Buxton versus mingay c b game question on the stat W m c sec who be or be not  a inferior tradesman trespass quare enclosed space to break in pieces the  plaintiff declare that the defendant be a inferior tradesman to wit a  apothecary such a day commit the trespass by hunt in the plaintiff close upon  the general issue not guilty this cause be try at Thetford march before Mr  justice Dennison when a verdict be find for the plaintiff and S damage and S  cost subject to the opinion of this court upon a case make which state that it  be prove at the trial that the defendant at the time of the trespass be a  surgeon and a apothecary and not qualify to hunt or ml game within the intent  of the statute that on the that of December he Wilson king bench er p be hunt  with diverse other not qualify in company with a person who be proper qualify  to kill game and commit a trespass in the plaintiff close I the question for  the consideration of the court be whether upon the fact above state the  defendant shall be deem a inferior tradesman within the intent and meaning of  the statute W m c sec which run thus and whereas great mischief do ensue by  inferior tradesman apprentice and other dissolute person neglect their trade  and employment who follow hunt fish and other game to the ruin of themselves  and damage of their neighbour for remedy whereof be it enact by the authority  aforesaid that if any such person as aforesaid shall presume to bunt hawk fish  or fowl unless in company with the master of such apprentice duly qualify by  law such person or person shall be subject to the penalty of this Act and  shall or may be sue and prosecute for their wilful trespass in such their come  on any person land and if find guilty thereof the plaintiff shall not only  recover his damage thereby sustain but his full cost of suit any former law to  the contrary notwithstanding so that if the defendant be a person within  Wilson king bench the meaning of this clause of the statute the plaintiff  shall have his full cost otherwise no more cost than damage this case be three  or four time argue at the bar and in this term by Hewitt sergeant for the  plaintiff and pool one of the king sergeant for the defendant it be say for  the plaintiff that there be no such distinction as superiority or inferiority  between trade or tradesman either in legal or common apprehension and that  therefore the legislature can never mean to consider one trade as superior to  another or to make any distinction in trade but that by the word inferior  tradesman they mean every person in trade not qualify by law and that this be  a reasonable construction secundum to throw under means that statute be make  for preservation of the game for the defendant it be insist that to entitle  one to go a hunt there be no qualification necessary and therefore a  qualification be not the criterion to determine or try who be or be not a  inferior tradesman within the true meaning of this statute but that every case  of this kind ought to be leave to a jury who may with certainty sufficient  determine under the particular circumstance of the case what person be or be  not a inferior tradesman otherwise the lord mayor or rich tradesman in London  can not lawful go hunt without a qualification in land which can never be the  meaning of the legislature the court be equal divide in opinion deliver the  same seriatim the last day of this term the puisne judge beginning first Noel  I for the defendant I think it will be hard for I to say that every tradesman  in this kingdom though never so rich in money who bath not a qualification in  land shall pay full cost in a case like this nor can I prevail upon myself to  say that the defendant because be be mere state to be a apothecary be  therefore a inferior tradesman or a dissolute person it be argue for the  plaintiff that among tradesman as such there can be no line draw with respect  to who be superior and who be inferior but that they be all upon a equal foot  as tradesman and that therefore the legislature by the word inferior tradesman  mean such as be not qualify but I think if this construction be to prevail it  will bring every gentleman though of the best family in England as well as  rich tradesman who have not a qualification within the meaning of this clause  it be argue for the defendant at the bar that a qualification be not necessary  to authorize a person to go I hunt I shall Wilson king bench say nothing to  that point but however that may be I think a person go out with a gentleman  qualify to kill game can be convict for kill game as a unqualified person it  be say for the plaintiff that if the qualification be not the true distinction  no line can be draw between superior and inferior but I answer there be a know  distinction universal agree to be between tradesman with respect to superior  and inferior as master and journeyman and apprentice and this be a natural  subordination which answer the Act of parliament in every respect for  journeyman and apprentice be plain inferior and within the mischief intend to  be remedy I do agree that the statute sa S unless in company with a master  qualify and that every apprentice be out abunting not in company with a master  qualify be within the statute Wilson king bench er p I think the jury at the  trial ought to determine under the particular circumstance of every case of  this kind whether the defendant be or be not a inferior tradesman or dissolute  person and it be too much for I to say that this defendant who be a apothecary  and surgeon be a inferior tradesman or a dissolute person in my own private  opinion a surgeon be the fit person in the world to be in the field with  gentleman hunt foe remember the master of a pack of hound have his neck  dislocate by a fall from his horse when out hunt and if a surgeon have not be  near he when the accident happen who pull his neck right the gentleman will  most certain have lose his life it general happen that near every great town  in England some gentleman keep a pack of dog and it be well know that he never  go out without be accompany by many tradesman as well as other not qualify if  therefore judgement in this case be to be for the plaintiff to have his full  cost it will laya foundation for a infinite number of suit upon the whole I be  of opinion the defendant can be say to be a inferior tradesman nor a dissolute  person and that the plaintiff ought to have no more cost than damage Bathurst  I for the plaintiff I think this be a question of law and not of fact and that  the judge and not the jury be to determine who be inferior tradesman or  dissolute person within this law in order to find out the true construction of  this statute we must take the intent of the maker into consideration which be  plain to secure the game from be destroy by person neglect their lawful  employment as appear by the preamble there may be a inferior and superior  between mass Wilson king bench to and journeyman and apprentice but I can  never be of opinion that the legislature intend to permit every master of  every little mechanic trade to neglect his trade and go hunt the clause under  consideration it must be admit be a little obscure but I be of opinion that  every tradesman be inferior who be not qualify and that be the only line we  can possible draw between inferior and superior and I be incline to think the  parliament purposely pen the Act in this obscure manner not to disoblige their  constituent many of who be tradesman in Bennet and Talbois comens it be object  that a clothier be not a inferior tradesman send non allocatur say the book  for the statute seem to prohibit all trade upon the whole I be of opinion that  all qualify tradesman be not inferior tradesman and that all unqualified  tradesman be inferior clive I for the plaintiff I entire agree in opinion with  my brother Bathurst notam he deliver his opinion to the same effect will l c j  for the defendant I think myself unfortunate whenever I differ in opinion with  any of my brother however I have the pleasure to reflect that in the year I  have sit here this be but the three time I have differ with any of my  associate the single question here be who be that tradesman shall pay full  cost in a twelvepenny trespass in bunting in company with a gentleman qualify  I do not think it necessary to draw any line at all in this case but it ought  to be consider upon its own circumstance and I be clear of opinion the  legislature can never intend that a surgeon be a inferior tradesman within  this clause I think the case consist both of matter of law and matter of fact  and if I have be to try this cause I shall have tell the jury my opinion upon  hear the evidence and the circumstance of the defendant and have ask they  whether upon their oath they can say that this defendant be a inferior  tradesman a dissolute person or neglect his trade and in this manner I shall  have speak to they and then leave they to say what be their verdict upon the  whole evidence and circumstance of the person and case of the defendant for my  own part I can upon my oath say that this defendant mere as a apothecary and  surgeon be a inferior tradesman or a dissolute person and agree entire with my  brother Noel that the plaintiff ought to have no more cost than damage  therefore as the court be equal divide there can be no rule but let the postea  remain in court Wilson king bench er p