‘BAITERS’ DISPUTE

Hokitika Guardian, 17 November 1932, Page 6

‘BAITERS’ DISPUTE

trouble in mahinapua CREEK

ALLEGATION'S AND DENIAL

Adjourned from last court day, a charge -of assault was preferred in the Magistrate’s Court to-day against William Uriah Holley by Frederick Howard who also sought to have defendant bound over to keep the peace. 'Plaintiff was represented by Mr J. Murdoch, while Mr T. F. Brosnan appeared for defendant, the case being heard before Mr W. Meldrurp, S.M.

The evidence for the plaintiff given in the court a iortnight ago, alleged that Holley had,,thrown stones at him as he, the plaintiff, went about his duties as a whitebaiter in Mahinapua Creek. Further, that defendant had threatened him and used insulting -and obscene language to plaintiff. Mr Brosnan explained why he was unable to attend last court day, ana asked that the evidence be taken again, land that all witnesses leave the court.

The Magistrate consented and ordered the case to be taken de nova.

■Sydney Holley, brother of defendant, said that on Friday, October 28, at about B.SO a.m., he saw Howard get into his boat -and row across the creek •to his son’s trench. After talking to him for a few minutes he rowed down the creek for about a chain and then drew into the old channel of Fisher, man’s Creek. He went along parallel with his brother’s trench, about 35 feet out, and.die (witness) saw liis brother pick up a long rod and adopt a. threatening attitude toward Howard.; He discarded this, and started to throw stones. Witness heard Howard ■ calif out that it was a public way, and that; he could use it if lie wanted to. Ho'Heycontinued- to stone Howard, driving! him to the shore in among th e rushes.’ He heard a -stone strike the boat, and) after about two minutes, Howard man-; aged to get his boat -away. About two: hours Later Howard and his son rowed j past defendant’s trench, to an island; and took off a heifer. > > To Mr Murdoch witness sa'd that[| the .stone s weye falling round the boat.. -He heal’d Holley call out to Spoor andj Fe'ly to come along and “dump How-j ard in the water,” He also heard! defendant reply to plaintiff that “King; told me to stone you.” j Crcvs-examined he said he was onhis trench during .this time, being! about 9J chains from defendant’s., Counsel f-cr defendant closely question--ed witness a s to the position of Ills j trench, its height from the ground,; and water, and the state of tides.

Mr Brosnan; If there ai’e four wit-: nesses who say that it was impossible for you to see Howard’s boat, what would you say?—That they are liars.; You could see the -splash the stonesmade in the water ?—Yes. h And hear the voices so far away?—j Yes, there was a wind blowing. ■ Why should you take part in the;se: proceedings ?•—What do you mean ? i Why d o ' you come into court at ch'ef ; witness against your own brother? —j Because it’s time somebody checked i him. -He’s been causing me trouble) for ten years. • ,You’ve got your remedy. Why bring, Howard into it? —That has got nothing ■to do with it. My brother's been! causing trouble and it is time steps; were taken to stop him. Plaintiff corroborated the evidence; given by the previous witness. -He. said that defendant had threatened to drive the bar through his brain.. He: had to stand up and dodge the -stones, otherwise he doubted if he would have; been here to-day. Defendant threatened to knock his “block” in and to dump -plaintiff in the b cemetery.; Defendant was very excited. When he came past later with hi s son defendant threw more stones. /

Cross-examined plaintiff said that! defendant rushed for the iron bar when, h© saw him coming. Mi 1 Brosnan: If there had been a “run’’ of whitebait that day the boat would have frightened them in front of defendant's trench, wouldn’t it?— No, boats are going up and down alii the time. What was the bar made of?—lron. And what was it used for?—l don’t know, and nobody else knows, unless it was to poke somebody with. You don’t use iron bars for catching whitebait.

You didn’t catch any fish that morning, did you?—l caught a few. And you did not want Holley to catch any, d‘d you?—That idea never entered my mind. Wasn’t Holley tossing the stones into the Cva.ek to divert the fish ?—No, he was throwing them at me, and he was mad, too. You deny that you were interfering with Holley ?—Absolutely. In any manner whatever.

To Mr Murdoch: He would have born hit more often had he not dodged the (stones.

Edward Frederick Howarti, 'son ol plaintiff gave evidence along similar linets.

To Mr Brosnan; Your father was acting quietly?—Yes. He’s one of the quietest men at the Creek, I suppose?—H e stops on his trench, and does not go up and down the stream stirring up muck like other fllshermen.

M r Brosnan said the defence was that Holley > was catching whitebait, and throwing pebbles to direct the fish. Apparently plaintiff was catching none, and purposely went down 'alongside defendant’s trench, scattering the whitebait. When plaintiff came along, defendant had lifted the iron rod, and merely shifted it, —did mot use it threateningly, and picked up a tin of pebbles which ho tossed into the stream iji a frantic effort to direct the firh.

Counsel contended that- plaintiff, by rowing -alongside Holley’s trench, was interfering with defendant’s proprietary, rights, and amounted to trespass. j William Holley, defendant, said there: was a fair .run of fish at the tune andj he wag occupied catching them, driving j them from the outside to the. inside j of his trench, and was tossing stones; into the stream. He first saw plaintiff; come round from the .stream, c'.cse to' his trench, which frightened the fish.. He denied using the bar in threatening; manner, it being too heavy for onething. He had picked it up and tnere'.y ■shifted it. Witness said he could have 1 ; jumped into plaintiff’s boat from the • side -it being so close. He had certainly told him to get away and -had; •■‘made no bpnes about it.”- Plaintiffhad rowed right through the » roa where he was puttino- the stones, but .he had not been thi-owing stones at him. Howard said,' while in the boat,: that he would not sit on his trench,, and l.t defndr ntr.jeatch them from hi?; own, and would .make it his business.; Howard had said, that the stream wasa public thoroughfare, and that he, would use it where and when he pleas-, ed. Plaintiff and Ms son 'had deliberately interfered with his fishing before and he had been obliged to complain to 'the Inspector.

Mr Murdoch: You. have heard your brother's evidence. Is it true? I prefer not to -say anything about my.; brother in this Court. My brother was at the war, was badly gassed, and had three -severe accidents.

Please answer my question? Ha 6 he told the truth ?—1 don’t think so. He could not have seen Or heard anything from where he was.

Did you tell him you would drive the bJir through Howard’s ‘‘b head?. —Certainly not. Or words to that effect?—No. What wa s the bar used for?—For protecting nets. : r

If plaintiff had been interfering, you. .had your remedy didn’t you? —I already had made complaints. iMr Brosnan: Why did the boat gdj into til© rushes, because it drifted?—| Certainly not. It wag because there; was little water.

, Thomas Spoor said he satv Howard’s boat rowing alongside Holley’s trench almost touching them with his oars. If he desired, he could have kept further cut. It appeared to witness that he had gone there looking for Dronhle. He saw defendant fishing, and knew* there was whitebait either in Holley’s trench or nearby, and Holley was throwing in stones to drive the fish in. It appeared! to him that Howard deliberately rowed his boat in to disturb the fish. Witness heard plaintiff say something to the effect that he was not going to let Holley catch whitebait. The rod in question was necessary, but lie used, 0 pole himself for tire raurpoge. Had Holley ceased throwing while Howard went past, the fish would have gone his trench. Holley could Have killed Howard with stones had ho iteen iso desired, the latter being so” close. In his opinion Howard was calling out louder, land appeared more, excited' than Holley. It ; was not necessary for him to have gone alongside that trench to reach the island, for by doing so lie was going out of his way.

Mr Murdoch: Have you spoken to defendant about this caise during the past fortnight?—Once, this morning. You see Holley every day?—Yes, on the creek. You wore 100 yards away from the score ?—Yes. Other witnesses have said that stones were thrown at Howard. Ae-on-ding to you, they were tolling lien ?—They must have been. (Proceeding).