To the Editor of the Wellington Independent.

Wellington Independent, Volume XVIII, Issue 1869, 16 May 1863, Page 3

To the Editor of the Wellington Independent.

Sir,— The report of the debate on the Fenctng Act, •which took place on Friday evouing last, as published in your paper to-day, 1 scarcely informs the public as to the real intentions of" tho Bill I had the honor to lay before tho Provincial Council, and I therefore think it a duty I owe to tho public and myself to offer a few explanations, which I bog you will do mo tho favor to publis _i ii your next In the first cla ise of my Bill I proposed as follows,— "That no fence should bo considered a sufficient fertco unless it consisted of morticed posts and four raite, f.;e top rail whereof should not be less than four feet six inchrs from the ground. Or if the fence shall bo made in any 0 her way, it shall be of equal efficiency to such fence. No river or streams taken as the boundaries betwoen two properties or parcelm of land shall bo doomed a sufficient fence for tho pui'poses of thiß Act" In the Fencing Act now iv forco, it is provided that a three railed fence four feet high, shall bo deemed a sufficient fence ; but my own experience has taught me that it is not a sufficient fence, for it will not prevent the trespass of pigs or sheep, as has been "proved in many instances. Two of these came under my notice not long sinco m Wairarapa, when I was on the Bench in tho Besident Ma -istrate's Court at Grey town. The fences in both cases were the legal fenc3S, and judgments given against tno defendants. It w'3 the opinion, I believe, of the framer or the Fencing Ant : 0./ in force, and is still the opinion or some people, that a four railed f onee was expensive, ana would pre3B too heavily on the man of small means. Wow 1 ppiaa tka.ttf Uw lew loroea people to fence W all, tt« tarn

object ia to prevent the trespass of cattle, great or small, and then the legal fence will not do; so that in this resp :>ct the sooner the law is amended the better, or the man of small means will soon find that in law expenses ho will have to pay more than the diffovence of cost between the three and four railed fences j i.e., if he were to keep pigs or Bheep and does not confine them to the stye or the pen. During the debate, Mr Borlase stated that the majority of people out of doors were strongly opposed to this part of my amendment ; but I can only say that I have spoken to a great many people on this subject, and very lew, whether of Binall means or mon of wealth, have not tola me that they thought the three railed fence utterly useless or equal to no fence at all. Now, Sir, with regard to rivers. The Act in force provides that all rivers over a chain wide are to be considered sufficient fences ; but it is very well known that in a great many instances rivers of five chains wide, are no better fences than rivers of half a chain wide and frequently not bo good. This is a very difficult part of the subject, and 1 drew the latter part of the clause as it stands above, m the hope that in Committee the point would be argued, and the difficulties cleared away. The second clause of my Bill was intended to provide, — That throughout the enactments referring to fences of hazardous materials (in towns), the term scrub should be deemed to include manuka scrub, gorse or furze, branches or boughs of manuka, gorse, or other shrubs, and all materials of a similarly hazardous description. It shall not bo lawful for any person to put up or construct either entirely or In part respectively, within the limits of any town, any fence or shed, of whatsoever description, either entirely or in part respectively of scrub, or to sow gorse or ' furze fences. I The difference between that in the present Fencing Act I consists simply in the introduction of the word gorso or furse. I introduced this, because I think it will be generally admitted that gorse is quite as hazardous a material as manuka, Sao. I believe it to be more so, and I cannot help feeling great alarm when I see so much gorse , growing within the limits of the City, not only in fences, ! but in a wild and vmcared for state. An example of this . may be seen close to our Public Offices, on the north side. If this gorso should by any accident take lire, it would most probably produce a conflagration we should all .deeply deploro and not easily forget.-— I remain, &c, W. M. Smith. May 12, 18G3.