Timeline: Antiquity » Medieval » Renaissance » Age of Enlightenment: Restoration » Augustan » Sensibility » Romantic Age » Victorian Age » Early 20thc.

Sporting Magazine

1802-Jul | "Bull-Baiting Debate in the House of Commons, on Monday, May 31 [sic]." Sporting Magazine 20 (1802-Jul) 187-190; Digitized by Google, Online at Google Books.

Bull-Baiting Bill, 1802

Sporting Magazine

Bull-baiting.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, May 31 [sic (May 24)], Mr. Dent moved the second reading of a Bill to prohibit Bull-Baiting and Bull-Running. The advocates for the abolition of this sport were, the mover,Mr. Dent, Sir Richard Hill, Mr. Wilberforce, Mr. Newbolt, and Mr. Sheridan. On the other side, and in favour of Bull-Baiting, were, Mr. Windham, Mr. Courtney, Colonel Grosvenor, General Gascoigne, and Mr. William Smith [sic (Smith favored the bill)].

Mr. Windham, after some introductory observations, said, the Bill before the House would have passed unnoticed the last Session, if he had not been by chance in the House. He was of opinion that gentlemen should set about reforming themselves before they reformed others. If the House reformed in one respect, it should in another: while the run was made against Bull-baiting, was hunting, fishing, shooting, horse-racing, and cock-fighting, to pass, unnoticed? Mr. Windham said, he despised the cant and hypocrisy of some persons, who, while they were making war against the sports of the poor, were outraging charity, and seemed to forget the privilege cruelty had given to the higher orders by the Game Laws. The present he considered as the first step towards a system to abolish the rustic sports of the lower orders, introduced and supported by those reformists, who, if they had succeeded in other reforms, would have left the Country now without a Constitution. This new system of reform arose out of two things, namely. Jacobinism and Religious Fanaticism. The Jacobins wished the abolition of rustic sports, because the lower orders, berest of the means of their jollity and amusement, would become cheerless, morose, and gloomy, and therefore the more likely subjects to be worked up; and he was persuaded that, in the whole of the London Corresponding Society, not one bull-baiter, not one pugilist, not one man who delighted in the manual exercises, was to be found to give countenance to their dark, mischievous, and cowardly transactions. The House, he had no doubt, would agree with him, how nearly blended questions of this nature were with the very existence of our Constitution. By the voice of religious fanaticism, our masculine amusements were pronounced "Lewd Sports, and Anti-Christian Pastimes." From the earliest times the sports of the field were followed by all nations.—From the Philosophic Zenophon, throughout every link in the human creation, to the lowest individual, has not hunting been admired?—It was a theme worthy the praise of Milton, and the most eminent Poets, though Dr. Johnson lamented the paucity of human amusements. Often he joined in the chase, because hunting made one theme. For "his own part, he would not compare boxing or bull- baiting to so low an amusement as horse-racing. He was surprised to see an Hon. Member (Mr. Wilberforce) so decided a friend to the Bill—he indeed leaped over nine horse-races in Yorkshire—(a loud laugh) to attack one solitary Bull-baiting match at Stafford. Horse-racing, it was true, might be good, inasmuch as it tended to improve the breed of that noble animal; but what sort of an Assemblage attended these polite sports?—noblemen and gentry—elegant gentlemen without character—black legs—sharpers of every denomination—keepers of E. O. tables—apprentices who rob their masters' tills,and become forgers—groom porters—shufflers of cards —setters at dice—lacquies—pick-pockets and thieves—in short, of every description. If, therefore, Bull-baiting was put down, Gentlemen certainly must, injustice, cast their eyes towards other sports. Finally, he deprecated the idea of this war declared against the amusements of the lower orders. In high life, a fine Lady's Ball is a most delicious thing; but if it decends to the appellation of a vulgar hop, how gross and abominable! This reminded him of a circumstance that happened a few years ago near Berkeley-square; he said he was walking with Sir Harvey Aston, a most sincere friend to those sports which he now advocated. A very great tumult took place, which had more the appearance of an insurrection than the shocking outrage of a vulgar dance. They approached the place of attack, where the Civil Officers were breaking open the door, to put the merry inhabitants of the house to the rout.

On enquiring the cause of the disturbance, he was informed that it was a hop;—but what aggravated the offence was, that the harmless people were dancing to the music of a black fidler!—The effect of the Poors' Rates, be believed, had a great influence in producing this hostility to amusement. With regard to the cruelty of Bull-baiting, were gentlemen certain that the bull did not experience pleasure from it? Probably, far from feeling pain, he feels satisfaction in the contest. Bulls that have once been baited are more eager to attack the dogs than others, and are therefore called Game Bulls. Gentlemen certainly would not deny, but that the dog had pleasure in the contest. In his opinion, it was the least cruel of all field sports, and cherished those feelings, which were the best support of loyalty, and the greatest protection both of the Church and State. In the French Revolution, and during the troubles in our own country, who were the men who committed the greatest cruelties? not the country sportsmen. No; but the very men who were active in crying out against such sports, who talked smoothly against all such horrid transactions, but who, like razors set with oil, cut the keener. If the present Bill should pass, he would move for leave to bring in one to do away hunting, shooting, and all the cruel amusements of the higher order.

Colonel Grosvenor thought the lower order of the people entitled to their amusements as well as the higher. The higher, orders have their Billington, and why not allow the lower orders their Bull?"—(A laugh.)

Mr. Courtenay, in his usual manner, entered into an ironical defence of Bull-baiting. He conjured the House not to deprive the people of an amusement which contributed so essentially to the welfare of the State. His Right Hon. Friend had proved, that the Bull, though smarting under it at first, in time also came to be extremely delighted with the practice. This might be proved from the analogy of bears, who were to be trained to dance. At first they, no doubt, felt rather uncomfortable on the hot iron, but by degrees they came to relish the sound of the fiddle, and to find dancing a.very agreeable amusement. If by passing this act a treaty was signed between the bull-dogs and the bulls, "the death warrant of the country would be signed" a second time. There were now no wars, and how would ex-ministers amuse themselves, if these sports, that afforded the image of war, were taken away? He hoped, if the Bill did pass, that certain districts would be exempted from its operation—Norfolk, for instance. He should vote, not only for the preservation of Bull-baiting, but he would also beg leave to propose an amendment. As the Corsican bulls were reckoned particularly adapted for this sport, he would propose that some of them should be got over; and of these, the most ferocious might be called Bonaparte, and appropriated to the district he before alluded to, where the ex-ministers might have an opportunity of baiting him with dogs of the true English breed. He trusted, therefore, that as Bull-baiting had been proved so conducive to the happiness of both the and brute creation, and so essential to the preservation of our constitution, our national character and morality, the House would never consent to abolish so invaluable a practice.

Colonel Grosvenor and General Gascoigne spoke against the Bill.

Mr. Wilberforce replied to Mr. Windham. He entered into a description of the cruelties practised on bulls to rouse them to a sufficient degree of fury, to gratify the barbarous wishes of their tormentors; and said, it was a disgrace to the English nation, to suppose that such an amusement could be regarded as indispensible to them.

Mr. W. Smith followed on the same side. He thought Mr. Windham so affected by the nature of the sport that he defended, that he had run wild, and was goaded into the range that he had run. He could not otherwise account for the connection of anti-jacobinism and bull-baiting.

Mr. Frankland went into a comparative statement of the degrees of cruelty in all the sports of the field. He defended the practice of Bull-baiting, which he said was exempt from cruelty. He hud attended many Bull-baits, and had never seen more than one dog at a time let loose at a bull.

Mr. Sheridan defended the Bill. He asked, what sort of moral lesson would it be to the wife and children of the farmer, who sold his Bull for the purpose of being baited, to see the poor, simple, harmless animal, which, for years, they had cherished as a favourite, and learned to look on with affection, tied to a stake, worried by dogs, and his bleeding tongue torn out of his month by the roots? But cruelty to the Bull was not the only cruelty exercised on these occasions. What sort of moral lesson for instance, was it to the children of the farmer who bring his aged bull-bitch, many years the faithful sentinel of his house and farm-yard, surrounded by her pups to prove, at the bull-ring, the staunchness of her breed? He brings her forward, sets her at the infuriated animal, she seizes him by the nose, and pins him to the ground. But what is the reward from his owner, amidst the applauses of the mob to his favourite animal? He calls for a hedging-bill, and, to prove her breed, news her to pieces without quitting her grip, while he sells her puppies at five guineas a piece! These, said Mr. Sheridan, are some of the hopeful lessons of morality which are to be taught by Bull-baiting!!!

Mr. Dent, in a short speech, replied to the observations that had been made against the Bill. The question was then put for the second reading, on which the House divided.—Ayes 51.—Noes 64. The Bill was consequently lost.—Adjourned.