POSSESSION OF IBIS

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28821, 16 February 1959, Page 17

POSSESSION OF IBIS

Two Men Fined

“In my view the evidence given by the two acclimatisation society rangers has established beyond doubt that both defendants at different times had the body of the ibis for several, days, and this can be held to be more than custody and indeed is possession within the meaning of the section,” said Mr A. P. Blair, S.M., in a reserved decision in the Magistrate’s Court. He found Hilton Leonard Hamilton, a railway surfaceman, of Lincoln, and Richard Blowers, an agricultural contractor of Halswell, guilty of having been found in possession of a white ibis, a protected bird, in July last year. Hamilton was charged in November last year with killing the bird and having possession of it, and Blowers with having possession. The Magistrate had found that the evidence was insufficient to convict on the charge of killing the bird, and reserved his decision on the other charges.

The white ibis, which is a native of Egypt, was the only one ever reported in New Zealand and before being shot it had frequented the vicinity of the Selwyn No> 2 river for several weeks.

The Magistrate imposed a fine of £lO oh Hamilton for having possession of the bird, and on Blowers, whom he found to have “played a lesser part” in the matter, a fine of £5 was imposed. No order regarding their shooting licences was made. In the Court case last year the two defendants, who pleaded not guilty, were represented by Mr P. T. Mahon, and Mr B. McClelland appeared for the North Canterbury Acclimatisation Society, which brought the charges. “Even if the defendants’ intentions were ultimately to hand the bird to a proper authority, their conduct shows that they did in fact retain the bird and up to the time of the interview of the rangers they had taken no steps in that direction,” said the Magistrate in his decision. “The only evidence that they did have such an intention comes from what was said by Hamilton to the rangers, but the fact remains that they retained the bird for a period considerably in excess of a time reasonably necessary to hand the bird to a proper authority,” he said.

An appeal against the Magistrate’s decision, on the ground that the Magistrate was wrong in fact and in law in entering convictions, and that the fine was excessive under the circumstances, has been lodged by the two defendants and will be heard at a sitting of the Supreme Court

HUSBANDS’ AND WIVES’ GUIDE A frank and confidential booklet for married people only Sent tn plain wrapper free Write today GEORGE BETTLE, Chemist, 25 Victoria street. Christchurch —Advt