THEFT OF TREES.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 28 February 1929, Page 8

THEFT OF TREES.

FROM EGMONT NATIONAL BARK

CONVICTION AND HEAVY FINE IMPOSED. At the EilLham Magistrate’s Court on Tuesday, before Mr. Jj Miller, S.M., George Espiner ,of nowan, was charged that on or about November 27, 192-/, he wilfully cut and removed trees to the value of £3O without being author--1 ised to do so by the Elgmont National Park Board. A charge of theft was also laid in connection, with the . same matter. Sergeant J, Henry, II awe fa, conducted the police prosecution and Mr. A. Chrystal, Eltiiam, appeared for defendant. The charge of cutting and removing trees, was withdrawn, not having been laid within the statutory time. Tho magistrate entered a conviction, and imposed a fine of £2O. The defendant wag also ordered to refund to the Park Board £ls, as value- of the trees. He was also ordered tq pay witnesses’ expenses and court costs, amounting to £-6 19s- —a total of £4l 19s, in default two months’ imprisonment. Security for appeal was fixed at 15 guineas. Herbert William Larsen, chief ranger for the Egmont National Park Board, stated that on May 8, 1928, in company with Mr. Ward, Crown Lands ranger, he visited a property adjoining tho -reserve but did not find evidence of trees having been removed. Ho had not been correctly directed. On A lay 21, with Mr. Ward he again visited the locality and found that eleven trees had been removed. Scrub, had been cut on the edge of the reserve to. cover up the sledge tracks made in removing the timber. Rimu, Hinua and Tawhero trees, had been removed to the property of Herbert Espiner, defendant’s brother. Witness estimated that over 700 posts had been cut from eleven trees. It would take a week for one man to sledge, the posts out. In company with one. Humphrey, he had visited the locality on May 1 and. was shown the stumps of elevep felled trees. Tho tawhero had been out

about January or February a,net the rimiD from six to eight months before l their 1 visit. One stump, evidently out about three years, had started to decay, but there was no sign of decay on the others. Tracks made on Bspiner’s property had- become obliteratedbut on the reserve they were kept open by cattle eating out the undergrowth. The fence between the reserve and Espiner’s was in good order with the exception- of a places where it had been deliberately interfered with. Thfere the 'wires were stapled on the tops of posts, allowing access to cattle. Witness had been informed that the tawlieros were taken out in November. This timber was of no value except for temporary fencing. He would not say that three .minis had been cut as long as three years previously. The tawheros bad been felled by axes but the rknus were scarved and sawn. Accused had no authority to remove trees from the reserve. The rimus on Espiner’s property were unsuitable for posts. About the middle of January lip visited Esp-iner’s farm with an asi sistant ranger to meet Espiner by ar- | rangement, but the latter did not keep the appointment. Sergeant Henry here. explained that Espiner was attending the Hawera Court on the day in question and could not keep the appointment. Mr. Uhrystal said he had explained the position to the secretary of the Park Boardt and had unsuccessfully endeavoured to. make another appointment. He did not deny that the posts were taken toi Espiner’,s farm from the reserve, but pointed- out that the farm had changed hands and afterwards reverted t<> the Eispiners. Percy Ernest Humphrey gave evidence that he was engaged as a contractor. at Rowan in June, 1927. In November he worked on a stumping contract at Herbert Bspiner’s farm, George Espiner was on the same property. He- saw Espiner cutting trees on the reserve about November, felling _ four or live trees within a few chains of where witness was working, and about half a mile from Espiner’s house, from which the sound of chopping couild not be . heardv The trees were sawn and split into posts and witness saw the accused carting them out! through Herbert Espiner’ s> property. I As far as witness could remember it | took accused, who worked alone, more l than a week to do so-. Witness could not even approximately estimate the | number of posts taken out. They were left on the property, near the" road, and later removed by lorry. He saw a man named Whalen loading and carting away posts. These were green and he saw similar posts at Newton King’s saleyardg at Kaponga. Witness pointed out to- Messrs Larsen and Ward stumps of' recently-felled trees, cut by Espiner, on the edge of the reserve, almost touching the fence. It wa.s impossible to see from Espiner’s house the posts being taken out of the reserve.

Under cross examination, witness said tile five trees lie saw being cut down were tawheros. He did not know by whom the other six were out. He saw several lots of posts near the road l but saw Whalen carting only one load of, roughly, 100 posts; these were of. rimu and tawhero. Of the five trees he saw felled, three were rimu, one taI whero and lie did n-ofc remember what the fiftlii was. Witness admitted tlia.t he was nob on good tenns with the Espiners, particularly George, against whom he had a grievance. Witness had, reported Herbert Espiner for grazing stock on the reserve. Pressed on the point, witness • said he was not a ranger, and therefore did nothing to stop Espiner. A,s soon as it was convenient for him to do,, lie personally reported the matter to a board meeting at Manaia in May. He did not say George Espiner cut the rim us, the remains l of which he saw. It was reasonable to suppose that the rimns were not split into posts until twoi years after felling; the timber would he seasoned, but- harder to work. Witness left 100 posts on Espiner’s farm on completion of his contract. There were some rim,us. still on the property, which contained 200 acres. The terms of his contract with Espiner was to stump and clear, and he cleared three acres, getting about 100 posts. There wouldi not be 600 posts off the balance of the farm, Charles Cbssey, contractor, said’ he had carted about 100 dry rimu posts from the roadside near Herbert Espiner’s farm. These were delivered to the Kaupokonui Daily- Factory. Witness had alsoi carted rimu and binau posts for George Esperin from the Kaponga saleyards for delivery to various people, with whom Espiner had made sale arrangements. He was paid for cartage by George Espiner. To Mr. Chrysta! : There were no tawhero posts among those he carted. Charles Paterson, fanner of Kapuni, deposed to purchasing 64 posts from George E'spiner, paying for them at the rate’ of Is 6rli each. The jmsts were eyidentlv split from trees which had been felled for some time. They were of. rimu and in good condition. TTenrv William Whalen, general carrier, of Kapuni. who also dealt in wood and coal, stated.that in January- 1928 be had a conversation with George E's-

piner, the result being-a promise by Espiner to fill’ an order for 200 posts, at Is each, in about two weeks’ time. Witness purchased 75 posts from Bspiner on Jnuary 20, J 928. and 51) (30 riinui and 20 birch) posts on November •1, 1927. The 75 posts' wore taken from near Herbert Espiner’s gateway. Arrangements for payment were made, by witness and Herbert Espiner. John Scanlon, carrier, Kaponga, said lie carted, on January 16, from outside Espiner’s gateway 65 hinua and 54 rinra posts for the Farmers’ Cooperative Society. The -posts were- dry and solid, and did not appear to have been split . from recently felled trees. George Espiner assisted in the loading. He was paid for cartage by the Fanners’ Co-op. Stanley Frederick Miller, contractor, Rowan, said- he hud a stumping contract which was nearly concluded on Deoembbr 23. George Espiner was with him, and 60 rimu posts were cut and. left on Herbert. Espiner’s property. George- Espiner agreed to complete the unfinished contract. The contract provided for Herbert Espiner taking at £2 lOis per 100 any posts that witness cut. There- was some standing timber, suitable for posts, on the five acres and on visiting the place twelve months later he- noticed some logs had been split for posts. There was plenty of tawhero® on Herbert Espiner’s farm. FOR THE DEFENCE. George Espiner, faim labourer, now resident at Moboia, stated that in November and December he was working for Joe Chamberlain at Rowan. About Christmas time he undertook to clean up his brother Herbert’s place—stumpiiig, carting posts, etc. He understood he was allowed to have the timber on. his brother’s farm is completing the contract. None of the timber removed by Whalen came from the reserve. To- Sergeant Henry witness said he looked upon the matter a® a joke when spoken to by a constable. He did not now regard the case as a joke. He told the constable- that it was silly to take notice of such a charge coming from Humphrey. About 200 or 300 posts were cut on his brother’s farm. Witness usually did the splitting alone. The posts were sold in small lots to different people. • The carting done by Co-ssey for him was after Christmas. Humphrey was on the farm in October and November,. but witness was not there until December. Witness’s brother, Herbert, lived at Manaia and visited the, farm at intervals; he knew that posts were being split on that farm and sold, but did not receive any of the proceeds. Herbert Henry Elspiner, fanner, now living at Rowan, stated that Miller started his contract in the beginnnig. of December. Witness’ brother George worked with, him.. The terms of the contract-wore that he (Wilson) was to stumip and clear as, much as land as possible by Christmas. The contractor was not required- to split posts and he would; prefer that the contractor did net dp so, as it delayed the clearing of the land. George ,remained clearing up the job. There was a considerably quantity of timber on the land to- be cleared. The ranger was quite- wrong in stating that the-fence was deliberately tampered with. He had occasion to. take the fence down and staple the wires on the top of the posts in. order to get his cows out of the reserve. The trees along the, fence were as they were when witness took over the farm five year® ago. The felled trees referred, to by the ranger were covered with moss which would take quite a few years to, grow. It was impossible for Humphrey toi have seen the trees fell-' ed, owing to dense undergrowth. Witness’ brother, George, left the farm purely on account of domestic trouble and could he there now if he were reasonable in the house, Wilfred Alfred Wilson, sharemilker on Herbert E'spiner’s farm at Rowan, corroborated the evidence as to' completion of the stumping contract and George Espiner remaining on the farm to clear u-p. Witness had been sharemilking for Herbert Esperin for three years. He went into the reserve and. took note of the position of trees, No tree® were cut down during the timewitness was on the farm..

Joseph Chamberlain, farmer, living at Rowan, said George Espiner was working for him in October and November, 1927, during which lie had no time to go into the reserve- to fall, trees and could, not do so without witness’ knowledge. Witness corroborated the evidence in regard t-4 the row between George Espiner and Humphrey. In announcing his decision, given above, the magistrate said the case presented some difficulty. If it had been on the evidence of Humphreys alone he would have no compunction in dismissing the information, as Humphreys bad a grievance. In this case, however, they were not relying on Humphrey’s evidence, as there w T as the evidence of the chief Crown ranger.