FOXTON,

Manawatu Times, Volume II, Issue 53, 21 April 1877, Page 3

FOXTON,

Wednesday, 18th Apeil. (Before ' Robert Ward, Esq., R.M. ; E.~S. Thvnne, Esq., J. P.; and J. T. Stewart, Esq.fJ'.'P.) PUECELL V. BLAKE. Two informations were laid against ihe defendant. First for having killed two pheasants, and the second for having two pheasants m his possession. 'These informations were laid under the 10th and 25th clauses of the Animals Protection Act, 1873. ' Defendant pleaded not guilty to the first information^ and guilty to the second. John Purcell being sworn, said, I am a. constable residing at Foxton. On the evening of Saturday the 7th of April, I saw the defendant walking along astreet of Foxton ; he had a gun ■on his shoulder and. a game dog following him* and was also carrying a bag. I said, Blake, I am given to understand you are shooting pheasants. He said, no, and walked away. I followed him round to the back yard of Mr Whyte's Hotel. I said fo defendant to satisfy myself that he was not shooting pheasants I should search his bag. He declined. T then took the bag from him. He then said that he would turn it out "himself, and did so. He had some bukako. There was also a smaller bag inside the. other. I asked him what was inside that, he said his tommy, meaning "his tucker. He did not want, me to take it from him, but I did so, and when I opened it I found two pheasants. I^e wanted to persuade me that they were bukako. One was a cock, pheasant and the other a hen. The birds were fresh. I am certain that they were shot that day, for when hung up they were bleeding. I produce the skins of the birds. The wings are cut up as from shot. I afterwards found the bodies pitted with shot, the birds from defendant. The defendant' has told me on previous occasions that he would let me know if any one was killing pheasants, and that lie was a sportsman and liked to preserve game. The defendant declined to crossexamine the witness. Henry Blake was then sworn, and said : lam a laborer, residing at Foxton. On Saturday the 7th of April, it was wet, and I went out to shoot ducks. I shot Ihree and some bukako. On returning home, m Mr Robinson's paddock near the wire fence leading to the back, my son about thirteen years old who was with me, went and picked up the two pheasants. They were quite chickens. The cock bird bad his entrails torn out by a hawk which had jumped up by them. I took them and put them into a -little bag which I carry my lunch m. I did not know I was doing anything wrong or I would not have done so. When I picked them up they appeared to me as if they had flown against the wire fence, as both the wings were damaged. Cross-examined by Constable Purcell : If the birds had been killed by the wire fence they would not have had shot m them. I did not give them up to you when you asked, because I was afraid. By the Court: They were stiff when I picked-them up. Henry Blake who was questioned by the R. M., before being sworn, if he knew the nature of an oath, and whose answer being satisfactory, was sworn, and said : lam the son of Henry Blake. When we came up from shooting ducks on Saturday before last, m the afternoon, oil getting near the wire fence by the house that Dr RockstrowXsed to live m, the dog found two pheasants they were both dead and stiff, the inside of one of them was torn out by the hawks. They were both cold. I picked them up and gave them to my father to

put m the bag. He said he would not put them iv, m case they would mess the ducks. He put them m a little tommy bag inside the other. I was with my father allthe time. We did notmeetan'yone on the road. When we got to Mr Whyte's Mr Purcell asked my father how many pheasants he had m the bag, ancl asked to be allowed to search the bag. Father said no, not hero, come rouud to the back. When we got round to the back of the house, Mr Purcell took the bag off my father's shoulder and emptied the birds out, and then took hold of the little tommy bag and took the two pheasants out. My father asked him what he was going to do with them. He said he should see. Mr Purcell then left us and took the birds away. Tlie birds were bleeding at the time from the wings. The cock bird was bleeding most, he had had his inside torn out by the hawks. When I first found these birds my father a<ked me what I had got. I told him I had found two pretty birds. I did not know what they were until he told me they were pheasants. Cross-examined b} r plaintiff : I have had no conversation with my father about appearing m Court. He did not know that I was coming here. I go out shooting with my father. I have seen pheasants flying only, I have seen pheasants flying at the bu-k of our house. I should know a bukako from a pheasant. We take a dog when we go shooting. We had Mr deary's dog out this time to see if he. would retrieve. He did not point. We went by Mr Robinson's wire fence, and across his paddock to the lagoon ; then straight up to the lake. .Not seeing many ducks we came back again by nearly the same road, only a little more to the right, and then up Mr Robinson's wire fence ; and when we got up part of the way by the wire fence we found the pheasants. I never told any boys that my father had shot pheasants that Saturday. By the Court: We started that morning about eight o'clock and we found the pheasants about dusk. It was the dog first found ihem. We did not go to Mr Theophilus Easton's that clay, neither were we invited to go there to shoot bukakos. The plaintiff here asked for a remand to procure a witness to rebult the evidence. The Court adjourned the case for half an hour, when Patrick JXeylon was called on, and being sworn, said : I am a farmer residing at Foxton. I saw Constable Purcell someday this month at the front door of Whyfe's Hotel. Mr Blake came along; he had a gun and bag; he put down the bag, and Purcell came to take ii up, but Blake took it away. Purcell followed him : when he (Purcell) came back again he had two pheasants. We had an examination over them ; there was a cock and a hen bird. The entrails did not appear to be coming out of either of them. I had both the birds mmy hand. I saw no damage to them. I could not say if the wings were broken ; the feathers seemed to be smooth. I saw no signs of blood. Ido not know if the birds were warm. Cross-examined by defendant : I examined the male bird ; the feathers were smoothed over it. This ended the case, and on defendant being asked by the Court if he had anything to say, said I did not know I was doing anything wrong when I picked up the birds, or 1 would not have clone so. I am not m the habit of shooting pheasants out of season, neither do I shoot small birds like these two. Constable Purcell said he had been informed that Blake had been shooting for the last month, and therefore he had been watching him, and on the clay mentioned he determined to catch him, and he believed that if Blake had come' by the birds as he said he had, he wculd have been willing to have given them up at once when asked, ancl not have secreted them m a small bag. He did not wish to press for a heavy penally, but defendant knew the pheasants were out of season, and consequently he had no right fo shoot them, and therefore ought to be made an example of. Before giving judgment the Resident Magistrate said that the evidence before the Court fully satisfied them that the defendant had commit fed a breach ofthe Act, and that the evidence went m favor of his having killed the birds. Being the first lime he (the defendant) had been brought up for such an offence the Court were disposed to treat the case with leniency. The fine they had power t*> inflict was up to £20, but as this was the first offence the Bench would now inflict a penally of £1 for each case, ancl the costs of the Court, amounting to 14s. Should this happen again a very different view would be taken of the case, and defendant dealt much more harshly with. He hoped this would be a warning to all interested. He did not want to be m any way harsh, but the law must not be broken.