He who possesses a ploughgate of land in heritage; but if the additional question is asked, How much land makes a ploughgate? no one can answer the question with any precision.

We hail the new Game Act as a step towards the abolition of the Game Laws, but we do not approve of the principle on which it seems to rest. It assumes, that the landlord is the proprietor of the game on his lands, and, therefore, he is authorized to take it from the persons who have killed it without his leave. If this provision is attempted to be enforced, it can scarcely fail to lead to deadly conflicts. It is in vain to attempt to change men's opinions of the nature of property by Act of Parliament. No man ever considered himself guilty of theft, by killing a partridge on his neighbour's property, and carrying it off. It is difficult to understand the kind of property one has in a bird, which property is transferred to another, not by the act of the owner, but by the act of the property; that is, by the bird flying over the hedge; and which bird may belong to half a dozen of persons in a single day, without the knowledge or consent of any one of them either to the acquisition or transference of the property. By the Scottish common law, it is clear that the killer of the game, and not the proprietor of the land where it is killed, is the owner; the doctrine of the English common law, on the other hand, is an amusing specimen of the subtlety of lawyers. If a man starts game on his own lands and kills it on those of his neighbour, the property remains in himself. If he starts it on another man's lands, and kills it there, it belongs to the owner of the land; but if he start game on one man's lands, and pursue it to those of another, and kill it there, it is neither the property of the man on whose lands it is started, nor of him on whose it is killed, but belongs to the killer. But if the lands on which the game was started be a chase or free warren, the property is not changed; for which distinction the reason is given, that the property arises from privilege, and so cannot be changed by the act of a stranger. The reason is, no doubt, very clear and satisfactory. If there is to be a property in game, it ought to belong to the tenant, and not to the landlord. The tenant acquires, by his lease, a right to the whole produce of the soil; and as the game consumes this produce, it ought to belong to the tenant. But the destruction of grain occasioned by the game is not the concern of the farmer alone. In Great Britain it must amount to many thousand quarters annually; and in the rapidly increasing depend ance of this country on foreigners for grain, it is an object, in a national point of view, to diminish the enormous quantity of game which exists in many parts of the country.

It therefore gives us much satisfaction to observe, that the tenantry of Perthshire have set the example of petitioning Parliament to be empowered to kill hares and pheasants on their farms, and thus protect their crops from destruction. Nothing can be more preposterous than to allow a landlord, after exacting a full rent for his farm, to consume the crops by means of hares or pheasants, which are exclusively reserved for his own enjoyment. It is no answer that the tenant may demand compensation for the damage he has sustained; for it is, in all cases, difficult, and generally impossible, to prove its amount. Besides, it is a rule of law, founded on the most obvious principles of common sense, that one is not bound to sustain an injury and take compensation; for he is entitled, if he has the means, to prevent the injury being inflicted. So reasonable a request as that of the Perthshire tenantry, cannot, if duly urged, be long rejected by Parliament. If granted, it would not

destroy field sports, but merely put an end to the butcherly battue, a result in which every true sportsman would rejoice.

We believe the time is not far distant when we may expect that the Game Laws will be expunged from the statute books. Public feeling is outraged by the miseries they occasion, when compared with the paltry object attained. Already several land proprietors in England have destroyed their preserves, and given permission to their tenantry to kill game; others have let it to their tenantry at a rent to be paid either by the delivery of a certain quantity of game, or in money, reserving to themselves a right to shoot, but not to carry off the game without paying the tenant a stipulated price per head. With some the humane motive has operated, of removing the temptations to poaching and crime which large preserves afford to the distressed peasantry.

UTILITY OF ECONOMICAL MISSIONS.

Ir is rare indeed that we can speak of either the wisdom or the suc cess of anything undertaken by the Whig Ministers; and therefore it is with peculiar satisfaction that we notice one proceeding of theirs, which has been distinguished by both wisdom and success. Our neighbours, the French, with all their general intelligence, have always been sadly ignorant of political economy, and as conceited as they were ignorant. No country ever so abounded with prohibitions, restrictions, and high custom-house duties on foreign articles, for the protection of native industry. Indeed, French industry was so well protected, that it was almost destroyed. It was like a child, so abundantly swathed with warm flannel, as to be in danger of suffocation. Every branch of trade had its protection; that is, its power of making the other trades pay more than the natural price of the article. To see that this was in reality a system of mutual pillage, rather than mutual protection, a mere feeding out of each other's dish, instead of their own, necessarily accompanied with grievous waste, was an effort beyond French clearsightedness in matters economic. The system produced its natural results; but no man ascribed the disastrous state of trade to the system. Nor were the French alone in their blindness. We Britons can only boast of seeing the error of our own ways and of theirs a little sooner than they. After the war of Armies terminated, a war of Revenue Officers succeeded to it; custom-houses took the place of castles, and ships of war gave way to revenue-cutters. Along our coast, a strong force, under the denomination of the preventive service, still keeps as vigilant a watch to protect us from an invasion of French wines and brandy, as ever was maintained to prevent the landing of French flat-bottomed boats. But our Government has been the first to see the folly of this course, which is one item in the account of their merit. Seeing the evil, they resolved to endeavour to get it cured; which is item second, in the same account. (We are anxious to make the most of any good they do.) Seeing the evil, and resolving to attempt its cure, they hit upon the very best means of effecting their purpose: item No. III. Seeing the evil, resolving to attempt its cure, and choosing the best means of effecting their purpose, Ministers selected the man, of all others, most adapted to secure the success of their scheme: item fourth,

And here the merit (which has not been small) of his Majesty's Ministers in this matter ends, and Dr. Bowring's begins.

For above a year, Dr. Bowring and an associate (Mr. Villiers) have been engaged in the task of convincing the French nation of the impolicy of the restrictions on their trade with this country. The result has been most satisfactory. We copy from the Examiner, a paper distinguished for its accurate knowledge of French affairs.

"Dr. Bowring has lately visited the principal markets and ports of France, for the purpose of ascertaining the wants and opinions of the great commercial, manufacturing, and agricultural interests of France; and, to judge from the universal expression of the departmental newspapers, the removal of commercial restrictions, and prohibitions in France would be welcomed by the community at large. At Bourdeaux, La Rochelle, Nantes, throughout Britanny and Normandy, the newspapers of all parties concur in the declaration, that the experiments of the prohibitionists have failed, and that the popular interests demand liberty of commerce as the groundwork of future legislation. There is no country in the world where truth penetrates so easily, and travels so rapidly, as in France. A sound philosophy, once introduced, finds a thousand allies in the imaginativeness and enthusiasm of the French people. The sentiments of the country press have been responded to with great ability by the newspapers of the Capital. We have seen articles in the Constitutionnel, Courrier, National, Journal du Commerce, Moniteur de Commerce. Bon Sens, and other Parisian newspapers, full of benevolence and of wisdom. They concur in the declaration that the times of jealousy, and strife, and hatred, are passing away; that the interests of free nations are everywhere the same; that the best and the strongest alliance is the alliance which is reared on mutual benefits. They anticipate, with eloquent delight, a union with England, founded on a common prosperity. Such anticipations we meet with cordial gratulations." In these gratulations we fervently join.

When such is the good effect of one mission of this sort, there should be more of such missions. Why not keep Dr. Bowring employed constantly in this way? We will venture to say that few men have been the means of doing as much good in their whole life as he has accomplished in the course of little more than a year. There is employment in the dissemination of economical truth, for many Dr. Bowrings, if we had them. Not a few might advantageously be employed at home. Although the light of economical science has broken in upon this country, how many dark places yet remain! Even among the conductors of the public press, how many do we yet find raving against Free Trade as the cause of all the distress of the country! Part of the fudge written against free trade is no doubt so much lying doctrine, paid for in some shape or other by the monopolists whose interests are defended; but more of it proceeds from sheer ignorance, united to presumption. A few conversations with such a man as Dr. Bowring, from whom it is no humiliation to take a lesson, and whose kindly disposition, frank courteousness of manner, and ardent enthusiasm for the good of mankind, make even kings listen to Radical doctrines without offence-would soon convince the honest portion of our editors of their ignorance, destroy their conceit, and open their minds to the truth. Some part of Dr. Bowring's enthusiasm and benevolence could not fail to be communicated along with his knowledge. Then, while laying siege to the prejudices of editors in private, Dr.

Bowring might give a short course of lectures on the principles of economic science, to the public of our great commercial towns.

Nothing would tend more to enlighten the public mind than lectures on Politics and Political Economy, by men of eloquence and mastery over these subjects. During the approaching Parliamentary recess, we wish that several of our popular members of Parliament would make their rounds among the principal towns, and promulgate those truths among the people that have fallen upon ears open only to prejudice or self-interest in St. Stephen's. Mr. Cobbett, Mr. Buckingham,* and other members who have been far too seldom heard in the House, might thus employ some months, to their own advantage, as well as to that of the public. And we have no wish that this mode of communicating public instruction should be confined to teachers of Radical doctrines. If our Tory orators think they can find fit audiences among the people of England, Scotland, or Ireland, for discourses on the Divine right of Kings, passive obedience to the powers that be, the advantages of monopolies, of a national church, of tithes, of taxes on industry, of negro slavery, &c. by all means let them not hide their candle under a bushel, but promulgate these doctrines with all their might, for the good of mankind and their own glory. Nor be our good friends, the Whigs, silent, as those who cannot render a reason for the faith that is in them. Their lectures would at least be excellent exercises of the understanding; inasmuch as the general principles of the Radicals would require to be reconciled by them with the practice of the Tories, if their own theories and practice are to have any consistency. As in the recent case of Messrs. Borthwick and Thompson, the champions of negro slavery and liberty, who lectured in the same towns, and occasionally did battle for their respective causes in presence of large assemblies of interested auditors,-a Tory, a Whig, and a Radical, might travel together in the same sort of harmonious fellowship, as the " wonderful hanimals" in one of Wombwell's menagerie waggons; and make a tour of the principal towns. Many of those who came for amusement would go away convinced or confirmed by one or other of the orators. The lecture would be repeated to the wife and children at home, and to all visiters for the next three or four weeks; so that as sure as the truth is elicited by conflicting doctrines, the truth of Toryism, Whiggism, or Radicalism, in whichever of these isms truth may be found, would take

A correspondent points out what he considers an inaccuracy in the Diary of an M.P., No. I. in our Number for July. Our M.P. says:-" Poor Mr. Buckingham, too, has been silenced." Since the clamour raised against Mr. Buckingham, in the debate on the Irish Coercion Bill, (a clamour which has since been repeated against every member who rose, as Mr. B. then did, at a late hour-near twelve o'clock,) Mr. B. has been heard, our correspondent tells us, at least half a dozen times, at some length, and without the least interruption. We are aware of this; and that although very slender reports of these speeches of Mr. Buckingham are to be found in the daily papers, full and accurate reports of them may be read in the Mirror of Parliament, and in Mr. Buckingham's own useful and very clever Parliamentary Review. But, this notwithstanding, we concur with our 'M.P.'s Diary, in regarding Mr. Buckingham as having been silenced; for, unless we greatly mistake both Mr. B.'s qualifications and inclinations, he would, in the course of so long a session, where so many stirring topics have been introduced with which he is familiar, have spoken, and spoken well, not six times at some length, but sixty times at great length; and instead of meeting with not the least interruption, been honoured with a running accompaniment of Oh! Ohs! &c.; frequently exalted into a storm of howling, hooting, crowing, groaning, growling, grunting, and other sounds not to be matched out of a menagerie. With such music, every member of the House, who has courage to speak the truths of Radicalism, and perseverance to sustain the wrath of those who hate the truth as they hate the devil, is sure to be treated.

root, spread its branches, and scatter its seed over all the land. Other benefits would arise from this peripatetic mode of teaching. The teachers themselves would learn something which it much imports them and their parties to know. During the application of the torture, a surgeon stood by, with his hand upon the patient's pulse, to see that the rack should not strain the miserable wretch beyond the farthest point to which human suffering can go without producing death: in like manner it would be well if our rulers would cause a careful watch to be kept over the effects of their instruments of taxation, that the inflictions may not exceed the strength of the racked sufferers. Even when the relief of the distressed people is the object of legislation, and not a farther application of the taxing engines, it is wise to keep an eye on the effects of state medicines administered with kindly interest. In administering medicine, no less than in inflicting the rack, it is necessary to watch the indications afforded by the looks and pulse of the patient. The part of State physician might be enacted by the peripatetic lecturers; who might report, when the people had as much taxation or protection as they could bear. Of State medicines, as of State torture, there has been always more than enough. It is difficult to say, whether protections and monopolies, or taxes, have been more injurious to the people.

EXTRACTS FROM THE DIARY OF AN M.P.

No. II.

June 18. Symptoms of yielding on the part of Ministers. Their underlings, who some days since spoke boldly of excluding the Bishops from the House of Lords, begin to talk of the dangers of collision. It is said that Lord Fortescue, Lord Ebrington's father, has declared against the Irish Church Bill; which signifies, if I read the times aright, that the Ministers themselves feel as their opponents do, on this matter.

Business goes on a little. All improvement of the Reform Bill refused. Col. Evans brought forward his motion on this matter just at dinner time. Hardly any one present. He himself made a very lukewarm speech in favour of his plan. I do not quite understand the gallant member; for an out-and-out Radical, he appears over timid, hesitating, and wavering. It is to be hoped that when the day of real struggle comes, there will be no shrinking: the Westminster electors, I trust, will not again be deceived.

No relief as to the Corn Laws. Mr. Fryer's speech was a singular exhibition. Such eloquence, I suspect, is irresistible, when employed upon the people. Here it creates amusement. He and Sir Wm. Ingilby are certainly unique orators in their several styles.

So Sir Andrew Agnew wants to try his hand at legislation for the Scots! Having failed egregiously in his noted experiment for improving English manners on the Sunday, he is about to exhibit his wonderful powers in regulating the behaviour of his countrymen. Good luck to him, and to them. The best thing that I can wish for the wretched subjects of his visitation is, that a spark of the pure light of common sense would light upon the unfortunate legislator's brain, and induce him to give up the vocation on which he has entered so rashly.