THE SHEEP BILL.
TO THE EDITOn OR THE NEW ZEALAND TIMES. In regard to the summary of the Sheep Act published in your’last issue I offer the following amendments for consideration : Clause 10, Sheep Bill No. 3, which provides for appointment of inspectors of sheep by the Governor, would be better left in the bands ofCounty Councils. The English Act, Viet. 32-33, clause 12, provides that—“ Every local' authority shall, from time to time, appoint as many inspectors as shall appear necessary, and may also revoke such appointments ; but must at all times have one existing inspector." Clause 13 however provides that Privy Council (in New, Zealand the Governor) may, if satisfied that the inspector appointed by local authority is incompetent, Remove such inspector, or appoint inspectors if required.
•Inasmuch as any complaint lodged against a runholder on the one part or an inspector on the other can be more cheaply and efficiently investigated on the spot, I should strongly recommend that these appointments should bo left iu the hands of counties, subject to the approval of the Governor. Clause 12 of the Bill provides that it shall be lawful for the inspector, at such times as he shall think fit, to inspect any sheep within his district ; and clause 13 declares a penalty if the sheepowner shall refuse or neglect to muster his sheep for the purpose with all convenient speed. As being thoroughly conversant with sheepowners and sheep inspectors in a district to some extent affected by this clause, I must protest against unlimited autocratic power to inflict injury upon sheep-owners being thus placed iu the hands of an inspector. Four inspections of any diseased flock in the year would satisfy any ordinary requirements. The clause in the Act protects the sheep-owners against wilful injury by saying (Viet. 32,33, clause 31); “An inspector. . . . may enter upon any land, building, &0., where he has reasonable grounds for supposing existence of disease, and shall, if required, state in writing the grounds on which he has so entered.” This is a fair protection against a careless inspector, who might otherwise cause serious loss and injury to a flockowner by a capricious exercise of authority. Clause 22, Sheep Bill, requires the owners of infected sheep to give notice of disease in his flock ; the .English Act requires the inspector to do so. I consider that if an inspector believes that the owner of an infected flock has neglected or failed to give such notice to his neighbors, the inspector should forthwith deliver the notice required. Clause 23 requires that all scabby sheep shall be branded S. This, provision is very unjust to au owner who takes vigorous' measures to clean his flock. For many months after they have ceased to be scabby such sheep would be unmarketable, or very much reduced in value. It is hard to be branded as a criminal after the imprisonment has been borne. .
I think that a clause requiring thirty days’ quarantine for all sheep ; introduced from abroad would be better than the proposed clauses 32, 36, &0., requiring sheep to bo , dressed. Imported sheep suffering from weakness caused by a long voyage are in no condition to withstand the trying effects of dipping. Clause 19 of the Sheep Bill empowers the inspector to declare sheep scabby, and to require the owner to clean them within six months, if satisfied that they are scabby. Clause 33, Viet. 32, 33, declares that the certificate of the inspector to the effect that an animal within his district is affected with any contagious disease, shall be conclusive. In English law there is but one admitted proof of scab, and that is the presence of the scab-insect (aoarus). This fact is well known in England, and was recently quoted in the field. A clause declaring this fast; would saue much heartburning and litigation. Clause 46, Sheep Bill, permits any occupier to stop aud examine any flock passing through his rim. A more objectionable clause was never printed, unless guarded by the provision * above, requiring the -party obstructing the sheep to set forth his grounds for doing so iu writing. In ordinary cases an inspector should be required to give notice of inspection, bn t iu extraordinary cases it might be dispensed with.—l am, &c., Y.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZTIM18780806.2.14
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5416, 6 August 1878, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
714THE SHEEP BILL. New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5416, 6 August 1878, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.