THE RABBIT ACT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3692, 20 December 1890, Page 2

THE RABBIT ACT.

Further Prosooutlons.

Maokay v Andrew,

In the R.ftf. Court yesterday', before Colonel Roberts, KM., Mr J. 0. Andrew, of lea,, was fined £ls and costs,'7s, for failing to destroy rabbits on his property. On the application of ;covmsel for the defendant the hearing of evidence in mitigation was adjourned till Wednesday.January 7th, Smith vManiheraMaka,

Matiihera Mak was charged by Inspector J. W. Smith with "failing to destroy rabbits on his property at Te Ore Ore. ' The defendant admitted that there were rabbits on the property referred to, but stated that he did not know to whom the land belonged, It had not been subdivided,- He believed he had an interest in it.

The Court inflicted a penalty, of £l, with costs,7s., ]. Defendant; I pay this amount, but I will do nothing; i The Court: If you do not take steps within a month to destroy, you will be fined £5 when again convicted.

Defendant: I can't help it; I. will pay the i's rather than do anything. Everybody interested in the block should pay their share.

S.uik v Maak Ratimo,

Maak Batimo was charged by Inspector J. W. Smith with a similar offence, nud was also fined Jsl and costs, 75.. -The defendant expressed the wish that the two hundred natives interested in the block should be served with notices. Same v Kehe Maka.

Kere Maka was charged by Inspector Smith with a similar offence, and on pleading guilty was fined £1 and costs.