Police Court

Southland Times, Issue 19036, 2 May 1903, Page 4

Police Court

THUKSDAY. APRIL 30th

(IJofore Mr S. K. McCarthy, SM.)

DIUNIvI'iNNKSS

A woman was lineil 20s and tosls ; in

default -is dour.-/ iiupri.sonment, for liwr

iirsl olYenuc

.\f>.\Kti;s uki:ds iMtosKiu; rioxs

Lewis Mnthiison was cliftrged with l'ail-

inj,' to comply M'ilJi ft notire from nn insjiector to clear hind occupied bji him al South Invercirsill from Caliioniiuii thisile. a noxious weed. — 'Ik-feiulanl, said that

tho sci'tions wpru a corporat-ion" rnscrvi-, iind lie claiiniMl that lie was not tltu Ici^nl owner or occupier, ns the. lease had not heen signed. The urrungenujiit was therefore not complete, mwl he submit toil he wiis lujf yot responsible.

Air T. M Macdonalil. for the prosecution, said that the sections were Nos. »>R. W, Tii, 71. and 72, Seaward Bush Hundred. South lin ercargill. Tho dedpfendant hud been smiui months- in occupation oi them, and though the lease had not been signed, he had put in v deposit on account of rent.

Alfred Hull, town clerk. South Invercnrgill, gave evidence that defendant's tender had heen accepted for the lease of the sections lie paid Si'i 10s on account of rent, und was on the borough roll as occupier of the land.

K. Wright, inspect or under the Noxious, Weeds Act. (rave evidence that he had inspected the hi ml on various occasions. He found it in v very had state from California!! thistles, and nothing was being done to clear them. Notice was served for February i/7th. giving defendant three days' notice to commence clearing:, the work to be done by March Hth. Witness inspected the land on April Bth but practically nothing had beon done. Another inspection was made on the UHth inst., and v good deal hud been cleared, but the operations were too late, as the thistles had seeded. Clearing had been done previously on other sections owned liv defendant.

~M. O'Meara. inspector, deposed that he inspected defendant's land on urircl February, and found it very bad with California)! thistle nnd ragwort. Saw defendant next day. and he promised to clear it. .Witness inspected tho land on J7th March and tfth of April, and found nothing done. On April Kith there was a small plot cut on the roadline.

Defendant stated that the Lime given for clearing wan too short for tho acrea£o he h:id to go through. It was impossible for him to clear it in nine days. In addition, he was. unfortunate in suffering from ill-health during the last two years, and could not afford to pay anyone to help him. lie had clearad 1.") acres- after he got the notice, and was proceeding with the rest when he was laid uj». As soon as he recovered, he started again, and the property was now pretty well cleared.

His Worsliip said that tho point raised by defendant that his lease had not been signed was of no avail, as ho had agreed to accept the lease and gone into occupation. With regard to the length oi time allowed, that had already been dealt with in a previous case. He must not. in administering tho Act, consider the amount of ground that the defendant and hitr Servants could cover in a given time, but )i« had to Jook nt it from the public point of view. The Pepartmeni simply gave notice to clear the land within time to prevent weeds seeding, and it was tho occupier's duty, if he could not undertake the work himself, to employ other labour. Tho more fact thnt defendant could not afford to do this was not a defence. >.\ nominal penalty of 10s and cysts Us, with solicitor's f. ;e £-j i> X , would be iin-

Posed

■Margaret Donnelly (Kast Invercargill) and David Fairweather (Clarendon) wore each fined 10s and costs £:! Os, for failing to comply with notices to clear rapwort and Cuiiudian thistle from sections. The defendants in dhe.se cases did not appear. hjhJ convictions we/v recorded on the evidence of the inspectors.