RABBIT NUISANCE ACT
ALLEGED UNREASONABLE STATUTE.
In dealing with a case at the Magistrate's Court in ©firistchurch on Friday morning, in which a farmer was charged with an offence under the ilabbit Nuisance Act, the Magistrate; 1 .Vlr V. G. Day, described the Act as oj reversion to the days of barbarism. The defendant was Richard Candy, 3f Camp Bay, Purau, and the com-} plainant Ernest Alfred Radford, inspector for the Banks Peninsula Rab- j jit Board, for whom* Mr M. J, Gres- , ion appeared. x f ) The information alleged that the de-' felidant, being the owner of certain lands within the jurisdiction of the Banks Penisula Rabbit Board Trustees, did delay or neglect to take rea-. sonable or diligent steps to promote the destruction of rabbits on the said lands within a reasonable time after; ~ihe service upon him of a notice , requiring the immediate destruction of rabbits on such land. Theddefendantt t jleaded nqt guilty, and after hearing uhe evidence his Worship, on January 14th, dismissed the information, the defendant being allowed costs An appeal against tho decision was heard at the Supreme Court, in banco, jn February 2nd, and was allowed by Mr Justice Herdman, who held that the evidence of the complainant had ' to be accepted. In consequence of tlm ruling, the oase was again called at the Magistrate's Court on Friday, when Mr Qresson enquired if there was not a minimum penalty in such a case. In reply the Magistrate said that tlie Act did not provide for a minimum penalty, and as he was of the opinion. , chat the inspector had failed in his Juty to take every .reasonable care in ■ -jarrying out his inspections, a conviction only would be imposed, without a penalty. The Statute under which the information was laid was most unsatisfactory, as the . Court was compelled to accept the word of an inspector in any such cases brought under its notice. The position might irise (without reference to the present sase) where an , absolutely unscrupulous inspector might lay an information. It Was practically, reverting to\ ,fche days of barbarism, when every man was his own judge.' It ..was a . matter for the farming community to take up. Mr Day said'he intended to - treat every similar case that came before him'as he was treating this onb, provided he was not satisfied that the inspector had carried out his duties j satisfactorily. * :
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAG19200330.2.56.4
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Wairarapa Age, 30 March 1920, Page 7
Word count
Tapeke kupu
400RABBIT NUISANCE ACT Wairarapa Age, 30 March 1920, Page 7
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Wairarapa Age. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.