This historic book may have numerous typos or missing text. Not indexed. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1827. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... given by Buchanan, in his celebrated epithalamium on Francis, and he beautiful and afterwards unfortunate Mary, cingere venatu saltus. To besiege the forests with hunting, was not more characteristic of the North, than of the South Britons. The forest laws in the earlier periods of our history, and the game laws from their first enactment, have therefore always been regarded as oppressive and odious. We speak, however, more directly of the Anglo-Norman laws. For although the Anglo-Saxon kings laid claim to the forests, they were generally more liberal, in the dispensation of their power; for until the time of Harold, except only as to their own deer, they never attempted to restrain the nobility or gentry bordering on the forests, from taking the diversion of hunting, and amusing themselves in quest of that superfluity of game, which their general love of hunting urged them to preserve, and not wantonly destroy. William the Conqueror was devoted to hunting, to gratify which passion, we are assured by the ancient chronicles, that he depopulated thirty-six miles of country, in Hampshire. He turned out the inhabitants, demolished their houses, and even the churches which stood in the tract, in order to render it a retreat for wild animals. This was called the New-Forest, and still retains its name, though now more than 700 years old. The severity of the forest laws enacted under the reign of this prince, was intolerable even to his own nobles. He not only imposed fines on trespasses committed within the forests, which far exceeded the offence, or the damage, but he made the killing of a deer punishable by putting out the eyes. This was extended even to the killing of hares or wild boars. Henry I. subjected offenders to a punishment no less true , and still mor..