A LOW CAD

Hokitika Guardian, 3 November 1917, Page 2

A LOW CAD

MAGISTRATE’S CASTIGATION - OF REV. HOWA RD ELLIOTT. [PKR PRESS ASSOCIATION. —COPYRIGHT.] AUCKLAND, Nov.. 2. The charges against Charles Christopher Clement and Herbert-'Eugene McEntep, of assaulting flu* Rev. Howard Elliott, on October loth, were heard by Air. F. V. Fraser, S.M., in the Police Court to-day. \ The information was laid by Mr. Elliott, for whom Mr. Ostler appeared. *

' Counsel said it wo s significant that the assault was committed when Elliott was leaving hi= bouse to speak at a meeting of the Protestant Political Association. He denied that Elliott pub lished any statement reflecting on the relatives of Clements, the matter being contained in a letter written by and addressed to Elliott himself to test >the censorship. The contents were first revealed by counsel at the postal enquiry. The truth of the matter was that the assault .was an attempt to prevent the right of free speech. While evidence was being given Elliott left the Court, and shortly wards Air. Ostler said his case was concluded.

Air. J. R. 'Reed, who appeared for the accused, remarked: “Elliott has funked it and slunk out of Court. It is cowardly to avoid going into the box, and is in accordance with his actions in attacking a dead woman.” The action made it clear that he would not substantiate the' grossly untrue statement he had made. r The charge against McEntee was dismissed, the Magistrate ruling that there was no evidence against him. Air. Fraser ruled, that in the absence of Elliott, he must presume that he made the statement attributed to him. In giving judgment. Air. Fra'ser said that he was absolutely satisfied that the statements regarding the chastity of the sister of Clements were absolutely untrue. “I can only' say that, speaking as a man, T thirl.- Elliott in making that statement in public'behaved like a low cad. and spenkiricr n R a man again, T am satisfied that lie deserved all be got. t and a good deal more.” He expressed regret that if* was necessary to enter a conviction against Clements; but no other penalty would he inflicted.

Mr. Ostler’s application for costs was refused.