FURTHER TRIALS.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1917, 27 November 1913, Page 9

FURTHER TRIALS.

CHARGE OF FIRING AT SPECIALS. FINGH CASE RE-HEARD. HIS CONVICTION HE-AI'TIRMED. Six strike cases were called at tho. Magistrate's Court yesterday.. Mr. "W. G. Kiddcll, S.M., presided. Edward Colclougb, a short man witli ruddv hair, was charged with having discharged a revolver at a mounted constable on October 30. He was.also charged with having taken part in a riot near'the junction of Customhouse Quay and Jcrvois Quay on the same date. Mr. V. J. O'llcgan appeared for accused, and Chief Detcctivo iiroberg prosecuted. Frederick George Alfred Cray, insurance manager, was the first witness. Ho stated that about 5.30 p.m. on October 30 ho was standing outsido tho Queen's Chambers, near tho wharf gates. A crowd had been attacked by tho mounted special constables. ColcloiHi was standing about twelvo paces from him, and ho saw accused placo a smoking revolver in his pocket and run. "Witness followed Colclougb, who ran up Customhouse Quay, round tho A.M.P. comer into Hunter Street, and then stood talking excitedly to a man who looked like a worker, and placing his hand upon his side-pocket. Theso two afterwards went into Barrett's Hotel. In his flight Colclougb caught up a bicycle, but as tho crowd blocked him ho abandoned! tho machine. Subsequently witness identified the accusedamong a number of others at tho Police Station. Ha could not say in which direction the revolver pointed. Mr. O'Rcgan: Did you bear reports of any shots? "Witness: I heard one shot. You heard moro than one —didn't your'—-"No; I heard detonators explode." . How can you say which were detonators and which levolvers?—"You can easily tell tho difference."

How? —"Tho detonators were thrown at tho ground, with the object of exploding them among the horses' feet, and tho revolver was fired from tho air." How can you toll tho sound or one from tho other?—" You can easily tell. Ono has a sharper sound than tho other." Are you a special tonstable? —"I am not." Constable John O'Donoghuo, , from Palniorston North, deposed that he saw Colelough fire one, perhaps two, ro•volver shots in the direction of 'tho Harbour Board sheds when tho mounted men were passing between him and tho building, and then put the. weapon into his hip pocket and rush into the crowd. Frank Morris, a packer, stated that ho was standing behind Colelough, who pulled a "shooter" out of. his pocket and lire into tho body of horsemen who were passing by. Colelough iircd so quickly tlia't witness could not say whether ho fired two shots or one, but he heard accused remark, as ho fired: "This will catch some of tlio ." Accused did not want to see if lie had done any damage. Ho'' 'immediately rushed into the crowd. Shortly after this the mounted men charged tlin mob. Witness knew Colelough well by sight. ■<■■■' .',«'!" '" Peter Franklin Hodge 1 , a Harbour Board clerk, who was present when tho mounted specials marched past the Post Office' Square, stated that a man standing by the tram track, (ircd a shot from a revolver which was pointed in tin; direction of the horsemen. The man then dived into the crowd, and ran in tho direction of tlio Pier Hotel. Ho believed that Colelough was the man, and ho was sure that tlto_ shootist took aim before pulling the trigger. George Jackmau, another Harbour Hoard storemauV said that ho was inside tho wharf gates when someone fired a revolver shot in the direction of the mounted men. Ho heard two reports just btforo he saw the man fire. Colelough was very like tlio man who bad fired, but ho was not prepared to swear positively on the point of identity.

Matthew fl. Tolhurst. :: watersido ■worker who is at present on strike and has been doing picket duty, stated that Colclongh was a inato of his, and that ho had seen the accused with a revolver in his room. He added that ho and accused cycled to the Post Ofi'ico Squaro on the afternoon' of October 30. Detective Mason deposed that he arrested Colclongh on November 15, and accused (in* reply to a question) said: "I havo no revolver, and never did have one." Detective-Sergeant Rawle corroborated the evidence of Detective Mason. Colclongh pleaded not guilty to each charge, and was committed to tho Supremo Court for trial.

INTOLERABLE WORD. 'THE SECOND TKIAL OF FINCH. Charles' Finch, a waterside worker, who was sentenced to one month's imprisonment on November 14 for assaulting a special constable (Robert Terence Wellwood), and who was further fined £o (in default one. month's imprisonment) for using the word; "scab," was granted a rehearing. His case bad oris'lnafiy' been heard by Mr._ AV. G. liTTldell, S.M., but the rehearing was taken yesterday before Mr. J. S. Evans, S.M. 'Mr. P.'S. K. Macasscy, of the Crown Law Office, prosecuted, and Mr. J. [''. W. DielcTon appeared for Finch. Mr. Macasscy Stated thattho facts- of the caw wcro short and simnle. Ho had only two witnesses to call.

The Insult and After. Robert Terence Wellwood, special constable, stated that about C o'clock on the oveiiing of November 13 he was going up Cuba Street in a tramcar in, company with Special Constable Wilson. Tlisv were then on their way homo to tho'barracks. As the car was proceeding along the street, Finch called out: "There's a coupe of dirty scabs." There were two other men with Finch. Witness and Wilson got out at the next stopping-place and went back to where thr-sis nien were standing. To Mr. Macasscy: There was not tho slightest doubt that the words were used hv Finch to witness and Wilson, ft would not be correct if it were stated that ono of Finch's party had said to one of the tram men: "Aro we dirty scabs?"

Continuing his evidence, witness stated that he and liis follow "special found accused and. the other two men together, and witness asked: "Are you the men who called us dirty —— scabs"? No veplv was made, but witness received a blow on the face from Finch. He at onco knocked Finch down. On rising Finch began to walk oil' at a fast pace, but witness followed and handed him over to a member of the regular police. To Air. Dickson: When Finch called out. witness and his comrade agreed to go back, but ho could not say what were the exact words (hat passed between them. It was certainly not witness's original intention' In strike Finch,, but'he did intend to arrest him. Mi-. Dickson: This isn't I ho first lime you've been in Court? Witness: Yes. Air. Dickson: It is?—" Acs."' Air. Dickson: You never t'o! :i man arrested for using insulting language?— "So." Air. Dickson: Do you know a man mimed Jones?—" No."

Mr. Dickson asked His Worship .in take particular notice of these replies in view of subsequent proceedings. Witness ajiiiin repealed that this c.-isp marked the fust occasion on which he had heen in tho witness-box. lie also denied calling Kinch and his companions liv a certain name or using oilier objectionable, terms. , It was true that both witness and Wilson had carried revolvers that day.

Retort to Solicitor. Special Constable Wilson gave corroborative evidence. .During cross-examination by Mr. Dickson, passages at arms arose sovcrnl times between witness and the solicitor. . "Just answer my question, said -Mr. Dickson at one stajte. "Von put such silly ones/' retorted the witness. Tho magistrate: Don't got into a discussion. Let us get on with the case. .In answer to questions, witness stated bo had- previously been concerned, in a case against a man named Jones; Ho did not think, however, that Welhvood had bad anything' to do with that case. Mr. Macusscv: That explains it. "Witness further stated that, when ho and "Wellwood went back to tho three men, he (witness) had bad to engage m a u>lit with Finch's two companions. Ono'of them, an old man, was under the influence of liquor.

What the Other Side swora. Mr. Dickson explained that tho defence would be ono of mistaken identity. Finch had an excellent discharge from the Navy and was such a good worker that he received '2s. a day more than ordinary hands employed in tho same class of work. Charles Finch, the accused, said that, on tho.dav mentioned in the charge, he was walking up Cuba Street 'in company with two other men, Liuder and Doriiig. When near the corner of Dixon Street ho beard some one behind call out some words, but could not say what they were, and could not sco who it was. Ho then walked on, and had got as far as Sband's, the bookseller's, when a hand was laid on his shoulder Something was said, but ho could not hear what it was, though ho heard Boring reply:' "No.'' "Witness then received a blow on "the face, staggered out into the road and fell. Ho got up and was walking away when ho was arrested. Ho was quite certain that ho liad never used the -words complained of.

To Mr. Macassey: He had no means of knowing th'it AA'cllwood and Finch were special constables. Ho saw them getting into the tram near the Uoyal Oak corner, but there was nothing about them to indicate that they were special constables. They had overcoats on and ho did not notico that they wore riding breeches. Their coats were nearly down to their boots. Tho Magistrate: AA'hat matlo you notice two men gcUing into a tram-car.? Finch: I was a't tho corner whero they got in. Tho Magistrate: Yes; but what mado you notico two men get into a car? Do you always take notice of pcoplo getting into a tram-car? Finch replied that ho was so closo that ho could not help noticing theso two men as they got in. In answer to further questions, Finch stated that he did not know what evidence was going to be given by Liuder and Doring. Tie only know of what was to be said by one of the independent witnesses. Thomas Pollock, a watcrsido worker on strike, gave evidence as to 'hearing a man—not tho accused—call out the words, "Are wo Scabs?" The. words were called oiit at the corner of Dixon .Street and Cuba Street, and...w.erc.. apparently directed to the. inotonijan of the passing 'tramcar. Henry Joseph Kichards, a labourer, who. was standing at tho corner of Dixon and Cuba! Streets on tho date in question,.deposed to being in company with Pollock when tho words "Are wo scabs?" were used. The words, were called out by Linder, not by Finch. Frederick Kolands, employed at Crabtree's Foundry, declared that he was walking up Cuba Street on the evening of November 13 when he heard a voice say "Hero como tho now." Ho looked up and saw two special /constables. Ono of tho latter then said: "Are you tho dirty that called us scabs?" AVellwood then hit Finch and knocked him down. AVlicn Finch was walking away, AVellwood place 1 his hand on his hip pocket and said, "I'll settle you now." Finch was then handed over.to a policeman. Witness considered that tho special con.'.tables were under tho inilucuco of liquor.

To Mr.SUa'jassey: Ho diri not see tho start of tho affair. He could not explain why Finch had not heard the last words used by Wellwood, when tho latter placed his hand oh his lup pocket. Nor could ho say why Wellwood and Wilson had como back to meet Finch and' his companion. Francis William Lindcr, a seaman, who was in company with Finch, (tho .accused) and Doring (witness's father-in-law) on tlio night of the arrest, stated that when near the corner of Dixon Street and Cuba Street ho (witness) called out to a niotorman on a passing tramcar, "Aro we scabs?" Finch never called out at all, and when the special constables came up to them later on Finch was not tho aggressor. To Mr. Macasscy: Doring was slightly intoxicated at the time, and tho special constables, in the opinion of the witness, wore also, intoxicated The witness explained that his saying: "Are. we s-jabs?" had some, reference to the fact that the seamen were ready to strike at the time of the train strike, and also to a meeting that was to be held on Newtown Park on the night of November 13. This closed the evidence.

Magistrate (Affirms tho Conviction. Tho magistrate held that so far as the charge of using insulting language was concerned there was nothing in tlio evidence of the defence to negative tlio prosecution, ft might have been true that Lindcr called out, but that did not say that Finch did not use the -words attributed to him. To acquit the aroused,.he would.have had to find, that b;>th the special constable committed perjury, and more than that, that they .conspired to commit perjury to send finch ti> gaol. The conviction would havo to bo affirmed. Similarly, his Worship did not. think 'that the fresh evidence would warrant Ihim ricqui thing. Finch on tho charge of assault. The conviction there would also be affirmed. The question then arose as to whether Finch should be sentenced again or sent back to gaol to complete his present term (he was then on bail). After some discussion, the matter was adjourned until Monday, when counsel may quote any authorities in point. In the meantime, Finch is liberated on tho same bail as previously. Air. Dickson mentioned the, probability of an appeal.

THE OTHER TRIALS. AIAtT AND Tllrt 11AMUUV OF MUCKS. Geo.rge Draper was charged with having encouraged divers persons to assault special constables on November " tho (lav of the riot in Fealherslon Street, An'. F. Iloldswoilh appeared as Draper's counsel. Wi'liam John Gray, merchant, slated that from his olliee in lioutb's Uuildin»s In' saw Draper, who worked in .Messrs. Al'l.ood, Weir, and llopkirk's iimber yard, wheel out a load of bricks and stones to men who wore standing on some stacks of timber as the special men were riding by. Other men pass; rd the, missiles up to those on the timber. , John Reginald Gray, a sou ol the previous witness, corroborated this evidence.

Paul llaxler lOasthani. importer, stated that, he saw a man whirling out bricks and oilier material. The Magistrate: Did he raise any objection to I lie men taking the things our of the barrow 'i Witness: No, he did nol appear In. He simply put the barrow down and stood by while the rioters helped llieniWiliiam llnpkirk, of Messrs. M'l-eml, Weir and Dunkirk, j;:ive evidence to the oll'oet that on the day in question if was no part of Draper's duty to wheel bricks, but that there were some bricks handy to the. cninno room. A number of the crowd rushed witness's premises that day andgot on lo Hie timber stacks. Hi, saw missiles com'inw from the direction of tlie stacks. After the riot he had the yard cleared of brick::, stones and bottles. About ibe time of the riot, however, two piles of bricks had been removed from nlnrcn in the yard where he had previously seen them. Detective-Sergeant M'llveney' stated that when he arrested Draper the latter remarked: "[ did not take auv part in the riot." At this staro the case was adjourned till to-day. Another charrr- is to bo preferred against Draper. " He will bo charged with takinc part in the Fcatherston Street riot on November u.

Female Stone Thrower. The case ol ! Agnes Udall, charged with having taken part in tho Foalherston Street riot of November 5r was called. Aroused did not appear, and Mr. P. J. O'ltcgan, who represented her, said tliat she was still in the hospital in a very bud way, and was not likely to recover while tho charge was banging over her. If she were brought to Court again there would only ho another outbreak of hysteria. In tho circumstances the police had agreed to a reduction of tho charge to one of the use of threatenin.!; behaviour. Inspector Hendrey stated that tho woman was prominent among tho rioters and stone-throwers in Foathcrston Street. A police constable admonished and removed her, but she returned to tho fray aJid was arrested. Sirce the proceedings had been, commenced she had been in a state of hysteria, and he, liko Mr. O'JUVgan, feared the consequence of persisting in the prosecution. Tho Magistrate reduced the charge, and tho defendant was.fined £1. The alteration of the charge dispensed with ~tbo necessity of tho accused's attendance in Court.

Barrett's Hotel Case. Max "Wolfe was charged with having on November 17 assaulted a special constable named Joseph Kilcollcy'(at Barrett's Hotel), so as to cause iiiin bodily harm. "Wolfe was, also, charged with having used obscene language in Lambton Quay on tho same occasion. The defendant was remanded till December 3. Fcathaiston street Riot. Participation in • the Fcatliersto.il Street riot—the affair of November a —was alleged against Arthur Houkinsnn. Accused was remanded till December 3. Bail (£80) was allowed. To Appear for Sentence. Two men—Archibald Campbell and William Uenrv Lawton—will appear before the Chief (Sir Pobcrt Stout) in tho Supreme Court at 10-30 a.m. on Saturday, to be sentenced on charges of taking part in a riot.