POLICE COURT.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 417, 30 July 1908, Page 3

POLICE COURT.

At the local police court yesterday morning, before Messrs Alf. Fraser and P. J. Hennessy, J’s.P., a young man named William Kelly, of Oroua Bridge, Was charged by the police with the thelt of a bicycle, valued at the property of Robert Hayward, of Foxton. Accused pleaded guilty. He said he was under the influence of liquor at the time he committed the theft and intended to return the bicycle. In the meantime he heard that he was accused of the theft, and was afraid to be seen riding it back, for fear of being arrested. He was very sorry for what he had done. Constable Woods gave evidence as to arresting accused, who admitted the theft, and showed witness where he had hidden the bicycle. The Bench slated that the prisoner had committed a serious offence. He would be fined £5, or in default one month’s imprisonment in the Wanganui gaol.

Accused asked for time in which to pay the fine, but the police objected, as accused was not well known in the district.

TIN-KETTLING AND ITS RESULTS. A young man named Ernest Rowe, labourer, was charged by the police with using abusive language. calculated to create a breach ot the peace, and was further charged with resisting Constable Sweeney while in the execution of his duty. Accused, for whom Mr Barnard appeared, pleaded not guilty. Constable Woods said the case was the outcome of a tin-kettling affair. Heard a noise on Monday night in the vicinity of Mrs McGrath’s residence, where a wedding had been celebrated. Together with Constable Sweeney, he visited the locality, and found accused with a number of others, hoodlums of the town, there. Asked Mrs McGrath whether she wanted them there, and she said she had asked them to leave. The crowd were given a drink and asked to leave. Witness took charge of one section and Constable Sweeney another. Got; his section away. Constable Sweeney was subjected to abusive and insulting language from accused, whom he subsequently arrested. During his arrest accused struggled and kicked, and one of his comrades tried to rescue him.

Constable Sweeney, in evidence, stated that on the night in question he heard a noise on the outskirts of the town, where a wedding had been celebrated. A number of hoodlums were congregated at the locality. The occupier of the house desired that they should disperse. Constable Woods requested them to leave, and they managed to get them away by slow stages. Accused, who was very talkative, said that as they were on a public place the police could not shift them. Several of the disturbers were under the in fluence of liquor. The police interfered to prevent a breach of the peace, and the mob was separated. Several of them wanted to quarrel. Accused refused to move on and used insulting language. He stated witness had him “ set,” and they would not shilt for him. Among remarks of a milder nature, such as: ‘‘You are as wet as a bag,” “Walter Anderson can throw you about as he likes,” “You couldn’t arrest anybody,” “ You couldn’t fight your way out of a paper bag.” “B hound,” etc., were used. When they got down as far as, Manchester House, witness asked accused why he had' so much to say. Accused ran away, and witness arrested him in front of the Manawatu Hotel. Accused kicked and struggled violently when under arrest. Wanklyn came up and took hold of accused and wanted to know what he was being arrested for. Accused was subsequently locked up.

To Mr Barnard : Did not think it was necessary to bring a charge against accused for having used obscene language, without arresting him. Was not aware that there was any feeling in the town against him since the Anderson affair. Did not think it was necessary to tell accused what he was being arrested for. Mr Barnard contended that it was necessary on his part to inform a person being arrested what the grounds of arrest were. Mr Barnard further submitted that there was no occasion for any arrest being made, but that the accused could have been summoned.

Further cross-examined, witness would not say accused was drunk, but that he was under the influence of liquor. Did not think it was necessary to arrest any of the others. Was not sensitive to any remarks made in reference to the Anderson affair. Constablei Woods stated that the parties who wanted to fight were separated. There would have been no occasion for arrest, if those who were creating a disturbance went home. The accused had been warned on previous occasions.

In opening on behalf of accused, Mr Barnard said a great deal more had been made out of the affair by the police than was necessary. Tin-kettling was a time-honoured custom and a certain amount of latitude was allowed on such occasions. If the police had not been there, nothing would have happened. The mere fact of the accused running away, was evidence that little resistance was shown. A disturbance of this nature did not justify the making of any arrests, and he quoted an authority re police procedure when making arrests. He asked the Bench to bear in mind the

custom of tiu-kettling, which caused the gathering. Ernest Rowe, the accused, was called, and stated that he had been invited to attend the tinkettling. He had had four drinks, but was sober. Two of the party were drunk before they went to the tin-kettling. Saw the police there. The police told them they had better go home. That was at about 10 p.m. They all had another drink. The police were arguing with the mob about going home. They informed the police that they would go home when they were ready, as they were quite capable of looking after themselves. The crowd shifted down the road about a chain, and stopped, and the police 1 came back and told them to move. “Cocky’’ Dunn wanted to fight witness, and Constable Woods took Dunn and others away. They came along the road and Constable Sweeney was ahead of them. Constables Woods and Sweeney were “chivying” us all the time. Refused to move on, and told C.nslable Sweeney he “ could not fight his way out of a paper bag !” Was not in a quarrelsome mood. When he got to Manchester House corner, he was lighting a. cigarette, and Constable Sweeney said: “Why have you got so much to Say?” Accused tueu ran away. The Bench : Why did you run away ? Accused said he didn’t want anything to do with Sweeney. He did not resist when being arrested, nor did he remember Wanklyn assisting him to get away from the police. Had no ill-feeling against Sweeney. Was told by the police to go home. The Bench : Why didn’t you do so ?

Cross-examined by Constable Woods : Might have been told to go home ten times. Did not remember hearing any one say : “ Come to the Park and have it out.” Replying to a question as to whether he did not recollect trying to pull away from the constable, accused replied : “ Gaud blime, I got a lot of chance of pulling away from you, haven’t I?” In reply to Mr Barnard, accused said he thought he had a right to be on the road when asked to move by the constable. Cyril Wanklyn, in evidence, said he went to the tiu-kettliug at the invitation of one ol the bridegrooms. He was asked to come along and bring some of the others. Songs and choruses were sung. The police came after ten o’clock. Some arguing took place. Two of the party were going to fight, and the police came back. Constable Woods got one section of the party away, and Constable Sweeney was ahead of the party witness was with. They were joking, but witness did not hear the language complained of by Constable Sweeney as having been used. Saw Rowe when arrested ; the constables each had hold of an arm. Witness put his hand on Constable Woods’ shoulder, and asked why Rowe was being arrested. By Constable Woods: Never urged those who were going to fight to go up to the Park. Heard Rowe say something about a bag. Refused to move on as he was waiting for the others. William Gibson, in evidence, said that Rowe was not quarrelsome. Heard Rowe make some joke about a bag. If the party had been left alone there would not have been any trouble. By Constable Woods : Are you one of Rowe’s mob—one of the wasters of P'oxton ? The constable’s reference was taken ex ceptiou to by some one at the back of the court, which met with approval by some of the auditors. Accused’s counsel also took exception to the constable’s reference. Witness, continuing, said he never saw accused struggling when arrested, and never saw Wanklyn attempt to rescue him. Had four or five drinks. Could stand as much drink as the next one.

B, Spelman, in evidence, said he did not hear accused use abusive language. Constable Sweeney tried to show his authority. Heard accused say, “get your holt.’’ Did not see Wauklyn try to rescue accused. Accused was hanging back when under arrest. The two under the influence of liquor were the cause of the disturbance. If they had gone away, there would not have been any trouble. Never spoke to the police.

Cross-examined: Heard some words, but could not hear others. Went subsequently to the police station to bail accused out. The Bench said that accused was liable to a fine of £2O for resisting the police. Both charges had been proved, and accused would be fined and 7s costs on each charge, or in default seven days’ imprisonment. A week was allowed in which to pay the fines. Cyril Wanklyn (Mr Barnard) was then charged with obstructing the police, an outcome of the preceding case Constable Woods stated shat Rowe, on being arrested, called out for “Tiny,” Wanklyn came up and caught hold of Rowe. Witness informed Wanklyn that he would be locked up if he obstructed the police. Informed Wanklyn that Rowe was being arrested for using abusive language. He brought forward the present charge as a warning to others. If witness was not present, there was no doubt in his mind that the person being arrested would have been rescued. Evidence was given by Constable Sweeney, touching the arrest.

Cyril Wanklyn, accused said he never touched Rowe, and had no intention of rescuing him. He put his hand on Constable Wood’s

shoulder and asked what Rowe was being arrested for. The Bench held that the police must be upheld in the execution of their duty, and fined the accused los and costs 7s.