FENCING-IN OF BYE-ROADS.

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 106, 19 February 1870, Page 5

FENCING-IN OF BYE-ROADS.

(To the Editor of the Tuapeka Times.)

Sir, — Can you inform me if it is legal for any person to fence-in bye-roads ? I am anxious to be instructed on this point as the practice of fencing-in the bye-roads-in the neighbourhood of Lawrence township is becoming very common— l think I may say a common nuisance or grievance. I will put the case thus : — Supposing I take up a quantity of land by one side of which is surveyed a Government road, do you think I would be justified, after fencing three sides of it, to run my fences across the road to join my neighbour's ground, in order to save the expense of another fence 1 This plan would doubtless be very convenient for me, and a great saving of money, on account of the great amount of fencing that I would save, besides the addition of the road to my paddock ; but the question of legality conies in the way, and that is the doubtful point. You will observe that by this t simple means of throwing a fence with a-slip-panel across the road, any stray beast is prevented from getting a chance of grazing on the road, or even near to it, so that if that description of fencing is justifiable, it will give no end of trouble to those people who require the frequent use of the road in question, as well as to those who are the owners of stock. I know of several complaints which are already made against one of our neighbouring landowners, who has fenced in a large quantity of land on two sides, and carried his fence across the Government road in the manner described. By this means he obtains the use of the adjoining property, on which he can graze his cattle ; and it is said that if a stray beast by chance should find its way to this individual's land, it is at once shown theroad out throrgh the gate, return to its home being thereby made impossible. To my knowledge there has been a great deal of trouble and inconvenience catised to several parties by the covetous and unjust monopoly of the individual I refer to. Such men should have a country tothemselves. A Small Grazier. Lawrence, Feb. 16. -