Untitled

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 5467, 5 March 1889, Page 2

The Mataura Ensign remarks that so much has been said of late about tho powore of tho Rabbit Inspectors, nnd tho obligation of Magistrates to impose fines if Inspectors hold fast to their opinion that a defendant, has not done all that was necessary, that we may quote a decision on the point reDortcd in the Eusiyn " "oniup of years ago. giving judgment in the case ot bmind v. Chappie, at Slacks, on tho 9th February, 1887, for a breach of tho "Rabbit Nuisance Act. 18*2," Mr. Nugent Wood, R.M., said there was an erroneous impression abroad tli.it a conviction under the Act was bound to follow if the Rabbit Inspector said th'it in his opinion the mwsmirit steps had not been taken to destroy the nibbi'tn. Such was not necessarily tho case. In this case ho did not think that Mr. Chappie had been fairly treated. Not only had ho, according to uvidonce, taken fair and legitimate steps to destroy the rabbits on his laud, but tho Government had netriected, until after tho defendant had completed his work, to take any steps to clear tho adjoining reserves, which wero referred to as veritable rabbit warrens. The information would be dismissed without costs.