LEGAL TANGLE

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 251, 14 June 1932, Page 6

LEGAL TANGLE

COURTS PUZZLED BY NUMBER OF MONKEYS' FEET. QUADRUPEDS OR BIPEDS. Arguments on monkeys, almost Darwinian in their intensity, have lately been held in England. Strangely enough, it is the animal's feet and not its tail that is in question. Three ofncial viewpoints on the subject have been put forward as follows: — The South ern Raiway: A monkey has four feet. The Folkestone Customs: A monkey has only two feet. The Board of Customs in London: A monkey has no feet at all. It need hardly be said that it is a financial issue that has stimulated such diversity of opinion. It is a complieated story, and the end is not yet. It all began with the arrival of six live monkeys at Folkestone Harbour. Acting on behalf of the consignees, the railway company responsible for their transfer from ship to rail, and took up the attitude that monkeys were quadrupeds and all live quadrupeds — from rabbits to elephants — being exempt from duty, there was nothing to pay for the privilege of landing. The Customs officers replied, in effect: "Oh, no; monkeys are bipeds, and are thereby excluded from the exemption clause — 10 per cent. of their value, please." A monkey, they asserted, had two hands and two feet, therefore it was a biped. "But," the railway representative urged, "the monkey's means of locomotion is on all four, so it must be a quadruped." In the absence of agreement the matter was referred to the Board of Customs. The board, which really does seem to give value for money, supplied a magnifieent answer. A monkey was a "quadrumanous mamal," a ereature i with four hands and no feet, so it could not be a quadruped, and the ; duty must be paid. It is not known on what authority, [ beyond its own, the board bases this f pronouncement. But meanwhile the correspondence i continues.