KEEPING FOWLS IN THE CITY.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 430, 12 February 1909, Page 6

KEEPING FOWLS IN THE CITY.

A NEW BY-LAW ADOPTED. ' A resolution in favour of !tUe adoption of the proposed l)y-law regulating the keeping of poultry in the city cvokecl a somewhat length)' discussion at last night's .'meeting ,nf the Cij:y Council. Councillor, Hindmarsh was of that tho by-law had been framed merely to bring one ratepayer to book. It would, he felt, be quite unnecessary as'regards certain'parts of the city,-at' any rate.. Councillor Smith, moved, as an amendment, that the second clause, which provides that not more; than 50 .poultry shall be kept-in'anV poultry house or run in the" city, without the .consent of the council, be. deleted. ■ ■ . Councillor j Hindmarsh': I will second the amendment, , The council , lias something else to do than to see that a ratepayers' fowls are counted. (Laughter.) • •'.'■ The Mayor .said that he/hoped that the council would rise to a true conception of its , regard ,to the matter. It . would be .? ridiculous thing if the council took upon itself to determine whether or not a ratepayer should be allowed to keep 50 fowls. If the keeping of fowls .was, under certain cirourastances,'injurious 'to the public health; let the council legislate to meet the case. What was all the ; fuss.. little noise?- He did not know, what the people of TCew Zealand were coming , to. They , did not like to be disin the slightest degree. He was. reminded that Carlyle was disturbed by the crowing of a cock. With regard to the ques-tion-of. noiso, why, in the locality where the poultry yard referred to was situated, cars ran past every five minutes. Every care' was taken to prevent the keeping of fowls in that yard from becoming a For instance, the fowls were kept in. the dark in the mornuntil an hour when'everybody ought to ™ °ul. of bed. Under the conditions in which the fowls were keptihere. it was impossible for injury to'health to accrue. In some cities at Home thousands of fowls were kept in the residential areas. If the by-law wore passed it would mean that the people affected would resort to'.the 'practice of keeping fowls in coops, which would bo worse for the community, as, well as for the creatures themselves. - It; would be another , matter if the proposed,-by-law provided that- each fowl should, be required to have a certain amount of space. . But to say that, no matter how.large' a property a man • had, he should not be allowed to keep 50 fowls, would be an unreaSO rni a , a r '<iiculous, provision. _ lhe amendment was rejected by 10 votes to 0 votes. , Councillor Ballinger then moved, as an amendment, that no one should be permitted to keep more than 50 head of poultry on less f quarter of an acre, without the consent of the, council. n,T h ?r yoting on ft 6 - su Egestion was equal, but 8; -t as to. whether it should be confirmed, altei-ed or rejected, will be considered at a later date.'*