RANGIORA.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 7067, 20 January 1891, Page 4

RANGIORA.

This Day.

(Before E. Beetham, Esq., 8.M., E. B. Good, A. Todd, and S. Hey wood, Esqs.)

Bbkach of the Fisheries Conservation Act. — Jameß Kennedy, jun., waß charged by A. D. Cole, Eanger for the Acclimatisation Society, with having at Oust on Nov. 28, fished without a license. There were two other charges, viz., That he did not return alive into the water fish under the regulation size, and that he uaed a device for taking fish other than a rod and line. Mr Helmore for defendant. Mr Spackman for the prosecution asked to have the I last charge taken first. The Banger gave evidence to the effect that on the date above-named he went by the evening train to Cust. Saw defendant at about eight o'clock coming from the direction of the river. Asked him if there was much fishing going on. Defendant ! replied no, as nearly all the fish had been I taken out of the river. Witness said he ! would like to have some to take home. Defendant said he had some, and would j give them to him. Defendant then went to some broom growing a short distance from the stream, and brought back the trout, the respective lengths of which were BJin, 9in, and lOin. Said he took them I with a snare. The marks of the snare could be plainly seen. Witness told him he was a ranger, and defendant remarked that he had put his foot in it. Said he had no license, and that they made up gangs every Sunday to take trout. Witness asked if he could give him any information, and he replied that he could lay him on. To Mr Helmore : The broom was beside the railway line, about half a chain from the river. Was positive that defendant said the fish were caught with a snare. Told defendant that if he could give information that would lead to the conviction of others, the cases would not go 00 hard with him. Also aaid that he would give him £1 for any conviction. Defendant's evidence was that he saw the trout in the broom at half-past five, when bridging up the cows. He did not know how they came there. Did not tell the Eanger that they were taken with a snare. The Banger did not draw attention to the marks of a snare on he fis h. Prosecutor Baid that he was allowed to give tips, and would give defendant from £1 to £2 for every conviction. Cole stopped at defendant's father's hotel for two days, but never said anything further about the fish. Mr Helmore, in addressing the Bench for the defence, said that the circumstances related by his client looked rather peculiar, but there was a doubt as to whether he took the trout from the water, and he was entitled to the benefit of that doubt. Mr Beetham (to defendant): "How old are you?" Defendant : " Eighteen years." His Worship : " What do you do ? " Defendant : "Work about the hotel for my clothes and tucker. His Worship : It ja time you earned more than that. Work' would keep yon out of mischief. There is not much doubt in the minds of the Bench as to your guilt. You either snigged the fish or stole them. There is no doubt that you and others are guilty of depleting the Cußt of fish in an unlawful manner. And when such as you are caught, you as a rule come before the Bench with a long face, and attempt to shelter yourself under the plea of oppressive game ! laws. There are no such things as game laws in this country. By paying a license fee every one can acquire the right to fish. | A large amount of money has been spent Ito stock the rivers with trout, and in ' taking these trout without a license you become a swindler. The conservation aws cere are nothing in common with what is known in England aa the Poaching and Game Laws. Here one man is as good as another, and sometimes a trifle better. Here it iB simply a question of money— of payment of the license fee. With regard to your statement that you found the fish ; if you found them how did you know whether or not they had been caught legally ? Did it not occur to you that yon might be stealing them P You will be fined £5 and costs, half the fine to go to the Ranger. If your position to pay had | been better you would have been fined i more money. I have before this fined one man £\O, two others .£2O each, and j another JB3O for similar breaches of the Act. Mr Spackman withdrew the other charges.

Slaughter-house License. — A renewal was granted to B. F. Croft.

There were no oivil cases.