SERIOUS POSITION

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 219, 10 May 1932, Page 6

SERIOUS POSITION

(Continued it, the man replied "you shoot my dog and tt'll shoot you." They had had a great deal of trouble with trespassers and many people who caxne on without permission even denied that they had any right to order them off. Defendant's Story Wright signified that he desirod to "give evidence, and on oath, said that he had no idea that 41 bnd was private property when he.went on it. . He said that he fired at and killed a hind, and then hearing several more shots on the other side of the spur, walked xound to see. what it was about. On the way, he met Evans and Hutchins who told hixn that he was trespassing on private land. He was a stranger to the distriet and did not know anything about the area or its owners. He had come through froxn the old landing stage at Okataina where he had his eamp. He admitted that he had seen a few cattle but said that he thought they had probably strayed from an adjoining property. "The evidence in this case revsals a serious position at Okareka," said the Magistrate in summing up. "It shows that certain sportsmen — I do not say that the defendant in this particular case is one of them — have shown an utber disregard of the rights of the property holders in the vicinity as well as a disregard for human life. This sort of thing has got to stop. This is the first case of this sort, so 1 will not fine the defendant, but I will inflict heavy costs which will re-im-burse Mr. Evans for bringing the case. "If anyone else comes before this court on these charges, and the case is proved against him he can expect to receive not only the heaviest costs which can be allowed, but also ' the heaviest fine." The Magistrate entered a eonvietion with costs amounting to £4 11/-. Further Charges Similar charges in respect of trespass on the same property were preferred against S. Pratt and A. Salter, of Hamilton who were represented by Mr. M. H. Hampson. Henry Evans, Jnr., said that on the morning of April 15, he had heard about 12 rifle shots, and had gone out to investigate. In the neighbourhood of the crater on the back of the property, he had found two young men who gave the names of Pratt and Salter. Both admitted that they had been shooting and one of them admitted that he had been on the property on a previous occasion. They had also said that they had been given permission to go on the property by some person at Wairoa, but no person had any authority to give such permission. Cattle in the vicinty of the shooting, had been very much disturbed. Apologised. Corroborative evidence was given by George Shirley Hutchins who accompanied Mr. Evans to locate the men. To Mr. Hampson the witness admitted that the men apologised for trespassing and said that they had no idea that it was private property. He did not remember Pratt saying that he had been on the property several times and took it, from the fact that he had not been spoken. to, that the property was open to shooting. The men had not been arrogant and had gone off the property quietly. Mr. Hampson, for the d'efendamS: said that the defendant Pratt, had been one of a Hamilton party which had been spending a few days at Tarawera deer-shooting. Pratt had shot on the property on three previous occasions, and had had no indication that it was private property. Harry Stanley Pratt, one of the defendants, said that he had previously been of the opinion that the land was held by natives. The Magistrate: But even native land has owners. Did you try to get the permission of the Maoris? No, sir.

The Magistrate: It seems to me these sportsm'en talte too much on themselves. Defendant said that on the morning after they had pitched their camp, Salter and himself had set out carrying guns. They had seen no fences and had noticed only a few cattle down by the lake shore. They had seen one big stag but had not fired at it as it was running and there was a danger of the bullets passing over the brow of a hill. They then worltcd round a spur and saw three deer which they vftred at. Some little timo afterwards Mr. Evans and Mr. Hutchins came up and accosted them. They asked whether they could finish the day there but Mr. Evans refused and they returned to Hamilton. Alfred Salter, the second defendant, corroborated this evidence. I..o said that he had had no idea thao this area was private property ara had told Mr. Evans that he regrettcd the trespass. He was not a deerstalker himself and was a guest of the party. There had been no cattle about, where they had been shootmr "As a matter of fact I thought it waste land that had been forgotten," said Charles Stanley Pratt, builder, of Hamilton, the father of the first defendant. The witness said that whenever he knew that land was vately owned, he always made a poinfc of writing and obtaining permissio: to go on the property. The Magistrate, after giving a ruling upon some legal aspects o-f case, said that he considered that t1 admission on the part of the defenl ants that they had seen cattle, ser *. o to show that the land had some private ownership. The defendants woub be convicted and ordered to pay costs £3 10/8 apiece. "It is unfortunate that the person; who have been caught have been r> c decent type of sportsmen and that the irresponsible individuals whom M" Evans was after, seem to have escaped.. The attitude of the rU-e— ants when apprised of the position was quite a proper one," remarked th: Magistrate in concluding the case. Mr. Potter : I may say, sir, that We had to take the first persons wh' were caught. The position was sc serious that we had to do somethinv and we had to give the matter pu1