The House then divided on the motion.
DOOLEY supported the motion, reserving to himself the right in committee
to ask certain questions on the subject.
LYNE, in reply, said: "It had been asked during the discussion whether
this animal killed sheep. He could assure the House that it did,
and kangaroo as well, and if the colony wished to keep its sheep and kangaroo
it would have to get rid of the tigers. His reason for advocating
a society was that the members would act as a check upon one another, and
see that the dead animals were produced before the fees were paid.
If the land was not occupied the revenue would fall off, and a good portion
of the land was not fit for anything but pastoral purposes. It was
a selfish view to take of the question that some did not suffer, as they
ought not to legislate on class principles. If, the country was fostered
the town would be fostered, and the whole country would be fostered.
It was, therefore, narrow-mindedness to try and prevent the prosperity
of the country. The revenue was bound to suffer unless these brutes
Brown, Burgess, Dooley, Falkiner, Hartnoll,
Hawkes, Lucas, Lyne, Mugliston (teller) and Pillinger.
Barrett (teller), Bird, Conway, Crisp,
Dumaresq, Fenton, Fitzgerald, Hart, Mackenzie and Young.
Photos sourced from: Parliament
of Tasmania Members Biographical Database, Tasmanian Parliamentary Library.
The votes being equal,
the SPEAKER said:
would best fulfil his duty by voting with the Ayes, according to the usual
custom, so that the question might be further considered".
In the published minutes
of the House of Assembly recorded in the Launceston Examiner of the 8th
October 1886 (p. 3), under the heading "Native Tigers", Lyne makes
further comment on the proposed structure of the bounty scheme:
"Mr. Lyne moved that
an address be presented to the Governor praying that he will recommend
the appropriation of a sum of £500 for the destruction of tigers,
otherwise known as the Tasmanian dingoes. He said he had been connected
with a society for the destruction of tigers for some time, and that society
had paid £3 per head for 15 tigers. He suggested that the Government
pay a moiety of the amount paid by societies, because it would have a much
better effect than by paying individual persons for killing them.
He had had as many as 14 sheep killed by these animals in one week on land
rented from the Crown".
The Mercury of the 14th
October 1886 (p. 2), under the heading "The Native Tiger" notes:
is at present being manifested by sheep owners in the Avoca and St. Paul's
River districts as to the probable fate of Mr. Lyne's motion that a sum
of £500 be appropriated as a subsidy towards the destruction of the
native tiger. It is earnestly hoped that when the motion comes on
for discussion today hon. members will give it favourable consideration,
and vote the amount, as the ravages committed by these animals in the past
have been such as to entail considerable loss to many sheep owners, especially
those with small holdings. Already several lots of Crown lands have
been thrown up in these districts through the great destruction of sheep
by dingoes, and it is asserted many more will have to be relinquished shortly,
unless some assistance is given by the Government, as the expense of extermination
is far too great to be borne by sheep owners alone."