FLAX REFUSE IN RIVERS.

Southland Times, Issue 14096, 30 April 1909, Page 2

FLAX REFUSE IN RIVERS.

. A PLAZMIiuLER COITVICTSD. Thomas Bennett was charged with having allowed (lax refuse to How into the Waimatuku river from his llaxmill. Defendant, for whom Mr Haggitt appeared. pleaded guilty. Dir Eustace Russell prosecuted for the Acclimatisation Society. Mr Russell staled that the facts wore that defendant had allowed the refuse from his llaxmill to (low into the Waimatuku. which runs into Riverton beach. Practically the whole of the mill refuse had been allowed to flow into the stream to such an extent that it had piled up and delleotod the r (ream. Counsel did not know whether the Society had notified defendant on the mutter, but the law was perfectly clear on the point. The effect of tint llax going into Hie stream -.was poisonous to the fish, as it destroyed the soluble oxygen in the water which was necessary to the fish. The Society had put 20,000 to 30,000 fish into the stream, and tins would give some idea of what the effect of pollution of the stream would be. He would like to state that in any further cases of this kind the Society would press for a heavy penalty.

Mr Haggitt asked the Court to take into consideration the fact that defendant had boon in charge of the mill only six months, and as the refuse was allowed to run into the river by Ids predecessor lie continued the practice. Ho know no better. He had caught ggod fish below the pollution, and did not know that the pollution was against the Act. Counsel asked that the minimum fine he inflicted. His Worship said that every tradesman should know the Statutes that affected his own particular trade. Still the defendant had apparently been really ignorant of his offence and ho would be fined the minimum penalty of £2, with £2 9s costs.