OUR FOOTPATHS AND THE POUNDING ACT.

King Country Chronicle, Volume III, Issue 181, 12 August 1909, Page 5

OUR FOOTPATHS AND THE POUNDING ACT.

To the Editor. Sir,—Having for some time been a resident of this promising village, I naturally take an interest in anything concerning the advancement of our orban conveniences hence this protest. The construction and preservetion of oor footpaths being a matter | that should have the support and direct or indirect co-operation of all who u«e them, like to see all fellow townsmen, while keeping to , the terms of the Pounding Act, also see that it is enforced, for the benefit if every pedestrian, instead of being fragrantly disobeyed by one or two persistent offenders. Every Sunday, the hordes of a certain firm can be seen by anyone, bar the poundkeeper, grazing round oor river bank, and the sides of the roads, while I have it from an eye witness that recently two horses belonging to say, Mr "A" were taken from amongst a mob of equine trespasser* belonging to Mr "B" and impended, while "B's" horses were left to graze at their owner's pleasure. Why the distinction? If beast of A's or B's, or yours, or mine, is wandering on the roads, that beast is illegally there, and not to mention making our limited amount of dry footpway impassable, should be penalised without fear or favour. Again, a mare and foal have had free grazing since August 7th, within "cooee" of the Pound. Where is the Poundkeeper? If he is dead, peace be to bis ashes; let's get another before oor roads are ruined. Seriously, why is not the Pounding Act enforced, not here or there, but impartially to "big" and "little" horse owner alike? Are we so infected with the bacillus "Taiboa," that corse of the King Country, that we arc content to see oor paths cut up by trespassing stock, and take the inevitable wetfeet and muddy attire as a matter of course? I am, etc., "SANS PEUR."