Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE RABBIT NUISANCE

CASE UNDER NEW ACT DISMISSED. By TclecraDn-Prejß Association. Christchurch, January 14. A case under the Rabbit Nuisance Act was heard in the Magistrate's Court be•fore Mr. Dav. S M., when Richard Candy, farmer, of Purnn, was charged w:ith failins to take diligent steps to promoto the destruction of rabbits. Mr. Thomas appeared for defendant, who pleaded not Kuilty. Mr. Gresson, who conducted tho prosc- | cution on behalf of the Banks Peninsula Rabbit Board, said that under, the new Act the insnector was the solo judge as to whether reasonable steps had been taken to nut down rabbits. The section leavine' it to the opinion of the Magistrate had been repealed, though the Magistrate would still judge whether the insnector had acted in a nona-fide manner In commie to any conclusion. The insnector in the present case would give evidence that the defendant had deliberately isnored all instructions. It was desired that a penally should be inflicted. Candy's neighbours had done the work satisfactorily, but their efforts had been neutralised through the defendant's negligence. ~* Insnector Radford said, the defendant had never laid sufficient poison. In.his nninion. Candy's nlace was a menace to the surrounding places. Witness had been an insnector for eleven years. He believed that poisoning would keep down the rabbit nest. Mr. Thomas urged that the inspector had not. taken sufficient steps to form an nninion t:s, to how Candy was attempting to destroy rabbits. Tho farm was one of 800 acres, and the inspector had not accompanied Candy to the place where the. noison should have been laid. The Magistrate said he would dismiss the information on the ground that the insnector had not taken sufficient steps to satisfy himself that reasonable measures had been adopted by Candy, Mr. Day agreed to Mr. Gresson's request to state a case for a general appeal.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19200115.2.29

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 94, 15 January 1920, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
308

THE RABBIT NUISANCE Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 94, 15 January 1920, Page 5

THE RABBIT NUISANCE Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 94, 15 January 1920, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert