeper he had known in his youth, nevertheless felt compelled to acknowledge “the abuse lavished upon [gamekeepers] as a class—often, it is to be feared, too well deserved.” Historians, for their part, have made little effort to discover whether that abuse was in fact deserved. Those who have not ignored the question altogether have usually been content to repeat the charges hurled at gamekeepers by their contemporaries. In the view of one of the more recent historians of the game laws, for example, the gamekeeper “was usually some bold pugnacious labourer, often a former poacher chosen on the maxim ‘set a thief to catch a thief.’… He could not often resist the constant temptation to sell game on the sly ….And the combination of igonorance and authority all too often made him into a brutal and arrogant man.”

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , Spring 1981 , pp. 82 - 105
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

I wish to thank John Beattie and Robert Malcolmson for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this article.

1 Jefferies, Richard, The Gamekeeper at Home: Sketches of Natural History and Rural Life (London, 1880), p. 13Google Scholar.

2 Kirby, Chester, “The English Game Law System,” American Historical Review, XXXVIII (1933), 245–6Google Scholar.

3 22 & 23 Chas. II, c. 25. Those with franchises of park, chase or free warren were also qualified to hunt game. In the following pages, “hunt” and “sport” will be used interchangeably to denote coursing, netting, hawking and shooting, as well as hunting in the strict sense of the word.

4 4 & 5 Wm. & Mary, c. 23; 5 Anne, c. 14; 9 Anne, c. 25.

5 Turner, G.J., Select Pleas of the Forest (Selden Society, XIII [1901]), pp. xx–xxiGoogle Scholar; Fisher, William Richard, The Forest of Essex (London, 1887), pp. 137–40Google Scholar; Cronne, H.A., “The Royal Forest in the Reign of Henry I,” in Cronne, H.A., Moody, T.W. and Quinn, D.B., eds., Essays in British and Irish History in Honour of James Eadie Todd (London, 1949), p. 20Google Scholar.

6 Turner, , Select Pleas, pp. xxi–xxiiGoogle Scholar; Fisher, , Forest of Essex, p. 139Google Scholar; Hilton, R. H., A Medieval Society: The West Midlands at the End of the Thirteenth Century (London, 1966), pp. 244–5Google Scholar; Young, Charles R., “English Royal Forests under the Angevin Kings,” Journal of British Studies, XII (1972), 12–13Google Scholar.

7 Fisher, , Forest of Essex, p. 150Google Scholar; Pettit, P.A.J., The Royal Forests of Northampton-shire: A Study in Their Economy, 1558-1714 (Northants. Record Society, XXIII [1968]), pp. 20-4, 31-2, 48-9, 150, 155Google Scholar; Thompson, E.P., Whigs and Hunters: The Origin of the Black Act (London and New York, 1975), pp. 34-6, 61, 160Google Scholar.

8 , Chester and Kirby, Ethyn, “The Stuart Game Prerogative,” English Historical Review, XLVI (1931), 239–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On Cromwell, see Hertfordshire County Records (Hertford, 1905–1957), I, 114Google Scholar.

9 Kirby, , “Stuart Game Prerogative,” p. 251Google Scholar; Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1676-7, p. 266. See also ibid., p. 298.

10 SirHoldsworth, William, A History of English Law (7th ed., London, 1956), I, 101Google Scholar; Kirby, , “Stuart Game Prerogative,” pp. 246–8Google Scholar. A law limiting the exercise of these rights to the franchise owner's own land (11 Hen. VII, c. 17) seems to have been a dead letter by the seventeenth century.

11 7 Jas. I, c. 11. Cf. previous qualification acts: 13 Ric. II, st. 1, c. 13; 1 Jas. I, c. 27; 3 Jas. I, c. 13.

12 In the following pages, the term “game” will be used to refer only to these animals. Badgers, otters and foxes, though pursued for sport, were classified as vermin, not game. Deer and rabbits, while also the prey of sportsmen, were by the late seventeenth century enclosed in most parts of the country in parks and warrens, where they were raised as much for meat and skins as for sport. There was no property qualification for hunting any of these animals during our period. Those who unlawfully took deer or rabbits were prosecuted under a separate code of laws.

13 At the time the Game Act was passed, plaintiffs in trespass cases could not be awarded full costs unless the jury found damages exceeeding forty shillings (22 & 23 Chas. II, c. 9, s. 136). This was unlikely to happen in cases of simple trespass by sportsmen. The restriction was dropped in 1696 (8 & 9 Win. III, c. 11, s. 4), but it was still necessary to prove that prior notice not to trespass had been given to the defendant. This, and the cost of legal proceedings, still inhibited the prosecution of sportsmen.

14 22 & 23 Chas. II, c. 25, s. 2. The wording of the act implied that a gamekeeper did not need a J.P.'s warrant to search a house, but in practice one was usually obtained.

15 4 & 5 Wm. & Mary, c. 23, s. 4; 5 Anne, c. 14, s. 4.

16 The last recorded appointment of a royal gamekeeper was in 1703: see Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1703-4, pp. 454-5. A vestige of the old royal gamekeeperships remained, however, in the area around Newmarket, for which a keeper of “His Majesty's game” was appointed, somewhat fitfully, throughout the eighteenth century: see Morehead, O.F., “H.M. Gamekeeper,” Notes & Queries, CLXIV (1933), 373Google Scholar.

17 3 Geo. I, c. 11 The act was repealed in 1808 (48 Geo. III, c. 93), but had been nullified by the courts fifty years earlier: see Chitty, Josepy, A Treatise on the Game Laws and on Fisheries (London, 1812), II, 1148–53Google Scholar.

18 Beds. R.O., HW 76. For some examples, see Kent A.O., U270 C1: 29 Aug. 1719; Berks. R.O., D/EBy C3: 23 Aug. 1781; Sidney, Lord Herbert, ed., Pembroke Papers, 1780-94 (London, 1950), p. 328Google Scholar.

19 Wilts. R.O., Roll of Gamekeepers Deputations, 1761-70. See also, Salzman, L.F., ed., Record of Deputations of Gamekeepers (Sussex Record Society, LI [1950])Google Scholar.

20 9 Anne, c. 25, s. 1.

21 See Munsche, P.B., “The Game Laws in Wiltshire, 1750-1800,” in Cockburn, J.S., ed., Crime in England, 1550-1800 (London, 1977), n. 31Google Scholar.

22 Wilts. R.O., Roll of Gamekeepers Deputations, 1778, 1782; Hist. MSS Comm., 14th Report, I, 141.

23 E.g., E. Riding R.O., DDGR/42/22: Thomas Peirse to John Grimston, 5 Oct. 1772; Essex R.O., D/DAr C1/114; Fendall, C.P. and Crutchley, E.A., eds., The Diary of Benjamin Newton, Rector of Wath, 1816-1818 (Cambridge, 1933), p. 158Google Scholar.

24 See Trench, Charles P. Chenevix, A History of Marksmanship (London, 1972), pp. 141–3Google Scholar, and Pollock, Norman H., “The English Game Laws in the Nineteenth Centry” (Ph.D. thesis, Johns Hopkins University, 1968), pp. 47–66.Google Scholar

25 Andrews, C.B., ed., The Torrington Diaries (London, 1934), I, 325Google Scholar.

26 See Munsche, P.B., “The Game Laws in England, 1671-1831” (Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto, 1978), pp. 67-70, 75.Google Scholar

27 Wilts. R.O., 383/114: memorandum, 16 Sept. 1721.

28 Hist. MSS Comm., Various Collections, VIII, 233Google Scholar.

29 Ibid., p. 223; Holkham Hall (Norfolk) MSS, Country Accounts, 1724-31. I am grateful to the Earl of Leicester for permitting me to examine and quote from these accounts.

30 Kent A.O., U269 E29; E. Sussex R.O., Glynde MS 868: memorandum by William Wodgson, ca. 1760. See also Gentleman's Magazine, XIX (1749), 252Google Scholar. References to this practic can be found as late as 1800, but by then it seems to have become unusual: e.g., Daniel, William B., Rural Sports (London, 1801–1902), II, 428Google Scholar.

31 Salisbury Journal, 19 Sept. 1763, 9 Aug. 1784.

32 Ibid., 30 Jan. 1775, 9 Aug. 1779.

33 Mordant, John, The Complete Steward (London, 1761), I, 351–2Google Scholar. On the market in game eggs, see Part. Papers. 1828, VIII, Report on the Game Laws, 18, 48-9.

34 Beds. R.O., W1/6149. I have modernized the spelling and the punctuation.

35 Mayer, John, The Sportsman's Directory: or Park and Gamekeeper's Companion (Colchester, 1815), p. 122Google Scholar.

36 Ibid., pp. 88-9.

37 Beds. R.O., W1/6157.

38 E.g., Munsche, , “Game Laws in Wiltshire,” p. 220Google Scholar.

39 Wilts. R.O., Longleat MSS, Account Books, 1787-8; Staffs. R.O., D590/620: 24 Dec. 1787, D593/L/6/2/2: 1818-1826. On his Shropshire estate, Lord Stafford provided his men with gin: see Staffs. R.O., D593/L/4/10.

40 28 Geo. II, c. 12. The purchase of game, however, was not outlawed until 1818 (58 Geo. III, c. 75).

41 Gentleman's Magazine, XIX (1749), 62Google Scholar.

42 Hertfordshire Records, I, 262Google Scholar.

43 Salisbury Journal, 4 May 1752.

44 Beresford, John, ed., The Diary of a Country Parson: The Reverend James Woodforde (Oxford, 1924–1931), II, 218–19Google Scholar. Three years later, a man was executed for the murder: see ibid., III, 3, and Norwich Mercury, 2 Feb., 8 Mar., 22 Mar. 1788.

45 Peacock, Edward, “Trial under the Game Laws,” Notes & Queries, 7th ser., III (1887), 221–2Google Scholar; 1828 Game Laws Report, p. 101.

46 Essex R.O., D/DBy All; Wilts. R.O., Longleat MSS, Account Books, 1775-1801; Holkham MSS, Domestic Accounts, 1793-1800. See also Taplin, William, Observations on the Present State of the Game in England (London, 1772), pp. 26–8Google Scholar.

47 E.g., Beds. R.O., W1/6156.

48 Norfolk R.O., How 758/5.

49 Wilts. R.O., Longleat MSS, Account Books, 1786-1801.

50 Sheffield Central Library, Arundel Castle MSS, S 542: memorandum, 1 Mar. 1819.

51 W. Sussex R.O., Mitford Archives, MS 884.

52 Wilts. R.O., Savernake MSS, Charles Bill to Lord Ailesbury, 31 Oct. 1779. See also ibid., Bill to Lord Bruce, 16 Nov. 1765, and Taplin, Observations, p. 28.

53 Wilts. R.O., Savernake MSS, Bill to Ailesbury, 30 Nov. 1777.

54 Parl. Papers, 1826–1827, VIGoogle Scholar, Report on Criminal Convictions, 34, 42; 1828 Game Laws Report, p. 50.

55 A Bedfordshire farmer, quoted in Fulford, Robert, Samuel Whitbread, 1764-1815: A Study in Opposition (London, 1967), pp. 224–5Google Scholar.

56 London Magazine, XXVI (1757), 87Google Scholar; Some Considerations on the Game Laws and the Present Practice of Executing Them (London, 1753), p. 37Google Scholar. See also Marshall, William, The Rural Economy of Norfolk (London, 1787), I, 172–5Google Scholar.

57 See Andrews, , Torrington Diaries, II, 10Google Scholar; Beds. R.O., W1/6159, 6167; Wilts. R.O., Savernake MSS, Bill to Ailesbury, 21 Dec. 1779.

58 See Itzkowitz, David C., Peculiar Privilege: A Social History of English Foxhunting, 1753-1885 (London, 1977), pp. 146–50Google Scholar.

59 Herbert, , Pembroke Papers, pp. 327–8Google Scholar; Wilts. R.O., 383/114: W. Philips to R.C. Hoare, n.d. [early 1800s].

60 Farr, M.W., ed., “Sir Edward Littleton's Fox-Hunting Diary, 1774-89,” in Greenslade, M.W., ed., Essays in Staffordshire History Presented to S.A.H. Burne (Collections for a History of Staffordshire, 4th ser., VI [1970]), pp. 154–70Google Scholar; Wilts. R.O., 383/114: Philips to Hoare, n.d. [early 1800s]. See also Cook, Col. John, Observations on Fox-Hunting and the Management of Hounds in the Kennel and the Field (London, 1826), p. 191Google Scholar.

61 Cook, , Observations, p. 42Google Scholar. For examples of packs given up, see Wilts. R.O., 383/114: William Wyndham to R.C. Hoare, 20 Nov. 1806; Cambridge Univ. Library, Buxton MSS, Box 9, A.H. Eyre to R.J. Buxton, 14 Nov. n.y.; 1826-7 Criminal Convictions Report, p. 41.

62 Wilts. R.O., Savernake MSS, Bill to Lord Bruce, 24 Dec. 1770.

63 Kent A.O., U749 E34: “Instructions for the Game Keeper,” n.d.

64 Knox, Vincesimus, “On the Animosities Occasioned in the Country by the Game Laws,” in his Essays Moral and Literary (17th ed., London, 1815), III, 10Google Scholar.

65 Salisbury Journal, 14 Aug. 1786.

66 Sheffield Central Library, Wentworth Woodhouse Muniments, Stw. 6 (i): ? to Benjamin Hall, 13 Jan. 1773.1 wish to express my appreciation to Earl Fitzwilliam and his trustees and to the Director of the Sheffield City Libraries for permission to quote from this document.

67 Gentleman's Magazine, V (1735), 195Google Scholar; Mordant, , Complete Steward, I, 352–3Google Scholar; Taplin, , Observations, p. 24Google Scholar.

68 Hansard, , Parl. Debates, 2nd ser., XI, col. 390Google Scholar; see also Daniel, , Rural Sports, II, 427–8Google Scholar.

69 Beds. R.O., D.D.J. 1258.

70 Wilts. R.O., Q.S./Game Conviction Certificates, 19 Dec. 1815, 1 Dec. 1819. Hunting beyond the limits of their manors was a common complaint against game-keepers: e.g., Salisbury Journal, 25 Jan. 1779, 3 Oct. 1791.

71 Norfolk R.O., How 758/27.

72 Wilts. R.O., 383/114: G.L. Michell to R.C. Hoare, 3 Dec. n.y. [early 1800s].

73 See Facts, Fully Established, and Submitted to the Consideration of Every Member of Both Houses of Parliament, To the Lords of Manors, And to the Attention of the People at Large (Bath, 1784), p. 62Google Scholar; Parl. Papers, 1826–1827, XX, 527Google Scholar.

74 William Salt Library, Stafford, 131/1/47.

75 Margaret, Lady Verney, ed., Verney Letters of the Eighteenth Century from the MSS. at Claydon House (London, 1930), I, 284Google Scholar.

76 Norfolk R.O., How 747/3; see also ibid., How 758/2.

77 E. Riding R.O., DDGR/43/40: F.G. Fowler to Thomas Grimston, 14 Jan. 1820.

78 Essex R.O., D/DAr C7/15.

79 Norfolk R.O., How 750/25.

80 E.g., Holkham MSS, Country Accounts, 1748-50.

81 George, , 6th Earl of Albemarle, Fifty Years of My Life (London, 1876), II, 232Google Scholar.

82 Thornton, Col. Thomas, A Sporting Tour through the Northern Parts of England, and a Great Part of the Highlands of Scotland (London, 1804), p. 263Google Scholar.

83 Farquhar, George, The Beaux Stratagem (1707), V.ii.Google Scholar

84 Rev.Cox, Ernest W., ed., “An Old Sussex Household Diary,” Sussex Archaeo-logical Collections, LXVII (1926), 197Google Scholar.

85 W. Suffolk R.O., P/T1: 25 Nov. 1818.

86 W. Sussex R.O., Cowdray MS 5128/32; Warwick Advertiser, 23 Dec. 1815.

87 James, , 2nd Earl of Malmesbury, Haifa Century of Sport in Hampshire, ed. Aflalo, F.G. (London, 1905), pp. 50–1Google Scholar.

88 Kent A.O., U1134 C1, f. 7.