ALLEGED OBSTRUCTION.

Press, Volume XLIX, Issue 14840, 4 December 1913, Page 8

ALLEGED OBSTRUCTION.

CASE AGAINST "PROFESSOR" MILLS DISMISSED. At the Magistrate's Court yesterday, before Messrs W. Tanner, and W. H. Cooper, J.P's, Walter Thomas Mills, was charged with, on November 26th, holding a meeting on the Sumner esplanade, so as to impede persons passing. Mr Spratt, appeared for the defendant, who pleaded "not guilty." Constable Hampton said that the "Professor" had addressed a meeting on the esplanade footpath from a motorcar. A big crowd collected, and impeded traffic. When asked to do so, the car , moved on. To Mr Spratt: The car was on the footpath, and there was a notice-board at each end to indicate that it was a footpath. There was, however, no kerbing or channelling. The car was quite close to one of the notice-boards. There were nearly 200 people present, and the esplanade was nearly 200 yards wide at that point. He did not know of any one individual who was inpeded. People could only pass by going over the road. Witness spoke to the driver of the car, which moved on immediately. Vehicles had a right on the esplanade. Wm. Hy Phipps Black, broker, residing at Sumner, deposed that* he beard Mr Mills addressing he meeting. The motor-car was standing across the pathway of the esplanade. If the by-laws were good, the traffic was impeded. To Mr Spratt: He did not know of anyone who attempted to pass, and was obstructed by tho gathering. George Brewer, another Sumner resident, gare similar evidence. He considered traffic on the footpath had been impeded. His estimate of the crowd was one hundred. ' To Mr Spratt: The car was.half-way across the footpath, on the other side of which were the baths. If no one else was there, witness could havo got pas* all right without leaving the footpath. There was no division between the footpath and the road, but seats and trees, as well as notice-boards, showed where the footpath and road were. The defence was that the evidence failed to sustain the charge. All the witnesses said the car was not on the esplanade, but Mr Mills was charged with impeding traffic on the esplanade. The other defenco was that if Mr Mills was on the esplanade, tho meeting was not so held as to imoede persons passing.

The defendant, Walter Thomas Mills, said that the meetinc: had been advertised to have been held in the Band Rotunda, but a high wind prevented this. He had suggested holding the meeting where they did, because the baths would act as a break-wind. When informed that the meeting-place was forbidden ground, he told his audience that he understood they were not allowed to speak in that place, and he had no desire to break the law. There was, lie contended, a passage-way between the car and the baths, and several people passed through that space. Peoole could also pass on the other side of the car.

To Senior-Sergeant Mathieson: There was no traffic there to impede? and if there had been it would not have been

impeded by my being there. (LaughHenry Larriman, owner and driver of the car, corroborated the "Professor's" evidence. •"__■- The" case was dismissed.