WHITEBAITERS AT WAR.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 2457, 22 July 1922, Page 3

WHITEBAITERS AT WAR.

o ' HOLDING THE FORT. . . . - • . - tp -A" SEASIDE DIVERSION. ■ i —1 ' • v ’ At the local S.M/ Court yester- ’/. \ da#, befb'rd- Mr- J'. L. Stout, S.M., the) sequM to an encounter between ■: . - several whitfebait fishermen over the ’■ , p'oisessioii-of a-specially favoured / v spot on the'bank of a creek at the seaside for the netting of whitebait was unravelled. George Victor -' Dunn was charged separately by F. ;? i ’ H. Short, C: W. Short and E. H. Collins with assault, and G. V, Dunn - ’ preferred - similar changes against . • his accusers. •/./’A \Ti Mr Bergin appeared for the Shorts and Mr Dunn conducted his ' pwn case 1 . 1 -' *' '\ ~ L' All theteases werd’ taken together !as the circumstances were the same, ft, Mr Dunn objected to this course but his objection was not upheld by ;- f the Magistrate. Mr Dunn asked- ' that all witnesses leave the Court iand two appearing for him retired, t Mr Bergin said theit . the parties 'were residents at the seaside and - 'paticipated in netting whitebait in y, ; ♦ season. There was a small stream which the defendant monopolised. . Short built- a whare- in the locality and had been netting whitebait in the stream. On ; the date in ques■jg{. t tion plaintiff was so engaged when Dunn appeared on the scene and assaulted him. F. H. Short stated that on July 7 10th at ’ about, 10.30 a.m. he was netting whitebait. He saw Dunn and'his mate in the distance holding aloft a scoop net. He had lost seV; veral nets from the locality. When he saw Dunn approaching, he'anticipated trouble and sent bis son to bring his son-in-law, Collins, on the scene. Dnnn and Stan.‘Reeve arrived. .Dunn in response to a question as to what he was going to do replied that he would soon show plaintiff: Dunn then put his net in behind plaintiff. Upon a further Pt protest, Dunn threw his net on tlie ;• banlc. and threatened to pull plaintiff’s, nose off his face. Dunn then struck af him and plaintiff slipped and fell. Before he could rise Dunn struck him on the jaw and he struck his eye on a stake. Plaintiff’s boy 1 told Dunn not to hit his father when he was down. Dunn then rushed at the boy, calling him a vile name and struck.him on the eye. The hoy then struck Dunn in self defence. Dunn then smacked at Collins who had the scene. Collins was i struck on the jaw by Dunn and retaliated with punches to Dunn’s ■ • body. To Mr.Bergin:At was customary to keep two chains apart other Did not threaten Dnnn' •, in any way. Had never had any trouble' with anyone at the beach. . Reeve never took part in the melee but said he knew what would happen if Dunn went to the creek. Tf> Dunn: You stood over my net. .» Took off his coat to defend himself. Denied any threatening be- . '■ haviour. ■ ( V C. W. Short corroborated his father’s evidence. Dunn and Stan. Reeve asked if there was any bait running. Dunn struck his father while the latter was on the ground and the blow forced . his ■„ father’s face against a stake which injured his, eye. . He struck-Dnnn in self defence, and knocked out one of his teeth. Dunn then made a swipe at Collins whicl/ grazed Collins’ jaw and the .latter returned the blows to Dunn’s body. Dnnn then dropped his hands and said “I’ll took for the tooth now.’ 1 ... ' >\ .. >To Mr Bergin : Neither he nor' Collins threatened Dnnn or spoke to them., Stan. Reeve said he didn’t f. want/ to go with Dnnn as knew what wpuld happen.' h/. , - To accused did not say later “this is the man that did for Dunn” to certain residents of the beach. 'He produced a tooth in a match box in a billiard room and said Dunn . /af" dropped it. Denied saying that when he laid the chaige the police congratulated him." S.M. to accused: Is your charac- •.. /ter as bad as all. that? ’ •.• Edward Henry Collins, son-in-^ law of F. H. Short,, stated that he' .was on duty all preceding the] morning of the fracas. Was told' that Dunn and Reeve were coming' along with a scoop net. He heard Mr Short ask Dunn what he was do : ing with the net and corroborated, /-what took place. Did not strike; Dnnn until after Dnnn attacked' ' him. Reeve said, “don’t fight.” He > put in three blows, two to Dunn’s • ribs and ,one ,to his stomach and: Dnnn dropped his and said “now Iwill look for my tooth,” Dunn then '■ , r P| Td Mr-Bergin : Heard rumours: of th'reats'froin’ Dunn, that was whyhe went down to the creek. ■ /i. Defendant: Where was ,1 when f 1 yon.first came down? / , , Witness: In position to scoop round Mr Short’s net. • . Defendant: Yon heard me use the -- - - alleged foul-word to Charles Short? . - i Wtness.: Yes. s .. : George Hartley described the \ • fight. Dunn said to witness after the fight: ‘What do yon think*of . that, three on to one.” Witness replied “No, not three on to one; but three, one-after another. ' To defendant: He .was three ‘ chains away when defendant first appeared: -He was able to hear what was said. Short senior picked up. a stick he fell on and immediately threw.it in the rashes. Plaintiff ,did not keep th© stick. Witness denied telling others that the Shorts i had cleaned Dnnn up. v The S.M.: If he did he .would only be telling the truth. .... . Witness continuing Charles Short.did not hit; defendant from J,k behind/ Defendant was able to see 4 both‘ men. He did not notice whethV er Dnnn attempted to; scoop, round V - Short’s net. •’• ' , . / -- V.--.; A/:.'A-A V. ■’■’•’

Defendant: After the fight was over I said to you “what do you think of those dirty hounds, three on to one” ? Witness: No. I said three, one after another. To "Mr Beigin: Short did not threaten defendant ,in any way when throwing away the stick. .- jGeorge: Victor Dunn, defendant, in; evidence said that he and his brother, Stan. Reeve, proceeded to creek on the morning in question for the purpose of fishing for whitebait. Reeve suggested going. On passing the ! Shorts, Stan. Reeve asked Fred. Short if there was any bait about, to which ? he replied “not' ■much.” They remained there for a few seconds only and during that time, defendant asked Short senr. for the return of a bed he had bor rowed off defendant. One word led to’ .another and Short eventually pulled off his coat and challenged, defendant to fight. Stan. Reeve' 1 said “don’t fight.” Short replied: “think I’m frightened of a thing like that; come, be a man for once in your life; come and have a go.”’ Plaintiff then took off his coat and immediately struck at him. After exchanging a few blows defendant •bit Short on the eye, knocking him . down. Short then Went towards the creek and pulled up a stake, saying, “I’ll kill you, you —, I’ll do you in.” Defendant watched to see what he would do with the. stick and while standing .with his back to the others, was attacked by Charles "Short and Collins and had to fight his way out of it. During the fight defendant lost a tooth, which Charles Short admitted knocking out. He valued the tooth at £5. That was the only injury he suffered. Defendant denied using any foul language 'of any-deserip-tion. , ( , - To Mr/Bergin: Short threatened to kill defendant and lifted the stake up in a threatening manner. Sian. Reeve stepped towards Short, saying, “don’t come at that, Fred., don’t put in the dirt.” Denied tel-, ling anyone at the beach that he was going to expel the Shorts from the posse. Had been back to the tu'eek since the ,qunrrel but no words had been spoken by either party. The, charge against him of using bad language was absolutely a lie. In the talk in the first instance, Short had complained about losing nets. Defendant had told him not to blame them for it and said that when he and Reeve were fishing there, they had lost nine nets. Defendant then asked Short to return the bed lie had borrowed. Short refused to do so and told de fendant to return something which defendant’s sister had borrowed from Short’s wife and he would return’ the bed. He did not remember what else was. said as the fight '• •_

Mr Bergin: You do not remember whether you used foul language or not thert'? A

I Defendant: Oh yes I do. I would remember if I had used bad language. ’ Stanley Reeve said on the morning in question he suggested to defendant that they^should go and get some bait. -They went to the creek and took with them a scoop net. His brother had a little argument there ‘with .Short senr. and they came to blows. Witness said “dou’t fight.” Short said, “get out of my road,” and took off his coat and started to fight .lias brother. Short struck out, lost his balance and defendant hit him and he (Short) fell down. When he got up he said he had fallen over hjs. gum boots. Then Collins and Short junr. rushed at his brother and Short junr. knocked defendant’s tooth out. Short senr. rushed to the creek and picked up a stake and said he would kill the —. Did r.ot. see what plaintiff did with the stake. They did not attempt to fish round Short’s net. In the first argument defendant told Short that if he didn’t desist from accusing him (Dunn) f of taking the nets, there was a law to prevent him. Did not hear any bad language. Defendant did not strike Short while I he was on the ground. Short urged his son and Collins to “kill the —. : Short aimed the first blow. They were at the creek five or six -minutes. He would not call the affair a

fight. N 'The S.M.: You are evidently used to this sort of thing at the beach, then.

Defendant then called William Royal Hartley, a school boy, aged .15, who said he was present on the occasion. He was about two chains 'from Shorts when defendant arrived. Heard what was said and corrhborated the .statements of, others.. Defendant: Was. any bad language used? V I.''Witness"::Yes. j ’ Defendant: Who by?,, Witness: By you. . Defendant, disgustedly: This wit ness should have been on the other side. He is a brother to a previous witffess. This closed the ease. The S.M. in‘.,sipnming ( up said there was no doubt that an assault had been committed. In liis opinion a threat must have been issued by accused to make Short senr. take off his eoat. ,; ’ The whole thing apparently was jealousy over fishing rights. Tr was hard'to believe Reeve’s statement: about the stake as Reeve did not see what was done with the stake. Certain amount of the blame' was on Short, who appeared rather eager to “get his nose pulled.” On the other hand Reeve and defendant were not over anxious to get away. A quarrel started and things followed logically. Had it been a police prosecution all concerned would have been liable. Taking into consideration Short’s eagerness to participate in a fight, he would convict and fine Dunn only £5 and costs £3 Is Od, and convict I and discharge him on the other two

charges. Defendant was allowed one month in which to pay the fine. Dunn’s charges against the other parties were dismissed.