PAYING FOR IT.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2124, 16 April 1914, Page 6

PAYING FOR IT.

THE ROWDIES AT TOWN HALL,

MR. FISHER'S MEETING.

SEVEN NOISY ONES FINED;

In connection with the recent disturbance at tho Hon. F. M. B. Fisher's meeting at the Town Hall, nine persons were charged at tho Magistrate's Court yesterday morning, beforo Mr. W. G. Itiddell, S.M. Tho charge laid in each case was as follows: —"That on April 3, at Wellington, you did disturb a public meeting at tho Town Hall."

Tho nino persons charged were Joseph Thomas Coster, Richard Haldane, Jonu Henry Johns, James Leys, William Maim, Michael J. Noon, William Reeves, Matthew Shaw, and John Matthew Stobart.

Joseph Coster was called first. On his behalf Mr. P. W. Jackson asked for a remand till next Monday, as accused had only been served with tho summons on Good Friday, and had not had an opportunity of securing a solicitor. Tho remand was granted, as also was a remaud on the written application of Mr. E. J. Fitzgibbon, for defendant Leys. Richard Haldane was then called. Ho strolled into tho Court with his hand nonchalantly linked in the sido of his waistcoat, and with a smile on his face. In answer to tho charge ho replied that ho was not guilty of disturbing the meeting. "Would you permit me?" ho inquired of the Bench, "1 havo a few words to say-—" His Worship: You havo pleaded not guilty; you will bo hoard later. John Johns did not appear, and Mahon, Noon, Reeves, Shaw, and Stobart each entered a plea of guilty. Evidonco was then called. Mr. H, F. Von Haast's Evidence H. F. Von Haast, who had been chairman of the meeting, was tho hist witness. Ho stated that the meeting had been a very rowdy one, full of noiso and perpetual interruptions. Neither witness nor Mr. Fisher had been able to secure a hearing till. 9.45 p.m. Up to that timo there had been interruptions, calling out, and counting out. At one timo (when a crowd had burst into the hall) there was pandemonium. Mr. Fisher had had to call on the organist to play in an endeavour to drown tho noise. ' After about 9.45 tho noiso died down somewhat. Mr. Fisher was able to get in sentences now and then.

In reply to a question as to whether ho had noticed the accused Haldane, witness stated that the man had occupied a position in tho gallery. Ho had continually interrupted, and waved a newspaper, ■ and shouted in an excited way. Accused asked whether ho had been, asking questions or merely making a disturbance. •

Witness: I do not know what you wero saying, I could not hear a word that you s'aid.

Accused: I was asking questions His Worship: Havo you any other questions to ask tho witness now. Accused: No. His Worship: Call tho next witness.., A Sarcastic Person. William Alexander Thomson, land agent, corroborated the previous evidence. Haldane, he said, had taken a prominent part. Ho was leaning over tho. side of tho gallery, sarcastically asking tho crowd to "Keep order!" Witness added that ho had also noticed Haldane taking part in tho disturbance at St. Peter's Hall on tho occasion of J*r. Fisher's previous meeting. Accused then questioned tho witness. "Did you hear md say 'Give Mr. Fisher a hearing?' he asked.

Witness: Yes, in a sarcastic way. Accused: Did I try and hide myself in the crowd. Didn't I make myself prominent? " •

Witness:.. Yes; you were leading the crowd at the back. Obsequious Bows to ifio Stage, Andrew Fleming Laughlan, clerk, stated in the evidence that Haidano had taken the most prominent part in the meeting noxt to that taken by Mr. Fisher and the chairman.

Accused: "What did you hear mo say ? Witness: I did not hear you say anything. There was too much "noise. You were up in the gallery sarcastically asking the crowd to keep quiet, snd bowing obsequiously to the stage to obtain laughter and ridicule from those present.

Sergeant Kelly also stated that accused had taken a prominent part in the meeting, behaving in the sarcastic manner mentioned.

Accused: What do you call in a sarcastic manner?

His Worship (to witness): You need notexplain that. Defendant, do you wisß>to give evidence yourself?

Tho answer was in the negative. Evidence was then given by Constable Dunn as to the ejection of accused Johns from tho hall. * The Fines, The Magistrate said that there was some difference in the various cases. Five admitted tho charge, defendant Johns had not appeared, whilo defendant Haidano had pleaded not guiltv. The latter had failed to give any evidence to support his plea, and would ho convicted and fined £3, with costs 95., tho alternative being fourteen davs' imprisonment. Defendant Johns would be fined 505., while the five others who had pleaded guilty would each be fined 405., with costs_7s., tho option Being seven days' imprisonment.