SHE TOOK FERNS FROM DEANS BUSH.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18629, 5 December 1928, Page 1

SHE TOOK FERNS FROM DEANS BUSH.

V. JMAN IS ORDERED TO PAY COURT COSTS.

When Louisa Lochard paid a visit to the Riccarton bush recently she picked some ferns and forget-me-nots. She was detected by the ranger and, as a result, appeared before Mr H. P. La wry, S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court to-day charged with takiqg the plants. On her behalf, Mr M'Carthy entered a plea of guilty. Mr Cuningham (who prosecuted on behalf of the Riccarton Bush Trustees) said that the prosecution was brought under the Riccarton Bush Act, 1917. The trustees had brought the prosecution, not with the object of having a heavy fine inflicted on the woman, but o call the attention of the public to the existence of the by-laws and put an end to the vandalism that went on in the removal of plants, shrubs and trees and damage done in Deans Bush. On this occasion, the ranger saw the defendant, accompanied by a man, leaving the bush. She was carrying a parcel from the end of which forget-me-nots were projecting. When handed over, the parcel was found to contain forget-me-nots and four ferns. The ranger asked the woman for her name, but could not get it. Her companion, however, gave his name. During the last year or so there had been quantities of plants removed from the bush or pulled up and left lying in the bush. Mr M’Carthy said that defendant’s uncle at one time was manager of the bush. At that time there was no objection to her taking the plants. On this occasion she was accompanied by her husband. She was not aware that she was committing an offence. She was under a misapprehension as to the position in regard to the bush. The only criticism counsel had to offer was that the ranger came up to the woman and put his hand on her shoulder. He had no right to do that. He had no power of arrest and no power to place his hands on any person. The lady was sorry she had taken these things and had tendered her apologv to the trustees. This was the first prosecution of this sort. She was the wife of a labouring man and the family had had a particularly hard time during the last six years. Mr Cuningham said that the ra iger ■ had full power to arrest. The Magistrate said that, as the case was brought for the purpose of calling attention to the existence of the regulations, it would be sufficient if defendant was ordered to pay costs.