protected at all, even if ] T inch were to be on the other three sides. A great many people were in the same 

 position, and it would be very unfair for those who had to erect fences, if they were subject to rabbits 

 coming in on one of their boundaries. 



The CHAIRMAN pointed out if this amendment were carried he thought it would be necessary to 

 do something with the 42 inches again, because it would read IT inch for a foot from the ground, and 

 then Mr. Varcoe said that 1 , inch was quite sufficient above that. 



Mr. LESLIE (Forbes) said that he could not accept If inch, but would accept 1-J- inch. That would 

 make a good fence, and decrease the cost, but he could not accept l.f inch. 



Mr. VARCOE (Hillstou) said there would be 6 inches in the ground and 1 foot above the ground of 

 IT inch, and above that a larger mesh. 



Mr. ATKINSON pointed out that there was an injunction out, that only one firm should make this 

 combination mesh. It would be wrong to pass this resolution in view of that fact. 



Mr. DA VIES (Gunnedah) thought that people who had large quantities of fencing already put up 

 should be allowed to run a foot of 1 inch niesh along the bottom, instead of putting up a fresh fence. 



Mr. NIXON (Gunbar) said it was well-known that many fences were not rabbit-proof, and they 

 should have a fence that would be rabbit-proof, if they were to define anything at all. He had seen the 

 combination mesh, and that could be supplied at the 42 inches for less than the IT inch was supplied at 

 30 inches. 



Mr. CUMMINO (Hillston) thought it would be more effective if they left them to choose with 

 the two. 



Mr. LESLIE (Forbes) moved that the mesh be 1| inch for the whole way. Ho thought it was 

 going to extremes to make it 1} inch the whole way. They might as well put up a galvanized iron 

 fence. One and a half inches was a practical fence. 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) seconded Mr. Leslie's proposition. 



Mr. BRETT (tlrana) thought that the lower 18 inches from the ground should be IT inch. He 

 knew very well that 1^-inch mesh was simply useless to keep rabbits in. He had seen them go through 

 it in large numbers. He knew a man with IJ-inch mesh, who, since putting it up, had had to erect 

 several miles of IJ-inch netting to prevent the rabbits getting through. 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) then suggested that a separate vote be taken for H-inch mesh for the 

 lower 18 inches of the netting, and then a separate vote about what the mesh for the rest of the width 

 should be. 



The CHAIRMAN then put the question as to whether IT inch should be the mesh for the lower 

 18 inches of the netting, and it was carried. 



The question of IT inch for the rest of the width was put and lost. 



The question of 1 j inch for the whole width was put and lost. 



Mr. LESLIE (Forbes) then moved, " That the balance of 2 feet above the lower 18 inches should 

 be a maximum mesh of not more than 1 inch." 



Mr. BRETT (Tirana) seconded the motion. 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) moved as an amendment, " That it be If-in." 



Mr. LAURENCE (Balranald) seconded Mr. Alison's amendment. 



The CHAIRMAN then put Mr. Alison's amendment, and it was carried. 



The CHAIEMAN then said that he thought it would be better to put these two resolutions in one, 

 and say that the lower 18 inches shall be H-inch mesh, and the other 2 feet shall be lf-inch inesh. 



The question, on being put to the meeting, was carried. 



Mr. LAURENCE (Balranald) proposed, ' : That in line 35 the word ' seventeen ' should be changed to 

 ' eighteen.' " 



Mr. LITTLE (Bullock Creek) seconded this motion. 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) said that he had some No. 19 in use, and it had lasted for ten years very 

 well indeed. 



Mr. LAURENCE'S (Balranald) motion was then put to the meeting and carried. 



Mr. DAVIDSON (Condobolin) then proposed, " That subsection (c) be struck out from this clause." 



The amendment lapsed for the want of a seconder. 



Mr. WILKES (Broken Hill) moved, " That in line 11 of page 14, clause 33, the words ' Court of 

 Petty Sessions ' be inserted instead of ' Local Land Board.' " 



Mr. OAKDEN (Cobar) seconded the amendment. 



The CHAIBMAN put the question to the Conference, and it was carried. 



Clause 33, as amended, was put to the meeting and sarried. 



Clause 34. 



" Boundary " and " adjoining." 



34. For the purposes of this Part 

 (a) a rabbit-proof fence shall be taken to be on the boundary of any holding or laud if it 



follows the line which is the actual, reputed, or accepted boundary thereof, or any lino 



which in the opinion of the Local Laud Board is sufficiently approximate to such 



boundary ; and 

 (V) the intervention of a road or watercourse (not being a permanent river) shall not 



prevent holdings or lands being taken to be adjoining. 



Mr. WILKES (Broken Hill) proposed, " That in line 22, the words ' Pastures and Stock Board ' 

 be inserted instead of ' Local Laud Board '." 



Mr. OAKDEN (Cobar) seconded the amendment. 



Mr. LESLIE (Forbes) said he had an amendment before that. In subsection (), after the words 

 " boundary thereof " he wished to insert " or, where boundaries are inaccessible or unfenceable, as near as 

 possible to the boundaries thereof, having due regard to the natural formation of the country." He said 

 that if they asked for these powers, the Lo;al Laud Board would be the only Board which could determine 

 matters of this sort ; and before striking that out they should know whether it would be necessary for this 

 amendment of his to be carried out or not, 



Mr. 



