TRAPPER FINED

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 35, 4 November 1933, Page 21

TRAPPER FINED

Method of Taking Opossums POISONING PROVED Inspection of opossum skins and argument as to whether they belonged to accused played an important part In the hearing in the Police Court yesterday of a case in which Frank Clark was charged before Mr. E. Page, S.M., with unlawfully taking or killing opossums by means other than snares or traps. He was convicted and fined £lO, plus £7/15/6 costs. ’ Mr. G. G., Watson appeared tor the Wellington Acclimatisation Society, who laid the charge, and accused conducted his own case. It was stated by Mr. Watson that Clark held a license to take opossums this season and, in due course, had submitted 92 skins for stamping. It was obvious to the rangers that somewhere between 50 and 60 skins weie from poisoned animals. The chief ranger ot the society, r. W. Willson, said that he had examined the skins on August 7 and found that a substantial portion were taken by means contrary to the regulatloub. He classified them 61 de finitely dead; 16 doubtfult anilu may have been trapped, dakuie, tlie whoje output for the Wellington dis trict this season the proportion of ffiead skins was only 3 per cent. W’ said that he had Giark on Au»ust 7 that the skins would be confiscated, and he asked Clark how many poisoned skins there were. Accused had re plied that there were 60 odd. P Accused denied that he had made that statement seriously and challenged witness that he (Clark) was not in Wellington on that day. . Witness stated that many complaints had been received as to poisoning bj Clark. There was no doubt about the skins belonging to him. 53 skins were definitely dead, 16 were tramied, and 20 were doubtful. . 1 Clark then commenced to go thp skins several times and said that certain of them were not Ms, t and contended that his name had been written on them by another man. The magistrate compared a Touch which Clark had signed with the sig nature on the skins, and asked if he would suggest that they were diffeient S 1 Mr. tU Wateon: Do you suggest that the line of skins now is an average line honestly taken. C °JH^Watson: You suggested that there had been a frame-up in somebody putting your name on the skins. Ho can there be a frame-up ifW are an honest average line of skins. The question was repeated several times before witness replied: “I say some of those arc not mine.” Mr. Watson: Is it your allegation that a firm or one of its employees has substituted other skins for yours and fraudulently signed your name on The question was not answered by witness, who mentioned the name of another man who, he said, was bchin the whole affair. Mr. Watson: Did you know *t was a criminal offence to poison opossums • Witness (heatedly) Are you mfei ring that I poisoned them? Mr. Watson: I don’t infer it. Im directly charging you with it. At. the direction of the the man alleged to be behind the whole affair” was communicated witn at his work to give evidence, but it was found that he had gone home ill. In imposing the penalty the magistrate said that such an abnormal num; tier of dead skins was among the flsubmitted that the only legitimate belief was that accused had poisoned tl! On the application of accused an order was made for payment at the rate of £1 a week.