The Forest Laws

As many Greyhound enthusiasts know, the Forest Laws came into being in England during the reign of the Danish King Canute (1016-1035). They prevented any "meane person" from hunting with Greyhounds. This was an era when the King exercised absolute power over his subjects and the chasm between the aristocracy and commoners was immense. The Forest Laws were a symbol of the state's power over the individual.

From the beginning, the laws were broken and the King's resources could not keep up with those who would poach wildlife from his land. To supplement their income, underpaid local officials accepted bribes to ignore local coursing. Commoners took every precaution possible to evade detection. They culled white puppies, preferring the natural camouflage of black or brindled dogs. By contrast, the nobility preferred white dogs, for not only did they symbolize purity and cleanliness, they had the practical advantage of being more easily seen from horseback during the hunt.

The Forest Laws were also compromised by the nobility themselves. Rather than transport Greyhounds great distances, noblemen prepositioned kennels of dogs with commoners who lived near a forest and granted them hunting privileges in return for caring for the dogs. Greyhounds were cherished gifts and were often given by the King for military service or other favors. Members of the clergy, often related by blood or politics to the aristocracy, kept Greyhounds. The famous line from the Monk's Tale in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales illustrates just one instance:

"Grehoundes he hadde, as swift as fowel in flight,
Of prikyng and of huntyng for the hare
Was all his lust, for no cost wolde he spare."

- The General Prologue

Complicating the problem was that there weren't enough Greyhounds to satisfy the demand for them. Few noblemen were involved in the breeding of dogs and it was against the law for commoners to do so! Dogs were often imported from Ireland which could scarcely meet the demand.

After the Bubonic Plague of 1347, it appeared as if the Forest Laws would be no more. The Black Death decimated Europe's population, killing both nobleman and commoner alike, and caused the greatest social upheaval in European history. With one-third of the population wiped out, labor became scarce and wages increased which brought greater freedom to the peasantry. In England, the courts were in disarray which allowed Greyhound owners to avoid the law almost openly.

By the time of Richard II (1377-1400), however, the plague had been gone for more than 50 years and the courts had been fully restored. The feudal world of Canute and his immediate successors had long since ceased to exist. Accordingly, the law changed to reflect the new economic reality. Anyone who did not own land capable of generating £10 annually could not own a Greyhound. Through vigorous enforcement, the new law achieved its desired effect in all but the most remote areas.

During the late Middle Ages, the story of the Greyhound parallels that of the nobility that kept them. From Runnymede to the deposition of Richard II, English history was the story of the expansion of power and influence of the landed aristocracy at the expense of the Crown. They had slain or deposed two kings, and Parliament was able to exert a measure of control over the nation's purse-strings. The Judiciary, which was made up of their own class, wielded the law as much for themselves as it did for the Crown. With vast estates, great wealth, and leisure time, the landed gentry often filled their hours in field sports including Greyhound coursing and falconry. For them, the Forest Laws died with the end of the Middle Ages. From the 15th century on, the restrictions on coursing applied less and less to the landed gentry, though commoners were still subject to the laws.

Upon Henry Tudor’s defeat of Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth Field in 1485, the House of Tudor ruled England into the first years of the 17th century. In his tenure on the English throne, the pendulum had begun to swing the other way. England's political fragility of the fifteenth century was replaced by Henry VII’s foresight and pragmatism and the Crown strengthened its position in relation to the gentry. He summoned Parliament as rarely as possible and consolidated the power of the Crown. Though nearly ruined by Henry VIII's free-spending policies, the Tudors maintained a level of authority not seen since Medieval times. They wielded great political power, but their control over the judiciary was still tenuous. Judges in local courts served at the pleasure of the Crown, but they often acted autonomously and protected their own interests.

During her reign, Elizabeth I participated in field sports and it is believed that the formal rules of coursing, based on those of Arrian from the second century, were set down by the Duke of Norfolk at her request. His rules do not appear to have been published during her reign, however, and though they were unchanged in their essentials, continued to be revised and refined right up through the nineteenth century.

Elizabeth did not, as is often seen in print, repeal the Forest Laws. Indeed, her successors took steps for more than a century after her death to continue the policy of preventing commoners from taking game with dogs. Under James I (1603-1625), no one could keep a coursing dog unless he owned land with the rental value of £10 per year, was a Baron of Parliament, a man of "high degree," or a son or heir of an Esquire. The Church was enlisted to help enforce the law—any Greyhounds discovered by church officials entitled them to the entire fine of 40 shillings per offence.

When James died in 1625, his son Charles I (1625-1649) showed no interest in coursing—he preferred Beagles. Under Charles, however, a new law was enacted that permitted ownership of Greyhounds by those whose land was valued at £10 per year or who had a 99-year lease on land of the same value. During the reign of William III (1689-1702), the law was amended to provide for whippings or confinement at hard labor as punishment for illegal possession of Greyhounds. During the reign of Queen Anne (1702-1714), trade in Greyhounds was rampant, and with enforcement still not wholly successful, a law was enacted that innkeepers, alehouse keepers and victuallers could not house dealers of Greyhounds. The fine for doing so was £5. Informers could receive £2, 10s of the fine. To further encourage commoners to report those trading in Greyhounds, the courts were authorized to give the remaining half of the fine to the poor of the parish. An innkeeper unable to pay the fine could be sentenced to three months in jail, four for a second offense.

In time, protests against the laws began to appear in the press. The lack of coursing was causing farmers to be overrun with hares, but because they belonged to the gentry, tenant farmers weren't allowed to kill them. Finally, in 1831, the Game Act removed all qualifications for coursing with Greyhounds based on estate or social standing. A series of poaching prevention acts limited the liability of the hunter from theft of property to merely trespassing.

By the end of the eighteenth century, a coursing craze gripped England that forever changed the breed. Wealthy enthusiasts formed coursing clubs, started breeding programs, bred only the best examples of the breed based on results of coursing meets, and began to maintain pedigree records. In 1845, Waterloo Cup winner King Cob was the first dog offered at public stud and other champion sires soon became available. Any owner of a female Greyhound had access to the best bloodlines of the day and the new railroad lines allowed ready shipment of females to the very best sires from any point in England. In a very short time, strains of the breed whose traits served them well on the coursing fields of England were retained and improved. Those that did not passed into history.

The Forest Laws and their descendants had become increasingly difficult to enforce and the Game Act, after more than 700 years, put an end to them, not by making Greyhounds legal, but by making hares part of the land they were on, not the property of the King or the aristocracy. It could be said that the Forest Laws ended with a whimper, not a bang. Though laws remained on the books well into the eighteenth century, the will to enforce them was simply not there. By then, Greyhounds were in so many hands that efforts to control them were fruitless. In the end, the Forest Laws were a measure of how much society had changed since feudal kings ruled a millennium ago. In some ways, however, it seems we are headed back in the same direction today.