ALLEGED ASSAULT.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXII, Issue 918, 15 November 1910, Page 3

ALLEGED ASSAULT.

PRIOR v. ROBINSON. CASE DISMISSED. At the local police court yesterday morning, before Messrs A. Fraser J.P. and the Mayor G. H. Stiles Esq,, Percy T. Robinson was charged on the information of Edward Alexander Prior with, on November sth, unlawfully assaulting him by striking him in the face with his clenched fist. Mr Moore appeared for the informant, and the defendant, who pl ea(J ed not guilty, was represented by Mr Cooper, of Palmerston North. Mr Moore briefly outlined his case and called Edward Alexander Prior the informant, who stated he was and had been for some time employed at Messrs King and Co’s, flaxmill. Until recently he was not a member of the Flaxmills Employees’ Union. Some little time back the defendant, who was secretary of the Union, in consequence of the preference clause in the Flaxmillers Award, had sent one of the members of the Union to take his (witness ) place, but Mr King refused to put the man on. In consequence of this an action was brought against Messrs King and Co., for breach of Award. After the case had been decided witness went to join the Union. He went to the office of the Union and joined. The Secretary and Mr Dalhousie were in the office at the time. After he had paid his entrance fee and received a book of rules witness asked the defendant if it was not his work to go round the mills and see that the men joined the Union. Robinson replied ‘ What the has that got to do with you. ’ Witness said “Not much, but I’ll see you do your work.” Without any warning whatever defendant jumped up and assaulted him. He struck him on the face, knocking him down, and then held him (witness) down with one hand and hit him with the other. Witness subsequently got up and said, “You’ve bad your go, now I’ll have mine.” He immediately went to the police and laid au information against Robinson for assault. The injuries received were a skinned and bleeding nose, which was still sore, a discoloured eye and other injuries about the face. Witness said Robinson gave no warning before striking him. Dalhousie took no part in the affair and just looked on. . To Mr Cooper ; Witness said be did not receive any message from Robinson previous to joining the Union. He wanted to join and denied going to the office with any feeling of antagonism. Could give no explanation as to the reason of his being struck. Did not remember being mixed up in any assault case previously. He admitted he struck a man uamed Lawtou one day 011 the wharf, but denied striking Walls. Denied calling defendant a - Defendant did not threaten to put him (witness) out of the office. Previous to this he had never spoken to Robinson. Since laying the information he had told defendant he would let the matter drop it he (defendant) would pay the costs, five shillings. Constable Woods said when informant laid the information he had the appearance of having been assaulted. His nose was skinned and he had a black mark around the eye. The appearance of his clothes would also give one the impression that he had been on the floor. When be served the summons on defendant he did not offer any explanation, and in reply to witness’ query, “What have you been doing?” replied “Having a bit of tun,” and drew witness’ attention to his ear, which had some skin knocked off it. For the defence, Mr Coo called Pei oy Tucker Robiusou, the defendant, who stated that he was secretary of the Flaxmills Employees’ Union. Previous to the present affair he had never spoken to Prior. He had sent a message to Prior and expected him to call on Saturday, 12th instant. However, he came on the sth instant. He came to the office at about four o’clock and asked if it was the office of the Union. Witness replied “Yes, come in.” Prior said he wanted to join the Union and witness made the necessary entries and gave him a book oi rules, aud told him it would cost six shillings. Prior said he only had 5s aud witness said, “Oh, that’s alright, you can give me the other shilling another time.” Prior stood looking on for some time and then said to witness “What the do they pay you for ?” Witness, who thought he wasjoking replied “Oh just for sitting here aud taking money.” Prior then said, “Now I’m in the Union I’ll see you well do your work.” Witness said his little boy was present at the time and he (witness) told Prior that ii he did not behave himself be would put him out. Prior said “\ou cau t do it you

With this witness got up with the intention of putting him out and Prior struck at him, hitting him on the ear. Witness struck Prior in sell defence and alterwards put him out of the office. The day following, Prior said he would let the case drop if he (witness) would pay the cost of the summons, which he agreed to do, but on the Monday morning Prior came and told him he had decided to let it go on. . To Mr Moore: Witness said Prior in his evidence had told deliberate falsehoods. His reason for putting Prior out of the oxhce was to protect his child from the language he was using. Richard Heron Dalhousie, president of the Union, who was u the office at the time, corroborated the previous witness’ evidence in

every detail. In reply to Mr Moore he said he would swear Prior hit the defendant first and also that Robinson did not hold him down and hit him.

To Mr Cooper: Had been a member of the Union’s Executive for soma three years and during that time had been in constant contact with defendant, and had never known him to be mixed up in an affair of the sort. Had known him to suffer a great deal of provocation without losing bis temper. The Bench after deliberation, dismissed the charge and allowed defendant 8s costs.