R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume X, Issue 3301, 5 September 1889, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

lENUI—WEDNESDAY. (LSeforo Col. Bobei'ts Rabbits. W. W, Johnston was proceeded A against for failing to destroy rabbits ( on his (Jastlo Point Station. Mr Bunny appeared tor the prose- | JH.;. cation and Mr Board for defendant. IM.bit Agent Smith gave evidence that the notice to destroy the rabbits was served on the 16th May, visited the property previous to thisand again Jflj übout the middle of June, poisoning flm was then going on in a fairly eatisfac- JBB lory manner and the rabbits had SBt decreased in consequence, on the HthnnH August made anotlior inspection andßMßj found them increasing, on tho 17thHHHB saw-them numerous about. 20 cbainawHN from the homestead. I so' I ''..four men jH9 employed in destroying raWts on this ABB occasion, did not consider this suffici-fiHB eat in the breeding season. ReportedHHH the result of these inspections to Mrj^B By Mr Beard: I was satisfied with tho poisoning, but not with tho steps taken afterwards. Hud nothing to report against the poisoning; it was tho insufficient number ot men that were employed after. It, is the proper thing to follow the poisoning with, other means of destruction. Do not, L»now tho cost of-poisoning; would not be surprised that it was £250 to £3OO. Hai known it cost £9OO «t Huauijarua some years ago. About twenty men were employed on Castle Point, poisoning between May and Jmif. '"/ 29th. Consider that a sufficient num%fcA ( ber. On the 26th Augußt the rabbits \ were not so numerous as three years . t v. ago. They, aro always scarce after . [ poisoning, ' c By Mr Bunny: Tha poisoniong did V decrease the numbers, but aa the 1 ; season was favourable they again iu- v creased.

Inspector Drummond, sworn, stated that in consequence of reports received from agent Bniith, ho caused a notico to destroy the rabbits to bo served 011 p. defendant on tha 16th May. Had not f made a personal inspection of the run. Laid the present information from tlm reports received, The area of the . _• property is 22,000 acres, and is rough and difficult country to keep the pest under on. It would require a large Bfcaff of men to destroy tho rabbits. By Mt Beard: The notico served had not beencomplied with. Dofond- . ant had begun work, but it had been discontinued, and not carried out efficiently, Did not inspect the run prior to the notico. Have not visited , it for some time, perhaps six monthsiferf The rabbits are increasing since I received the reports from agent Smith. By Mr Bunny: Tho defendant commenced poisoning in a satisfactory manner, hut tho work was not con tinued so. I urn guided by reault3, and do not oflor suggestions how the work should be carried out,

After a good deal of argument bv counsel, the Court inflicted a penalty of £5, including costs, and stated that ovidonco would be receivod iu uiitigttion of the line, W. 11. Holmes, manager for Mr Johnston gave evidence in mitigation 7 as follows, Hadcommonced poißoning and taken steps to destroy the rabbits before tho 11th May. Beforo receiving tho notice, from 16 to 20 men had been employed 'exclusive of mixer, packer and cook, Tho poisoning occupied 7 weeks and was very satisfactory, that was tho case all over the run. Some portions had been gone over two or three times, betweon two and three bales of skins had been picked up. Previous tojL poisoning 30 to 40 rabbits could b® ' caught in a day by ono man, at present not moro than twelve, Had poisoned since 29th June, and continued until tho rabbits would tako it no longer, then put on men with dogs and traps, Had taken steps to procure stoats and weasels. By Mr Bunny: Did not always know when tho Inspectors wero on tho run. It was difficult country to destroy rabbits on,some parts of it did not. require hunting on as rabbits did not stop on it. Out of 22,000 acres there is a considerable area of grass land, Rabbits were not very numerous near the homestead, there was only a small patch which a rabbiter could clear in a week. Did not consider tho rabbits increased much in August, September was the worst month. They will increase later on in some years, SOlllO of tho rabbitera were paid 15s per week and tho skins, others rocoivcd 3s per dozen and the • skins, these men did not earn good wages, tho average was £1 2s 6d pot' » week. f By Mr Board: One paddock had v beon poisoned three times, liotween £2OO and £3OO, exclusivo of labor had been expended in poison and grain since tho date of tho notice. To tho Court; This was a fair amount to expend and sufficiont for tho run, Tho cost of employing 16 to 20 mon would bo £2OO to £220. James Donald gave evidenco that ho had beon in charge of the poisoning and the work had been dono in a satisfactory manner. Did not know tho cost of the work, Had not been on tho run since the completion of tho work. The penalty was reduced to £3 including costs, J. S, Handysido was charged with failing to destroy rabbits on his property at Akitio South, Agent Smith gave evidor.ee that notico under section 8 of tho Act was posted to defendant on 16th May, He visited tho property shortly beforo this and reported to Drummond. Found poisoning comv menced on the 11th Juno, The rabbits were nuuernuson the portions not poisoned, Continued inspection on 12, 14, and 15th. Went over the greater portion of the run. There was a considerable area to poison on tho l§th June, Again visitet] thp property in July, and found the rabbits greatly reduced by the poison. Wont over tho coast portion on this occasion. I believe two wen wero also hunting. I saw ono. I agajn visited tlje run on the 30th July. The poisoning was completed and only twp men were employed.*! foported the fesi|lt of tljefje vipjts to Jnsppctop PrummontL The last month is 9 timo during which rabbits wiU. increase rapidly, , By Mr Handyside: I visited Aohonga ' or the lltli, trayelling up the Mataikona river. On 12th, wept round by way of Moiepork and and Spring Hill. On lfth, camobaek oyer the Lookout and down the dray track to tho station; travelled on th(W south sido of tho river all tho way J On 15th, went with tho manager, Mr Mcßao, on front of tho run and sandhills, Saw three or four rabbits. Again visited tho property on 30th July. Went uj; the coast from tjio Mataikunk river 1 aiid saw' ten lit twelve rabbits on tliat date. Oii 13t| A\igustweritoveHheb;ickran«e,Mortnt • Buster, and I'etoki li'liit, a distance of eight miles; saw Very few rabbits, not more than four,' The country' 'was well poisoned, never saw country better, pojiionei). '• 7 Inspector Brtmmcnd, awgrp,

that ho caused a notion (o bo served ' on defendant on lOili May, by post; it would bo received 011 the following Wednesday, or a week after bring posted. Had not visited the land myself; received reports from A gent Smith as to the Htato of the run. Defendant did not take steps to my satisfaction. I know tho estate. 1 consider two men insufficient after poisoning, and if steps are not taken y..' at once, there will be a repetition of * what took placu lust summer; a great iucrcaso in the pest. By Mr Handyside: Agent Smith gavo a satisfactory report as to the ft poisoning; ho said ho waa well B satisfied. Two men are not sufficient I on 18,000 acres. B Agent Smith, re-examined : I saw K.V ten rabbits betweon Aohonga -mil fi'i Matfjtoia, in a distance of fivo miles. B v I wna m error in my former ovidence m that I saw four while in company with Mr Moßae; it was after I left him, j noar the Mataikona river, that I saw » the rabbits alluded to in my lettet'. Mr Haudyside addressed tho Court, and proposed to bring ovidence that he had complied with tho Act ami taken all necessary steps, Tho Court explained that it could only receive such evidence in mitigation of a fine, It bad no alternative but to impose a penalty, as in the opinion of the Inspector proper step 3 had not been taken. Mr Handyside considered ic a great injustice that ho could not cali y witnesses to prove that he had taken a all necessary steps. J Mr Bnnny stated that it was not the desiro of the Inspector to press for an extreme penalty in this case. The Bench inflicted a fine of £5, which/by consent of the prosecution, was reduced to £3 2s, J. S. Handyside was again proceeded against for falling to destroy the pest on Akitio South station. He pleaded not guilty, and addressed the Court, From the previous ruling of tho Court ho could make no defence. M The case was an all fours with the f other. Ho could not plead guilty as he had dono all that was possible to keep the rabbits under; Agent Smith deposed that the area on the run was 3,300 acres, Visited the property after the notice hud been posted on tho 12th, 18th, and Htb Juno. Saw the rabbits numerous. .Poisoning was going on at tho time. Noxt visit was paid on 31st July. Th(! rabbits woroacarco on the poisoned ground. A large portion of tho estate had not been poisoned at this time. Again visited the run on ifcli August. The state of the rabbits was similar to what it was 011 tho 31st. On tho 7tli August saw a fow rabbits 011 tin. poisoned land, On the 11th and 12th, all the run had been poisoned; saw a fow rabbits, Two rabbiters were then employed on tho 3,300 acres. Mr Handysido objected to tho area of Akitio South brine; 3,300 acres as stated by agont Smith. This area includod the Glencoo station, which was a separate property' and produced a plan to show this to bo the case. Agent Smith, examined by Mr f Handyside, stated that ho always understood Akitio South included Glencoe, all the shcop being shorn at onß homestead, and it was under one management. A creek divided the property. By Mr Bunny Sheep cross the creek The poisoning was being followed up by two hands, which in my opinion was insufficient, Reported tho circumstances to Inspector Drummond from time .to time. Re-examined by Jlr Handysido included Glencoe in iuy visits. Considered it a portion of Akitio South. I was awavo that tho property was all worked in one, Inspector Drunimond gave ovidence that tho notice served included Glencoe, From agent Smith's report, and from my own knowledge knew the notice had not been complied with. Havo not visited the property since reports from Agent Smith were received, Defendant had not complied with section 8 of tho Act, Mr Bunny addressed the Court to the effect that the Inspector would be satisfied with a small penalty an in • the last-case. At the same time tho w Inspector was not satisfied with the steps taken by dofendant, A fine of £5 was imposed, which was reduced to £3 2s including costs, costs. Inspector Drunimond v J, C. Andrew. Failing to destroy rabbits on lea station, Mr Andrew addressing tho Court said that beforo tho case went further 8e must request an adjournment, as Ho had only received the summons on Saturday, 81st August, and had consequently r.o time to consult his lawyer or procure the'attendanco of witnesses. Ho considered it only just that time should be given him to prepare his defence. Mr Bunny opposed the adjournment aa ample timo had been given. The defendant had 011 previous occasions asked for tho same thing; it wis always his first move in the game, Mr Andrew objected to the insinua-

tion, it was only right be should have time to preparo his defence ami lie #wust press the Bench to grant an adjournment, The Court considered tho notion had been short in several cases and had objections been raised ho should havo considered thorn. In this case he would adjourn to the next day 11 a.m. Mr Andrew pressed for a longor timo which was granted, the case to be hoard at Masterton on the 13th inst. WIFji DESERTION, Georgo Comn?ton, arrested on warrant from Auckland for wife desartion by Constable Collerton, was ordered to pay 12s Gd per week, and two weeks payments were deducted from raopey that was found on him wjien arrested.