Correspondence.

Rodney and Otamatea Times, Waitemata and Kaipara Gazette, Volume 1, Issue 18, 26 July 1901, Page 3

Correspondence.

The c 'lumus ml this journal are open tor the discussion of all suhjacts bat wa do not n-CMs Barily identify ourselves with the opini<»"f» expressed.

. TO THE EMTOIi Sir, I notice your-remarks in your issue of 12th, re. tho game laws have called forth some correspondence. But you in your article did not put the relationship between the English and New Zealand law iff qnite the true light. In England the game laws werfl, made for a class, who either directly or indirectly sustained the loss caused by. the depreuation of such game. Moreover most, if not all leases contain a compensation clause, covering all loss sustained by pheasants,1 partridges, rabbits, or foxes. I Lave, heard farmers say they would rather lose a crop by the depredation of game, than harvest it. Moreover, the conserving of game, gives remunerative and pleasant employment to many. In New Zealand a society claims the ownership of game that never was theirs; game that never cost them a penny. Game by whose depredations they lose nothing. They never introduced game into our district, never payed any one compensation for loss sustained by, this game. Never gave employment to anyone to consume it, and never provided, any food for it. But j>aid a man to see th-;t no one shot without paying for a license. I ■■ fail to aba how anybody can set up a claim to game that I have .fed and reared .at my cost, when even thefore r fathers of such game, were not their property. They might as well claim my chickens.. The only difference is that I don't in any way detain the game and I go to a great lot more trouble to feed it. Yours &c. L.B.Wyatt.

TO THE EDITOR

Sir, — In your issue of 19th inst. you dj-aw attention x>i your readers to the profits of poultry keeping. Epr the benefit for those uninitiated I give the following facts: My flock consists of sixty birds 56 hens and 4 cocks. No. of eggs sold 515. average imve per dozen"BAd. Clear profit £10 13a. 2d. This does not include eggs or birds used for home consumption.

I hare kept poultry for twenty years. I never tried export; but anybody thinking of raising birds for that trade should try a game cross; the game are hardy and the best table fowl in existence, but you could expect no profit from eggs, although quite likely to have a smalt profit. I. don't quite see that a breed could be k'epfrto give good fesitteboth as a laying and exporting breed, although many people-might be lucky enough) to obtain such a cross -v ill it would only be by chance, and no., rule could be laid down for obtaining such a breed.

I see in poultry notes in this week's issue of the Auckland Weekly News, n correspondent signing himself N.S.I), inquires a remedy for poultry lice. The answer given, as usual in such wises, omits thejmost important part1 of the remedy given, viz, to hold the "biid ur-siras-DO'wx when powdering on the flowei s of sulphur, there are many better remedies for the cure and prevention of lice on hens. As N»B>D, lives somewhere in the Kaipara ■ district, if you will bo kind enough to ( publish this, it may be of some use to him, as it will no doubt catch his eye. tf not, he should take your paper

- Yours truly, A Hen Man

TO THE EDITOr.

Sir, I think ilie Acclimatization Societies are rather, too strongly attacked in the matter of licenses-. It must be admitted by ull fair minded persons, that these Societies hate done ft great deal of god in the introduction of many kinds of birds; I know in tlie WangamJi district; > very did feettler told mo that when he cauie to the colony it Was almost impossible to grow * bit of Crop on aScotinfc of the Savoc wrought "by insects, but >ince the British birds Were introduced-, the insects were so f educed that cropping fcould be sudoefisfully carried oii. Certainly some of tits imported birds helped themselves to some uf the grain, at times, but that was a 'mere detail of little consequence because; before that the insects'took eykuyrnixG. "Whorevov the Starlings have got estalilished the crickets and grasshoppers are very much reduced and as a matter of fact the much abused pheasant feeds very considerably on these- pests as well. Then who" can have, anything but praise for the tenormous amount of work which has been earned out in stocking our rivers with iish,, bringing e^'lmg within reach of most places in the colony. But perhaps this . argument will be met by Hie question as to whether such sport or recreation is not "inhuman and brutal" because the trout h '['ixiio-ht on a hook which must, of fcourse, be as unpleasant ibr the. fisli as tlie gunshot is to a bird; However, be that as it may the Societies Imve undoubtedly done a lot of good, although soi:i3 of the importations have been mistakes tmt-tliat coiild not be forseen witk exppriments in a new r-ounirv. They cannot introdiicG birds and fish without cost, avid vvher'e is Vhe mo.no'>' to come from without lieeh■sefoes? If the pheasants do injury to a settler's ci-ops I would say. let him kill them on his. .own land for the, protection '6i his propertY, but lo do so <luri (;■•-.' ihe breeding season, lie should bo required to make a lifel *fl.%v«feio;a b'eibro fcbme recognized local

[authority, that he is doiug so lor the protection of his property. In your columns I notice that shooting wild game is classed in the same catagory as shooting tame pigeons from a trap. Anyone who has the slightest knowledge of sporting matters -must be amused at that! In shooting wild game, the bird has all its senses on the arleit and perfect freedom to escape if it chooses. Shooting tanie pigeons jxist released from a basket is a very different thing—so different that it does not seem worth while to discuss the matter. I am. sir, Yours truly, Walter H" Cox. Dome Hill July 24. 1901. [In our article we said "breeding, and. shooting pheasants for sport was brutal" not '-wild game" as ..quoted above. Ed.]

TO THE EDITOR Sir, — la reference to the Coastal Company's donation of 100 pounds to Mr. J. W. Darroch, you state the amount is to be payed in yearly instalments, but do not say how many years the Company intend to take to pay over the money. May I ask wha period of years the instalments are to •be spread over, and will the £100 be guaranteed to the trustees j&f the funds at once so as to secure the money for Mr. Dnrroch's benefit, in C£se the Coastal company should cease to exist ? ■ 1 would also mention, that in the event of Mr. Nafhsunel Wilson, accepting the*pt>sii;i<,n of trustee, it is my intention to become a subscriber, I am &c.

Sympathiser. j. We have no doubt that the Manager wiil be pleased to give satisfactory information on this point, as he has, so far as we can see shown a sincere desire to help Mr Darroch.} TO THE EDITOR. • Sir,- —I Have been a subscriber to your valuable paper from the comn.encement and agreed with its contents until, thib last week 19 inst., when I saw a paragraph touching the game laws, which stated that1 some person unknown to me has been convicted on a charge brought against the person by the ranger, which duty fhe was paid to perform.: The charge was for the wilful act of kiiling'rHEx pheasants. One Was fined£2 19s. od. and the other I believe £2 Bs. od.. This, I believe includes all costs.

And through these two men haying3 been fined for a dishonest act, yet, sir, you are asking, through the same paper for the public to pay all their expenses. ■■■■■■

Now, sir, I ask you as a gentleman whether or no it's for the Public to bear any such expense? Why, the shootevs knew well before they left their homos that it was their intention to break the law, just the same as a robber going to rob a house. Robbing is all very well, but it is being caught that is the evil.

I think that if any persons do commit any dishonest act he or they, ought to bear their own costs. As this one case may be only one out of hundred's before, and who is doubtless better abb tc pay than*half the public ■ • l)id any person ask these men to break the ksr? if so, .lot him come forward to the rescue. I, for one, would help nny person in need—but not to commit crimes, although the j game law may.be unjust to one part ■but just to the other part. As I have j j list heard that one of .the parents has bought 600 acres of land for £900 I may say that I have been bed fast for this last five months and not one has ever been to ask if we have a loaf of bread oi* money to pay the doctor who manfully brought me through all my troubles, but never mind) Thaak Crod"! all is paid, and I am still within the land of the living. This letter h for I the receiver, not the sender} therefore it's fc« you to think best what to do.

Believe me sir^ Your Humble" Servant: . Thomas Itigei-, seiir. Port Albert July 21 1901-, [We are afraid that Mr : Inger has jmissed the point-. It ife Che Game Laws las they are at present constituted, that we take exception to> and will persist iii condemning them at every opportunity. Ed:]