THE BABBIT QUESTION.

Otago Witness, Issue 1971, 14 November 1889, Page 6

THE BABBIT QUESTION.

The difficulties with which the rnnholders have io contend in coping with the rabbit nuisance were forcibly illustrated in a case which has just been tried before Mr Revell, resident magistrate, at Gore. The ;. local rabbit inspector has been making a raid upon many of the settlers in the vicinity, and is apparently not discriminating,in the choice of those whom .he prosecutes. In this case he laid an information against Mr G. M. Bell, the owner of Wantwood, a station near Gore. The inspector "said the property was a large one, and the owner's influence considerable, and.his action therefore likely to be an example to his neighbours. He called his sub -inspector, who hadf ound rabbits plentiful, signs of efforts to exterminate them wanting, and the surrounding runs, as well as a Government bush adjoining, in good order. Arabbiter engaged by the Government on the boundary between the bush and the run said that he and another man had captured 550 rabbits with 240 traps since the 10th of last month. The manager of an adjacent station said his run was 14,000 acres in extent, that he employed seven men all the year, and paid 21s per hundred for 'large skins, and Id each for small ones. A 'rabbiter formerly employed fey Mr Bell said that he then received 2d each for the large skins, and nothing for the small ones. He worked for four weeks after the poisoning ceased, and used 100 traps for the first fortnight and thereafter 130, and captured 1160 skins. But he only | sold GOO to Mr Bell, the remainder he admitted having sold privately. Of course it ; may be guessed he gave Mr Bell the best skins. The inspector himself said that the i neighbouring proprietors worked enerr getically, and paid 2^d and 2d for good skins and Id and for small ones. He i considered the fact that Mr Bell did not pay j for small skins was detrimental to the clearing of the runs, " because it was only human "nature to suppose that some one paid for Vthe small ones— they, could be 'swapped' «-for big bnes ; from- the- men on the adjoin- 1 11 ing stations." • In- cross-examination he ] declined to say how many men stiould be put on to the 1000 acres, but if rabbits were found it was proof positive that the j proper work was not being done. The best method" after poisoning was trapping, also using dogs when there were dry sheep. He admitted that ,the poisoning; had been fairly done," but considered that inducement should begiven to the men to kill the young rabbits, which they would not do for nothing. For the defence, Mr Bell called bis son, the manager, who stated that 40 menand two ploughs had been used for poisoning; that since the poisoning 29 or 30 good men had been employed trapping, and he had 25 now. He had paid 2d for large skins and Is per lb for little skins up to 11th October, and had since paid £d each for small skins. He considered it >„ better to engage good men to do. nesting than to pay a bigf^price for -the- small - skins,- which encouraged i'faroaibg>. "The -overseer gave corroborative erfdenpe, and the manager before Mr Bell's occupancy in JBBS md the ■0> • ' ' r ■.■""■•'*'* ''" v/* "• *

ran was always bad with rabbits, buttheyweH well in hand when the run was handed over The company he represented (the N.Z.A, Company) paid Id for small skins and 2d for large, and .found the plan work well. Mr Bell himself said that he had paid £11,000 for ttie destruction of rabbits since May 1885, and there, were fewer rabbits now than at any former season. The bulk of the run lay exposed to the sun, and the' rabbits came from the sheltered country at the back. He had found the system of paying for young rabbits inadvisable at the commencement of the breeding season, though it . >as not with the object of saving expense, as the rabbits cost last; season £1200 more than was realised. -He considered the inspector should point out how .they could better fulfil the conditions of the Act, and alleged that the adjacent bush was scandalously'neglected. The magistrate held the .charge proved, and fined defendant" £s, with costs £4 175. The above is a most instructive case. It shows on the one hand an honest desire to put down a pest whicfi fcosts a loss of £1200 a year, and on the other a departmental dissatisfaction with the mean 3 adopted. There was no lawyer on either side, so that the case was decided purely on the facts, and the lesson it conveys is that if your neighbours adopt a certain system of payment for rabbitskins, you must do the same, or your men will "swap" over the boundary. Another revelation is made, and thai; is the enormous extent of the rabbit pest in some parts of the province, POND'S BUTTER BOXES. The action of the Victorian Minister of Lands, Mr Dow, with regard to the appropriation of Mr Pond's patent for his enamel has excited considerable attention, and much adverse comment. Mr Pond, as most people are aware, has invented a preservative enamel with which the interior, of boxes intended for the export of butter is coated. The invention has been duly patented both in this colony and Victoria, and a considerable trade has sprung up in the manufacture of the boxes. The Victorian Government has undertaken the shipment of butter on behalf of the colonists, and Pond's packages were considered the most suitable in which to pack the product. But there is a heavy duty levied on these boxes, amounting to 4s 6d on each, and besides the duty, the importation of the boxes was considered a grievance by the Victorian artisan. Mr Pond offered to pay the duty himself on the condition that he was allowed a drawback on such of them as were afterwards exported, and considering the large number which would probably be used for inland transport, and would never be exported at all, the offer must be considered a liberal one. But liberal as it was, it did not satisfy Mr Dow, who confessed in his place in Parliament that he had instructed the Government analyst to find out the composition of the I enamel, and that a firm of coopers had pro- i fited by the result of the analysis and were applying, the enamel to the interior of casks, although casks were not so suitable as rectangular boxes for shipment and cost proportionately more for freight. Upon inquiry being made in the Victorian House as to the appropriation, Mr Dow had the hardihood to affirm that the letters patent applied only to the boxes, thereby leading to the inference that the secret of making the enamel was public property and could be used, by anybody. Such, an explanation the, Argus very .properly calls tortuous and unsatisfactory, ,and/ it; very naturally indignantly asks • for- ail inquiry into the matter and a national repudiation of what is nothing less than barefaced robbery. Granted that it is true that the box as a whole formed the subject of the patent, it cannot be denied that the namele is the most important part of it, and if the boxes were simply nailed together in the ordinary way, instead of being fitted together as Pond's are, the preservative coating would be still the most powerful ingredient in their value, because it is that alone which makes them suitable. 'Mr Dow's first excuse was that the Government retained the right of producing the article itself when the patent was granted, And such a reservation could be conceived to be reasonable in extreme cases. For instance, if an invention were made which was of great national value and the inventor were to die with his secret, then the Government might be justified in rescuing the invention from oblivion. But in this case it is the fetish of Protection which stands in the way ; the embodiment of an idea that nothing at all must be imported which can be locally made, and the determination to realise it even at the expense of common honesty. If it be true that the Victorian Government have reserved the right to utilise the invention, probably Mr Pond has no legal remedy, but we imagine he could na ake any private firm pay very smartly for an invasion of his rights. The most lamentable portion of the wretched business is the apathy with which the attempted explanation was received in Parliament. A smart retort by Mr Dow to the effect that the Government wanted the casks ■was provocative of laughter and but very feeble protest by honourable members. We are glad to see that the press is not so indifferent to the national honour, and we trust the severest condemnation will reward an action so subversive of the usages common to honest men.