“UNSPORTSMANLIKE DEVICE.”

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XLII, Issue 9473, 4 March 1922, Page 6

“UNSPORTSMANLIKE DEVICE.”

FINE OF £7 IMPOSED. Reserved judgment was delivered by Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M., at the Christchurch Magistrate’s Court yesterday morning in the case in which Arthur Edgar Mead was charged that on December 20, 1921, at the mouth of the Rakaia River, he took trout by means of an unsportsmanlike device, namely, a heavy trace with three sets of double bare hooks’. After reviewing the evidence, the Magistrate said that he was quite satisfied that defendant and his witnesses had lied absolutely. There was no question that the tackle found in the possession of defendant was a most unsportsmanlike device known to poachers and unfortunately also known to some anglers. There was no direct evidence that the tackle had been used on the night in question. There were no fish to prove that it had been used. However, it was not necessary to prove* that fish had been caught. If an attempt was made to catch fish with such tackle that constituted an offence. Taking into consideration all the facts and the way in which the defendant gave evidence he thought the inference that the Court should draw was that the tackle had been used on the night in question to fish for trout. Defendant was fined £7 and ordered to pay 7s costs and £3 3s solicitors’ At the hearing Mr M. J. Gresson appeared for the Acclimatisation Society and Mr C. S. Thomas lor the defendant.