RABBITS AT RUAKURA

Waikato Times, Volume 94, Issue 14586, 8 February 1921, Page 6

RABBITS AT RUAKURA

LANDOWNER PROSECUTED. £25 FINE INFLICTED. A fine of £25 was imposed upon Richard Keane, who holds various blocks of land about the country, for failing to lake adequate steps to rid n section of 228 acres at Ruakura of rabbits. The case was heard al Hamilton yes ttrday before Mr 11. A. Young, S.M who wns told by Inspector Morris, of the Agricultural Department, that tin; land in question was overrun with tlr; 11 =1 to the detriment of adjoining properties, which were suffering as a resull of the rabbits from defendant's lend eating tlie crass. Defendant had been served with four notices during the past J 2 months, but had failed to tak" -1 any steps to abate the nuisance. The Department was making a determined effort to rid the, country of rabbits, and he therefore asked for an exemplary penally. Mr Mac Diarmid, f-r Keane. said thai defendant had held n Urge area of land for some years ih.-.t lltiakura, and had from time to time sold sections, bul h ? only now at Monavale and other places and was engaged most of Ids time in travelling a lout, ids affairs of this nature being handed over In his solicitors in WelI ngton to deal with. Similar notices hail he.mi received by Mr Keane in respect of other land and he usually handed them over In his solicitors for attention, and in all bul the present case Ihe mailers bad been faithfully dealt with. Unfortunately, when the notice regarding this land was sent on to his solicitor, the latter was not quite si re which block of land was referred to, and pul the notice in bis drawer v.'lh the idea of asking Mr Keane abom it when he nexl saw him. In this waxit came to be overlooked. As a matter of fact, the inspector went over the land just Ihe day previous In poison being laid and actually after instrucIvns had been givpn to do the work. A sworn affidavit was put in frurn rh -fondant's Wellington solicitor, acc pting blame for non-compliance with 111 ti order, which he had overlooked, as the land was described as in Kirikiriro.i I',-rish, of which he the solicitor had never before heard, although he had had many dealings with tins particular land. His Worship said thai quite apart from any notices receive:! from Ihe De partment, defendant should have seen that his land was clear. Neighbouring grass lands were suffering from the c'( predations of the rabbits on defendant's property. Owners must recognise their responsibility, and if their agents failed to carry out their instructions the owners should make them pay the fine*, in the last case before him lie line,| the owner £IOO, but the circumstances were somewhat different m this case, and the area was nol nearly so large. He thought the case would be met by a E 23 fine.