POLICE COURT.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVI, Issue 4899, 4 November 1925, Page 3

POLICE COURT.

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1»25. DISORDERLY BEHAVIOUR. At the Paeroa Police Count on Monday, before Mr J. H, Salmon, S.M., James Henry Curtis, labourer, Paeroa, was charged with wilfully bieaking a window in the lavatory of a railway carriage on September 12. Charges of quitting the train while in motion between Mangaiti and Tirohia and disorderly behaviour in a. railway carriage on the same date were also preferred against Curtis. There was no appearance of the defendant, for whom Mr E. A. Porritt appeared and entered a plea of guilty. Mr Porritt said that the damages foi the window had been paid. Hodson, clerk, Paeroa, was then .charged with alleged dis*orderly behaviour in a railway carriage between Te Aroha and Tirohia on September 12. Mr E. A. Porritt altso appeared for Hodson, and on the application of the police the two cases were taken together.*

Constable McClinchy said that the defendants were returning from a football match at Te Aroha and were under the influence of liquor when the disturbance occurred.’* George D. McKee, carrier, said that he had attended the match at Te Aroha and returned to Paeroa by train. There was drinking going on between .a number of men, including one of the two defendants. He changed into another carriage and had heard language used, but did not see an assault committed. To Mr Porritt witness said that Curtis was drinking with two Maoris, but he did not see Hodson, who was fitting at the opposite end of .the carriage, drinking at all. Thbmas McKeown, acting guard on the train on the night l in question, said that he s’aw defendant Hodson on the train, but .he did nob say the first time that-lie had been assaulted, but when he went back through the carriage Hodson .was' holding hjs mouth* and alleged that Curtis had hit him. Hodson was not drunk, but appeared to be annoyed, and excited. Witness said he did not see Curtis. Constable McClinchy said that in response to two telephone rings he went out to Tirohia to a man wire was alleged to have jumped out of a rialway carriage wlindow, but no trace of him could be found. Later he interviewed Curtis, who alleged that he had been persecuted. He had reason to believe that Hodson was sitting quietly in the carriage when Curtis went up and struck him. •On behalf of Curtis Mr Porritt said •that defendant was feelilig very ashamed of his conduct, and regretted the stigma that had been cast on his parents,- who were highly respected in the district. He had given an undertaking ,that a similar offence would hot occur' again, and would submit to a prohibition order being taken out against him. Curtis had voluntarily apologised to Hodson for having struck him. Defendant was of a highly strung nature, and was recovering from a serious illness. Curtis and Hodson had been close friends for many years. Mr Porritt asked that the charges be dealt with under section 92 of the Justices of the Peace Act.

In summing up ,the Magistrate said that there was no evidence against Hod-son, and the charge would be dismissed. In regard to Curtis, he was prepared to accept the evidence that he and his parents were of good character, but Curtis had evidently been the disturber and aggressor. The Court had a public duty to perform, and the travelling public, especially on railway trains, must be protected. Footballers, he regretted to say, seemed to be. under; the impression that they could do as they liked. He was going to correct tha-t impression. In taking into consideration what Mr Porritt had ’ satd in the defendant’s favour, he would be convicted and. fined £5, costs 7s, on the charge of disorderly behaviour. On the charge of breaking the window defendant would be ordered to pay costs, 7-s, and on the charge of quitting the train a conviction would be entered, with a fine of £l, costs 13s. Witness’s expenses amounting to 10s would also be allowed, payment to be made within one month from date.