PROSPECTORS’ PLIGHT

Greymouth Evening Star, 25 January 1926, Page 2

PROSPECTORS’ PLIGHT

shot deeiTfok food. Cut off from civilisation by flooded rivers, and isolated in'The Rough River district with their food stock funning low, a party of prospectors were, during the bad weather in November lust, faced with the uninviting ‘prospect of probable starvation. .Under the circumstances, it was not surprising that the game laws ‘ ceashd 'to be regarded as important. Therefore, .When one of The party succeeded in “drawing a bedd” l on. a deer, he did ndt hesitate to add fresh vension to the menu. A subsequent encounter with mounted po-. lice, who visited the cainp, resulted in the appearance of tile deer-slayer at the Greymouth Court today before Mr. TV. S.AI. He was; John Henry Broriiley, of Arney Street, Greymduth, and ’the charge against liliri was ‘that, on or abcii't November 25, 1925, lit the Rough River, Ikaihatua, he did kill imported game.

Bromley said that he and his companions were out prospecting for a gold teef. The rivers were in flood 'for three weeks, and they could not reach Tkamatua for supplies, as they had 'no horses. He admitted killing the deer, for food.

Senior-Sergeant P. J. McCarthy said he understood that the 'weather was pretty rough at the time. However, deer were ‘‘protected.”

In reply to a qiiestion as to how the constables were able to reach the camp, Bromley said that they swam the rivers on -their horses.

Senior-Sergeant IMcCarthy said he understood that the defendant was unable'to .'produce any samples to piove prospecting activities, and that he refused to allow the police'to enter the cinip,

- Bromley. “If oiie constable had hot turned round and said it would take six of us to stop him getting in, he might have got in!” “Yon had been camping there during the winter with your coinpan'ions ?” —“Yes, opossum hunting.” I think the constable suggested that you were doing that, and not prospecting?”—“Yes, he did.”

The Magistrate, after questioning Bromley regarding the low state of thb “tucker” supplies, remarked that ihe law had been broken. Under the circumstances, however, he would record a conviction and impose only a nominal fine of £l, with 7/- costs.