POLICE COURT.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXII, Issue 888, 6 September 1910, Page 3

POLICE COURT.

POLICE V. MUNRO. TWO INFORMATIONS DISMISSED. CONVICTION FOR THREATING BEHAVIOUR. (Before Messrs Rimmer and Hornblow J’s.P.) The local Courthouse was crowded with spectators yesterday morning, when the charges brought by the police against H. S. Munro, licensee of the Family Hotel, Foxton, were called on for hearing. Defendant was charged with: (1) being found drunk in a public place, (2) with using threatening and abusive language with intent to provoke a breach of the peace, and (3) with resisting Constables Woods and Sweeney whilst in the execution of their duty. The cases were brought forward on Thursday morning last when defendant pleaded not guilty to all three charges and asked for a remand in order that he might get his witnesses together and counsel to defend him. This was granted until yesterday morning, when defendant was represented by Mr H. R. Cooper, of Palmerston N. Sergeant Willis of Palmerston N., conducted the case on behalf of the police, and after briefl}' outlining his case called the following evidence for the prosecution:— Constable Sweeney on oath, stated that on August 31st he was on duty in Main Street in company with Constable Woods. At about 9.55 p.m. they were standing on the footpath a few yards south of the Family Hotel when defendant came out of the door and said to three men who were standing in the doorway, “I’m going to have a b go.” He came towards where they were standing and witness noticed that defendant was under the influence of liquor. He came right up to them and said to Constable Wocds “What the b h are you reporting me for now ?” At this stage Sergeant Willis asked that all witnesses should be ordered out of court, which was done. Mr Cooper said that if all wit- . nesses had to leave the court Constable Woods should also go, or at least his evidence should be taken first and Constable Sweeney leave the court. Sergeant Willis said that under the circumstances he would call Constable Woods first. Constable Woods on being sworn stated that in company with Constable Sweeney he was standing a few yards to the south of the Family Hotel when the licensee came out of the front door saying as he came out “I’m going to have a b go.” He was under the influence of liquor and came up to witness and said “What the b h are you reporting me to the Licensing Bench for now?” Witness said: “Sunday trading.” Munro then said ; “If you were by yourself I’d put you in the b gutter, and if I was a b crawler like you I wouldn’t be seen in the town. Why don’t you put the other b pubs up the same as you put me ? You want your b palm greased, that’s what’s the matter with you, and I’m not going to doit.” Witness said Constable Sweeney then said: “You’ve had a little drink to-day boss,” to which defendant replied, “I’ve had a little but I can look alter myself.” Witness said he had his doubts and advised him to go inside. He said: “You speak to me, I've a good mind to roll you in the gutter.” Witness then got hold of his right arm and he said, “It’ll take more than you to take me.” They struggled aud eventually got him on the footpath and handcuffed him, afterwards taking him to the cells where he remained two hours, when he was bailed out. To Sergeant Willis : Witness said he was quite satisfied that Munro was drunk. He resisted violently. When Munro first accosted witness and Constable Sweeney there were only three other persons present aud they were about 15 yards away. To Mr Cooper; He came to the conclusion that defendant was drunk as his hat was on sideways and he came out of the door in a very blustering way aud also staggered as be was walking. Witness said he had never previously seen defendant drunk. At the last meeting of the Licensing Committee defendant complained that the police were harassing him. Witness said he arrested defendant because he was drunk and using insulting language. Had he not said anything he would not have been arrested, as he was not drunk enough to necessitate an arrest. He resisted by throwing his arms about and kicking. Witness denied that he sat on defendant’s chest but said he was sitting on his back. Munro said it had cost him to delend cases brought against him by the police, but witness denied that he bad replied to the effect that it would cost him another before he (witness) was done with him. What witness did say was that it was his own fault. When defendent left the cells at midnight he was quite sober. Witness said he did not think anyone would then have been able to detect any sign of liquor about him. After witness ; and Constable Sweeney left the hotel with defendant he walked along quietly, as he was handcuffed aud supported by both of them, but he kept on calling out that he wanted bail. When they passed Lazarette’s shop there were several people standing there, and Munro called out to Lazarette, “Come and bail me out.”

Constable Sweeney recalled, continued his statement and his general evidence as to what took place at the hotel was similar to that given by the previous witness. Witness said he told accused not to use the language he was uttering as it might be given as evidence against him. Towards the end of the struggle outside the hotel Mrs Munro came on the scene. To Mr Cooper: Witness said he would swear that Constable Woods did not make use of the words “ It’ll cost you ,£l5O before I’m done with you.” Munro was side-on when Constable Woods put his hand on him. Witness did not hear any intimation being made to Munro that he was about to be arrested. After a great deal of resistance, Munro said he would go along quietly. Defendant was not knocked about at all. When defendant was on the footpath witness said he took hold of his arm in order to handcuff him, at this time Constable Woods was sitting on his back. In reply to Sergeant Willis, witness said that any force that was used was rendered necessary on account of defendant’s resistnace. This closed the case for the prosecution.

Mr Cooper, after outlining his defence, called the defendant, H. S. Munro, who said that he had been under medical treatment for bronchitis, etc., for some time past. On August 31st had gone to bed shortly after four o’clock in the afternoon. Up to that time the only drinks he had had that day had been a few pony portergaffs. He came downstairs again at about half-past nine that night, and thought he then had another small portergaff. Mrs Munro gave him a letter from the clerk to the Licensing Committee containing a copy of the police report. A few minutes later someone came in aud said that the two “ Johns” were outside. Witness was naturally somewhat annoyed at the report sent to the Licensing Committee, and said, “ I’ll go out and have a rally with them.” Witness then went to Constable Woods aud asked him what his objections were to him (witness), aud said; “You want to ruin me. You’ve cost me already.” Woods replied, “I’ll d well cost you another ,£l5O before I’ve done with you.” Several persons were present while they were arguing the point. Witness said, “ If you were by yourself I’d tell you what I think of you,” aud turned to go back into the hotel, at the same time saying, “ You want me to grease your palm, but I’m not going to do it. I’m a white man, and there’s nothing black about me.” Woods then said, “ I’ll take you,” aud caught hold of witness, knocking him down. Witness then said, “ I’ll go quietly,” but he retused to let him up, and proceeded to handcuff him. When passing Lazarette’s shop on the way to the police station, witness said to Lazarette, “Go down to Mrs Munro and get some money to bail me out.” Witness said he would swear he was not drunk. Just before coming out of the hotel a man who owed him some money had come in and wanted a bed, giving a false name, thinking that he would not be recognised, as he had shaved since he was last at the hotel some time ago, but witness recognised him. Witness denied that he was under the influence of liquor, or that he used insulting language. He also denied resisting the police. To Sergeant Willis; Witness said he never drank to excess. He did not remember the police advising him to go inside. Witness said that if it had been stated that he had been carried to bed that afternoon, drunk, it was a deliberate he. Witness denied absolutely having used the word b , stating it was a word he had never made use of in his life.

James Clark, labourer, one of the boarders at the Family Hotel, stated that on the night in question he was standing in the doorway of the hotel when defendant came out. Muuro was perfectly sober at the time. He went towards the police and said to them, “It’s a nice report you’ve sent in about me.” Constable Woods replied, “ Yes, and it’ll be a worse one next time.” Muuro did not swear, and certainly did not use the word b . Muuro said to Woods, “ You’re always watching me, but if you can find anything against me I’ll give ,£SO to any local hospital. I’m a white man, and there’s nothing black against me.” Defendant also said, “You’ll never have me in the gutter, you’re not man enough.” Muuro at this time was back on to Woods, and the latter made a rush at him. In the clinching they both fell to the ground, Muuro being underneath, face downwards. He said, I’ll go quietly,” but the police handcuffed him. Witness said he did not see anything to warrant an arrest being made. To Sergeant Willis : Muuro did not speak when he came out of the hotel until he spoke to the constables. When he was on the ground he said to Mrs Muuro, “ Take the names of everyone here.” Witness said he had not talked the matter over with Muuro since the affair. Mrs Munro asked him to attend the Court to give evidence. In answer to the bench, witness said he had never heard Munro use bad langu ige at any time. Had never seen Munro under the influence of liquor. Samuel Mansell, flaxcutter, boarder at the Family Hotel, corroborated tire main features of the previous witness’ evidence, stating that Munro did not swear at all, nor did not use insulting language.

To Sergeant Willis: Witness said he had not talked the case over with defendant. It was only the previous night that Munro bad asked him to come and give evidence. To the Bench : Witness said he bad never heard Munro use bad language, nor had he ever seen him drunk Samuel Peek, dairyman, said that on the night in question he went to the Family Hotel to see Mr Munro, but was told that he was in bed. Witness had a few games ot billiards, and on coming out of the billiard-room, at about halt-past nine, saw Munro coming down the stairs. Spoke to him, and stood conversing with him for three or four minutes. He was perfectly sober, and there were no signs of liquor about him. Witness then came away from the hotel, and passed Constables Woods and Sweeney in front of the library—about 100 yards distant from the hotel. Witness said he had never seen Munro the worse for liquor, nor heard him use bad language. In reply to Sergeant Willis, witness said that he visited the hotel almost every night and had played a number of games of billiards with Munro, and had never once seen him the worse for liquor. Mr Cooper was about to call further evidence for the defence, but the justices said that it was unnecessary to call any further witnesses, as the evidence before them was sufficient. The first charge, that of drunkenness, would be dismissed, as the evidence brought forward by the police was insufficient to prove the charge. On the second charge defendant would be convicted and fined £l, and the third information, that of resisting the police, would also be dismissed.