RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, AHAURA.

Grey River Argus, Volume XII, Issue 1319, 21 October 1872, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, AHAURA.

Tuesday, October 15. (Before C. Whitefoord, Esq., R.M.) OFFICIAL ENQUIRY. Pinkerton v. Ollivier. — This was a charge brought by J. D. Pinkerton of Ahaura, against T. M. Ollivier, a constable of the Nelson South- We3t Gold Fields, for being drunk and neglecting his duty. Mr Guinness for complainant ; Mr Staite for defendant. Mr Guinness said that the charges were that the defendant, who i 3 a constable of Police, wa3 drunk at complainant's Hotel on the 2nd instant, and refused to take a disorderly person into custody, contrary to the provisions of the Constabulary Ordinance and the Regulations made under it. He called John Drunnnond Pinkerton, who said : On the 2nd instant I was in my parlor with several ladies and gentlemen. Defendant was present. A man called him out. This person was under the influence of drink, ani his dres3 was in an improper state. I went into the bar and called the constable's attention to the man's dress. He called for somo brandy and gingerbeer. I told him I had no gingerbeer. He said, " Sling up the ■ b y water." I told him to be civil. He then oalled mo a " big-headed b r." Ollivier then walked into the parlor. The door of the parlor was ajar, bo I looked in and called to Ollivier to come and take the man into custody, but he would not move, and sat with a half drunken smile on his face and said nothing. I told someone, to call for Sergeant Goodall, and told the man he should not insult me with impunity. By the Bench : I do not remember who I told to call the Sergeant. Examination continued : Ollivier then came out. I had taken off my coat andwaistcoat for two reasons — fear of injuring something I had in it, arid that I might possibly have to defend myself. 1 again asked Ollivier to take the man in charge, but he declined. I did not strike the man. I was never near him after I took x my coat off. I returned to the parlor, and saw Ollivier sitting down. I consider he was drunk. He could walk and talk, but 1 have not sold liquor for 22 years without knowing when a man is drunk or sober. Cross-examined by Mr Staite : Ollivier boarded at my house. It was because he did not arrest the man that I brought this charge. I never asked Sergeant Goodall to arrest a man when he refused. I did ask him to keep his eye on a man. I was not aware the defendant had laid any charges against me when I complained of him. Ollivier was intoxicated, maudlin drunk. There were several people in the parlor, and 1 am sure Ollivier could have heard all that passed at the bar, the door being ajar. He came out as soon as ] called for Sergeant Goodall. He lied when he said he prevented me from fighting the man, for he did no such thing. By theßench : I gave the man in charge, and was responsible for his arrest. I don't know whether Ollivier understood me. He looked at me with an imbecile grin. He was not in uniform. Mrs Wick soid : I was in the parlor on the evening of the 2nd instant, and I saw Ollivier there. I think he was in uniform. Heard Pinkerton call to Ollivier to arrest a man. He did not move or say a word. The man was drunk, and his conduct was indecent. I believe Ollivier was not sober. Did not hear Goodall's name mentioned. Cross-examined : I formed my opinion of Ollivier's state from his voice, and when he got up he had some difficulty in rising from his chair. He could not . walk steadily. I am complainant's sister-in-law. H. Wick said : He came up to the hotel when the row was going on, and saw Pinkerton on the verandah. A miner was in the house and abusing Pinkerton. Ollivier came and told Pinkerton he would arrest him. Pinkerton had his coat off. I don't think Ollivier was sober. Dr Phillipps said : I was in the parlor when the row took place. Pinkerton came in, and asked Ollivier to arrest a man who was insulting him. Ollivier went out, and heard some high words. Ollivier was not in uniform. Cross-examined : Ollivier was not drunk. He appeared capable of performing his duty. By the Bench : I was in Ollivier's company about a quarter of an hour. I think he was sober, and fit for duty. Several other witnesses deposed to the ' same effect, and for the defence Mr Staite i called a number of witnesses who all ; affirmed that the constable wa3 sober. < Sergeant Goodall explained that the con- ' stable had the option of arresting a person 1 under the circumstance, and that his not < doing so was no breach of the Police Re- ] gulations. He could have done it had he ] deemed it advisable. He saw the con- 1 | Btable, who had been on leave that day, i at about 7 o'clock, and he was then sober. j

Saw him again in the street, at about 10 p.m. He walked steadily, and appeared sober. _ He reported the disturbance the following morning, and laid informations ! against Pinkerton and the other man. Judgment was reserved till the next day. On Wednesday, the Bench gave the following judgment :— The evidence of the constable being drunk was so conflicting that the Bench felt it must dismiss the charge. As to the second charge, the Rules of the Police Force certainly were so wide as to allow the matter to be one of those cases in which it wa3 left to the discretion of the constable whether to arrest or not, and though the Bench might think the conduct of the constable Btupid and most indiscreet, still it could not convict in this instance of a breach of the Rules, and must dismiss the information. Mr Staite applied for costs. The Magistrate said he certainly would not allow costs. The case was one iv which the conduct of Jhe constable was such as to bring his office into contempt, and though not one which would warrant a penalty for breach of the Rules, waa not creditable.