THU RANGER FOR OTAUTAU AND APAEIMA RIDINGS.

Western Star, Issue 1577, 8 July 1891, Page 2

THU RANGER FOR OTAUTAU AND APAEIMA RIDINGS.

TO THE EDITOR. St •,—Knowing, as I do, that you have the inte' Osts of the ratepayers ah heart, I will venture to ask you to insert tho following. Some time ago, as you are aware, I as well as fvvoral others, complained to the County Council of tho mean actions of the present ranger, and if you will allow mo T will again relate the circumstances surrounding the matter as affecting inysolf. Some time ago three of my children were driving four head of cattle along the Yellow Bluff road, and while actually doing so the tanger overtook them and inquired of thorn whom tho cattle belonged to. Af which he took them into custody. I was standing on the road at the time sixteen chains off, and saw tho ranger coming np, and he also must have seen me, for ho rode up to me leaving tho children in charge of tho cattlo, and to rav horror and surprise demanded the driving fee, which, according to his rendering, amounted to eight shillings. To this [ very strongly objected, asking him what right he had to interfere with uiy cattle while being driven by the children. To which ho renlPfl that the Act had been so amended that children were not in any way recognised who might bo driving stock along public roads. A.nd there I was confronted by an officer representing the majesty of the law, who seemed to have tho Impounding Act on his finger ends and would not take no for answer. However, to avoid having tho cattlo knocked about. I beat him down to five shillings which he agreed to take, assuring roe that it hia interpretation of the Act was not right, the Council would return me the amount. I wrote asking tho Council to consider tho matter, which they did, and called upon the ranger to give an explanation, which he did, and that seemingly to the satisfaction of all members present. In the first place he said the cattle were seventy chains away from my land, while the distance was as I said before only 12 chains; and in tho second place he assured the Council that there was no one in charge when he took tho cattlo in custody, and according to your report in the Stak. This ended tho matter, and in the absence of further evidence, nothing more could bo expected from the Council. I was much amused at the statements made by tho Chairman. One day he said bo left a horse on the road (the very place he should n-t have left it), when the ranger came along and ran the animal in. Ho declined to pay the fees charged as ho considered the ranger had no right to do snch a thing. I fail to see how on earth tho ranger could have done wrong when, according to the Chairman’s own showing, the horse was trespassing on tho country road, and that, too, in a thickly populated township, unless he is like the ranger, able to put bis own construction upon the law. In this case, however, the ranger was warned and told to be more careful in future, and esoreiso a little more discretion in carrying out h;a duties. Your readers will readily understand what tho Chairman meant by that, but after all Mr Hamilton is not a bad sort. Outside the Council both the Chairman and our member have heard complaints regarding the ranger, but so far as my own case and that of Lindsay Bros, goes, they uphold his actions in every particular; and this I must say it" Is a very strong indication that this part, at any rate, of this beautiful region of tho setting sun, is fast drifting back to its saAage state. Lindsay has property on both sides of tho road, but notwithstanding tho remoteness of the locality and the impassable state of the roads thereabouts,while some of their horses bad occasion to cross the road to an adjoining field, the ranger pounced upon them. It is hard to perceive why the Council cooiinuo to insist in keeping on snch an officer. It is true that, a few horses about Calcium occasionally broke loose and perhaps disturbed our member or some of his friends, ft is also true that a representative of a large estate who has not yet abandoned the “ dog in the manger ” system complained of some poor person’s beast that one day looked him in tho face, and that was the reason no doubt whv a ranger was appointed. But in tho face of resolutions passed at tho same time, and by the same paople that these monopolists be allowed to erect, swing gates, therby obviating the necessity of fencing. The principle looks bad especially so when we take into consideration the suitability or otherwise of those appointed. In conclusion I must say that it seems io be simply a matter of pounds, shillings and pence with tho ranger, and judging from his actions I have no hesitation in saying that he has in .nr case at anyrate defeated every end of justice. However, lam glad to learn that a petition will be sent to the Council asking thorn to dispense with him.—l am, etc., David Evans, Far Bush.