In the decision on the vagrant case, in Crabbe’s “Hall of Justice,” { 231a} and in the treatment of Gypsies on Knoland-Green, { 231b} a temper is displayed so truly Christian, and so different from what is just alluded to, that in consulting the best feelings of human nature, it adds dignity to magistracy.
Sir Frederick Morton Eden, in his first volume on the State of the Poor, p. 306, refers to an Act passed in 1741, respecting that class of the poor, who are considered by the Legislature as the outcasts of society, namely rogues, vagabonds, &c.; and he remarks: “From perusing the catalogue of actions which denominate a man, a disorderly person, a vagabond, or incorrigible rogue, the reader may perhaps incline to think that many of the offences specified in this Act, and in subsequent statutes, on the same subject, are of a very dubious nature, and that it must require nice legal acumen, to distinguish whether a person incurs any, and what, penalty, under the vagrant laws.”
In support of this opinion, and of the indefinite and unjustifiable latitude of those statutes, a late decision at Maidstone, in the action of Robins, v. Boyce, affords a striking demonstration.
If the statutes do not admit of any construction in favor of Gypsies, but enjoin rigorous treatment of them, merely for wandering, it may become a question whether the peculiar circumstances of their case, might not constitute an exception to the general rule.
However wholesome and salutary vagrant Acts may be, to deter persons from quitting their parishes in order to levy contributions, by practising impositions in places where they are not known, it is obvious that Gypsies, having no parochial settlements, cannot come under that description. Excepting a temporary residence of some of them in winter, their home is a whole county, and the majority of them are too independent to apply to any parish for assistance.
Here is a trait in their character, which, were it grafted on the stock of half the paupers in the kingdom, would be a national advantage.
It ought to procure some indulgence for the Gypsies, that their wandering mode of life does not originate in any contumacious opposition to judicial order; but in a scrupulous regard to the Institutions of their ancestors. For the advantages we possess, shall we return injury to our fellow-men! If after being fully introduced into a situation to taste the comforts of social order, and to acquire a knowledge of mechanical professions, which would render them useful and respectable, any of them, despising these privileges, should indulge wandering dispositions, they might then deserve all the punishment which under the vagrant Acts, can be indicted.