SECOND EDITION Wairarapa Daily Times. [Established 1874.] MONDAY. DECEMBER 3,1894. RABBITS AT COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XV, Issue 4892, 3 December 1894, Page 2

SECOND EDITION Wairarapa Daily Times. [Established 1874.] MONDAY. DECEMBER 3,1894. RABBITS AT COURT.

Thk llabLit. Act lias always been :i perilous ground for Now Zealand Magistrates, and has jeopardised more than one reputation. Unlike other laws it does not permit the Bench to take evidence ami adjudicate thereon, but makes the opinion of aEabbit Inspectorover-rido everybody, and virtually this opinion carries the verdict. This is law, but it is not always equity, and hence the Magisterial mind has been wont to vacillate between law and equity. In the Wairampa we have had the experiences of three paid Magistrates, Messrs Wardell, Von Stunner, and Hutchison; a fourth might also be enumerated, but his stay with us was a brief one, and it is not necessary to refer to him on the present occasion. The three we have named are all men of ability and experience, and each of thorn has taken a different line in dealing with rabbit cases. Mr Wardell was a landowner himself, with rabbits on bis own estate, and possessed undoubtedly a thorough practical knowledge of not only the Act, but of the difficulty of keeping rabbits down. He was wont to admit that in rabbit cases he had but little discretion, that the Act made the Inspectors the masters of the situation, and that it was superfluous to take evidence against their opinion. Ho, however, was very gentle when it came to imposing penalties, and he did not, on the whole, help the Inspectors much in their raid against land owners. Even in his day Inspectors had much trouble in tho flesh on Court days, and wo have seen one come out of the box limp and helpless, because lie could not explain to the satisfaction of an ingenious defendant the methods of repression adopted withregardto tho pestinthe reign of Julius Casar. Mr Wardell followed the letter rather than the spirit of the Act,and thore was much litigation in his day. When Mr Von Sturmer succeeded to the Magisterial throne there was a change. This potentate recognised that it was the intention of the Act to givo Inspectors the whip-hand of settlers, and he at once commenced to inflict flues in a business like mauuer withoutthe slightest display of sentiment or cavil. The cousequence was that sottlers discovered, that it wns better to do .what, tho Inspectors told them' to do than to come into Court before Mr Von Sturmer. More recently Mr Hutchison, in'his turn, appears on the scene, and if we mistako not, regards tho measure as tyrannical and he is doing his best to soften its drastic clause?, straw ing it soniesvhat against the inspector. Wo do not, in the light of past experience,., see any advantage in this''course, and believe that undy -the. existing.; law,,• rabbits .wiiibe.botisr:keptiucßeckby.cahy.. ing out not only itbe letter bnt'the stem spirit of the Act,; are bad enough . now in'tjie Wairiirapa, ; but they wouMhaye been worse but for the;- stringent:'powers given to

i Inspectors, and exorcised by them. It -is.'-frequently cheaper and easier to defy an Inspector, and to defend charges in Court than to clean arun, . and "it'is only human nature' that many settlers should take the less costly alternative. Experience has shown that it is necessary for Inspectors to be able to check this tendency by imposing substantial penalties." .The Rabbit Act enables them, to do this, and-it is no part of the duty of a Magistrate to defeat in any way tlio expressed intention and object of the Legislature.' We ourselves cannot help perceiving that there is a tendency now for rabbits 'to'" multiply; in this district, . and. the, question .has, to be:'faced; as responsible for the increase;. responsibility primarily, rests - Svitli, the Inspectors, but; they cokplain'thiit' they are not. properly:backed:up'by:the Mtigis/,' trate. If this bo the'case, Mr Hutchison has taken upon himself a- somewhat serious responsibility. We do not say it is so, for although we can ; clearly, see that, ho fails to follow the: firm example which Mr Von Sturmer set, we question whether, he has yet' gone so, far-as,to frustrate the obvious meaning and iuteution of the Act; Still, he. seoms to be moving in this direction.