ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

Otago Witness, Issue 420, 17 December 1859, Page 6

ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

To the Editor of the Otaoo Witness.

Sir, — I take leave to call the attention of the public to tha manner in which the Cattle Trespass Ordinance is administered in the town of Dunedin. Informations are laid under this Ordinance, in the name of the Chief Constable, against persons whose cattle are found grazing within the precincts of the town. I presume, therefore, it is assigned to the constables as part of their duty thus to carry the Ordinance into force. I think it a pity that the constables should be so employed, and that it would be better to leave the townspeople to enforce the Ordinance for themselves as they find necessary. But what I now desire more particularly to call attention to is, that some system of exceptions seems to be followed, and that the constables exercise a discretion as to the occasions for putting the law into force. Sir, I for one protest against the administration of a law, under which such crushing penalties may be imposed, being entrusted in any measure to the discretion of police constables. I now state facts, within my own knowledge, in support of my assertion as to the discretion exercised. This day Mr. Jones appeared at the Police Court in answer to a summons on account of three sheep which had escaped from a paddock. I select this as an extreme case of the application of the law. The sheep were -out of a flock of 43 rams recently landed from a vessel, and placed, pending their disposal, in a paddock, from which they had escaped, notwithstanding all due precautions taken to keep them m. Of course no one will suppose that three valuable rams would be willingly allowed to stray into the town. The Magistrate took this into consideration, and inflicted only the minimum fine of ss. But nevertheless the law was enforced, and this constitutes, an extreme case.

On the other hand, I have seen cattle day after day, frequently twelve or fifteen head, grazing upon the town land, systematically put and herded there. The Chief Constable has been fully aware of their being there; and yet, although this has gone on for weeks, no information has been laid against the owners, (unless it has been done within the last few days. Indeed, the Chief Constable has himself informed me that he did not consider it necessary to apply the law there. Let it not be supposed that I have any objection la cattle being allowed to graze on the unenclosed land in question, some of which belongs to me. I may state also that Mr. Jones, who has a great deal of valuable property in close contiguity, makes no objection. I may further state that at 'Hillside — where there are twenty acres of land, comprising vegetable garden and grass paddocks, very tempting to hungry cattle, and not by any means very strongly fenced — we have never had occasion to complain of our neighbours' cattle, although large numbers of them are always grazing all round About. I only maintain that if the police be instructed to act as common informers under the Ordinance, they should do so without discretion. T am credibly informed that at the other end of the town the cattle of certain parties appear to be particularly watched, and are immediately informed against by a policeman if they appear outside of the gate. I believe it to be the case, though I cannot state it of my own knowledge. But I state as a fact that I have seen be^gis tethered in that neighbourhood frequently, if not habitually, the owners of which I believe never to have been summoned.

As for the merits of the law itself, at it was made by the united wisdom of the Province as represented in the Legislative Council, we should perhaps be bound to consider it to be a wise and necessary law. With all due respect, however, I entertain the opinion that it is neither the one nor the other. On the contrary, I oonsider it to be most unnecessary and tyrannical, and I am astonished that the townspeople submit to it. I believe

a precedent could not be found for it in any part of the civilised world. No such penalties would impend over the owner of a beast that should be found in one of the principal thoroughfares of London ; and as to the Colonies, I can state that in the city of Melbourne, so desirable is it considered that every blade of grass should be converted into milk, that numbers of cattle may be seen every day within the precincts of the city, feeding upon any piece of unenclosed land upon which grass will grow. People who hive gardens (and there are fine gardens there, maintained at great cost) fence them properly, and then the cows do not eat their cabbages nor spoil their flowers. There are pounds to which troublesome beasts may be driven, and that is found quite sufficient protection, as I believe it would be l^io. Our Oidinance imposes heavy penalties an<l great haulship on the townspeople generally, and to v.h.it end ? That a few individuals who have cabbnge gardens may be spared the expense of fencing, and that a monopoly of feeding cows may be conferred upon a few others who are so fortunate as to possess comfortable paddocks. It is to my mind a melancholy idea that the fine rich grass should be seen growing up to the height of a beast's belly, while no beast is permitted to taste it, and the to.vn meanwhile is starved of milk. I was in hopes that the townspeople would have been sick of it before this : perhaps if the law were equally enforced they would speedily become so. — I am, &c, E. B. Carqill.

Dunedin, 14th December 1859.