TOLD THE MAGISTRATE

Hokitika Guardian, 5 September 1927, Page 4

TOLD THE MAGISTRATE

LONDON, July 11. 31 any plays 1 bare seen in several countries and often enjoyed the thrill of a. perfect “curiam” that, falling on a masterly situation, swiftly and dramatically discloses tho secret of an artistically sustained plot. But no play I have ever seen provided the thrill anil the unexpected that I experienced at West London Police Court yesterday. J; will endeavour to convey that same tin ill of surprise to readers in words, leaving imagination to make up for lack of scenery and effects. It is a one-act play. The .scene is laid in London’s shyest court, with the most reserved magistrate on the Bench—the only court in London where applications for advice and summonses are Hc-ld in camera—with about 40 or 50 women listening eagerly to tho secret revelations of fellow-sufferers,

Standing at attention in the dock is Private James AVlmbledon, of Hie K.0.5i.8., on leave from Aldershot. Ho is charged with doing grievous bodily harm to George Wright, a very young husband who lived next door to the homo of tho soldier’s mother in Warrington street. Netting Kill. * * » * * On. Saturday nigTit die Wrights were having a party, hut it must he known that earlier in the day Airs Wright had pointed out to her husband the Scoltisii private, who had changed out of his uniform into a blue serge suit. That is a- point to remember, because about midnight, when the parry was breaking up, the sweetheart of Airs Wright’s sister went down to tho passage to kiss her “Good night,” when suddenly there

was heard a terrified scream, and members of the party, dashing down tho stairs, found the sweetheart lying bleeding and unconscious in the passage.

Then things began to happen. George Wright, the young husband, was first outside the door, and he swore that no sooner had lie got his head outside than Private Wimbledon made three lunges at him with a poker. Two lie dodged, but the third got him on the temple and he was knocked down unconscious, and later a doctor put two stitches in the wound. He identified Private Wimbledon positively by the face that fate had given him and the blue sn it be wore. Mrs Wright also emphatically swore that tho soldier in mufti was the man who hit her husband ; and a young man friend of the family was even more convinced flint Private V< imbledon had swung the poker in his left hand.

The soldier, whose altitude in the dock would have earned the admiration of his sergeant-major, quietly but resolutely denied that he was present when husband George was hit with the poker. Vie declared on oath that his mother and father being out. be spent tiic evening with his I ncle James and Aunt Emily. who lived several doors away.

The evidence of the constable called to the scene by husband Y\ right went strongly against the soldier, whoso defence under the cross-exam-ination of tho magistrate seemed to go to pieces except that he stood stolidly by bis story. The court seemed t- 'be satisfied that Private Wimbledon was “for it.” Faced with overwhelming evidence, all that seomto await him was the sentence.

Then came, into the witness box from outside the court his younger brother Charles, dressed in a navy blue suit. ‘•What do you know about this;” inquired the magistrate. “Well,” answered Charles casually, “just after midnight tho people next door were having a party. 1 here had been a previous row. and when they came out they made for me. so I took the belt from the door and hi! two ol them in self-defence. T was lhe mail who did it.” “You are discharged,” said the magistrate. addressing Private M ini' Tdon. “and the police will take the necessary steps in regard to your brother.” ] submit that here was a. perfect “curtain,” containing a more dramatic element of surprise than can be seen in any play now being staged at a London theatre. Xnw. about Mr Marshall's insistence that all applications to the Bench shall bo bold in camera. He is the

only magistrate in tho Metropolitan area who adheres to that strict rule, although Mr Mead, that grand veteran of tho Bench, who is now approaching bis 80th year of youth, lias shied at Marlborough street against any disclosures being made except in court.

Mr Marshall yesterday very courteously informed me that lie strongly objected to any report being made of the applications. I bowed to the wish of the Bench, but I could not refrain from smiling at the crowded courtpeopled with neighbours of the applicant. Where was the secrecy? Every application made would immediately have a local publicity.

Only in Cardiff, so far as 1 have seen, is the principle of'confidential application properly observed. There nobody is allowed in court except the applicants, who enter like penitents in a confessional, one by one. I respectively submit that tne “hush-hush” system of the West London Police Court is more of a pose that a principle, especially as Mr Ratcliffo Cousins, Mr Marshall’s colleague, falls into ’line with the other Metropolitan magistrates.