The Babbit Act TO THE EDITOR.

Otago Witness, Issue 2179, 28 November 1895, Page 7

The Babbit Act TO THE EDITOR.

Sir, — The prosecution of several respectable but struggling settlers at Wyndham on tho 29th ult. by the rabbit inspector, under the Rabbit Nuisauco Act, called for severe criticism and well-merited strictures upon the act and upon its abuse by injudicious inspectors from the local press and from tho settlers in the district. Thfso inspectors, who are invested with autocratic power, showed a great w*nt of tact and judgment in making a raid upon • the farmers when they were busy putting in their crops, and when their stock, reduced by the Beverity of the last winter to mere skeletons, required all the rest and care that could be bestowed on them, ai well as every blade of grass they could get and should not be knocked about, to make room for poisoning to satisfy an inspector's whims, j This took place at a time when the farmers' ewes were lambing, and could nob very well be huddled in a corner. But what are these facts to men who are empowered by Government to enforce when, and where, and how they choose as despotic a measure us ever emanated from tho most autocratic Government in the world. The result of these prosecutions will no doubt have the effect of opening the eyes of the public to the intolerable oppression the settlers are subjected to by the working of this iniquitous act, and the outcome will bo that the necessary agitation will be started to have this law effaced from the Statute Book, which ife has disgraced for over 13 years. As the act shows, the inspector is vittually prosecutor and judge. The form of taking theee cases into court is but a hollow sham. The magistrate has no power or discretion in tho matter. Evidence is utterly valueless. Prosecution implies conviction. '• If in the opinion of the inspector there are rabbits on a person's land," penalty must follow. However hard an unfortunate settler may have tried to geb rid of the pest, and however unable he may be to pay the penalty, he musb find a way of doing it. In a mouth again the inspector may find it convenient to form on opinion that there are still rabbits on this settlers land ; he ruay be dragged into court again and be lined in any Bum from £5 to £100, but not less than £5. This may be repeated every month as long as the inspector Grids it -convenient or advisable to do so, for let it be remembered the settler can never destroy all the rabbits. To make matters worse, the inspector is armed with power to pub as many men on this unfortunate settler' j» land as he likes, aud. keep them there as long as he likes, as long as there are two rabbits on the place. If only delinquents were exposed to this tyranny it would not be quite so bad, but the act is capable of unlimited abuse, and' works only ia a most haphazard way in the most judicious handa, as it may press heavily on those who are" doing their utmost to cope with the pest. Moreover, it encourages the groaeeife favouritism and partiality, and as a weapon placed in the hands of ani unprincipled man j may become a source of endless annoyance, molestation, and perhaps ruin to many a good and industrious settler. The presence of rabbit 3on his property is not the fault but the misfortune of the settler, whose only crime ia that he has become an unfortunate colonist of New Zealand, and has, through the overbearing interference of a paternal Government; be- j sides many other burdens, to bear the intolerable incubus of the rabbits and their inspector. It is monstroug to find th»t such a numerous, important, influential, and useful class of men as the farmers should be made the victims of such outrageovs tyranny. A more despotic measure than the present Babbit Act could hardly emanate from the sublime Forte. We live in the nineteenth century and we boast of our freedom and civilisation, yet some of v? are treated little better than serfs. Oar ancestors in the feudal times would not passively submit to such tyranny. Let the act be abolished ; or, if there must t>B a Rabbit Act and staff (a circumstance I do nob think indispensable), Jet the act be placed in the hands oE the magistrate to administer in the usual way, taking evidence on both sides, and let the

* " The study of Animal Life," by S, Arthur Thomson. M.A., F.R.S.E., author of "Outlines of Zoology,' &c.

magistrate inflict a penalty suitable to the l nature of the caso where he finds it necessary to do so. This -is the conrsa pursued in administering other laws. Why should the rabbit law bo different ? • With your permission, I will append a copy of the three sactions of the Rabbit Act which are execrably objectionable, so that the public may see the bas ! s of my contentions. — I am, &c , Wyndham, November 18. Vox Povvli. Rabbit Nuisance Act. Section 9. — If immediately upon the service of 'Si notice such one or more of the owners upon whom the same is served do not commence to do all such acts, deeds, matters, and things as in the opinion of the iuspector may bo necessary to destroy the rabbits on the laud mentioned in such notice in the diortest time possible, and havirjg so cominonced do not continue such action \intil such rabbits arc destroyed, each of ths owners upon, whom such notice has been terved shall be liabla to a penalty of not less than £1, nor more than. £100. Section 10.— After the expiration»ot ona mouth from.the date of a conviction under the last preceding Eection if there shall still in" the opinion of the inspector be rabbits on the land mentioned in such notice, each or any or more ol the ownci-3 upon whom the notice referred to in the preceding section has been served shall ba liable to a further penalty of not less than £5 nor more than jEIOO, and so on for each succeeding period of one month during which there* Shall still, in the opinion of the inspector, be rabbits on euch lauds. Section 11.— If any owner shall neglect or fail to comply with any notice as aforesaid to destroy rabbits, then, in addition to or ia lieu of proceedings for the recovery of a penalty as aforesaid any iuspector or any person authorised by an inspector may enter upon the private land mentioned in such notice, aud use all such means and take all such measures and do and perform all and every such acts or things aa to him may appear proper or necessary to be done to ensure the destruction of the rabbits upon the private land mentioned in such notice, and shall have free right of ingress", egress, and regress into, over, and acro3S such private land for such p-riod as may in his opinion be necessary for the destroying such rabbits.