INCIDENT AT “WHITEBAIT CREEK.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 3872, 17 November 1928, Page 4

INCIDENT AT “WHITEBAIT CREEK.

A GUN-POINTING 'CHARGE. AND A PACIFYING CIGARETTE. MAGISTRATE DISMISSES CASE AS TRIVIAL. William Royal Hartley, labourer, of Manawatu Heads, was charged that at Manawatu Heads on October 4th, he did, without lawful and sufficient purpose, present a doublebarrelled shot gun at Edward Charles Boyle. Accused, who was represented by Mr. Cooper (Palmerston North) entered a plea of not guilty. 'Constable Owen, in outlining the case, said that on the date in question defendant and his brother, accompanied by another man were proceeding along the bank of the notorious drain at Manawatu Heads and defendant had in his possession a double-ban’elled shot gun (produced). They met two men, Boyle, a brother-in-law of the Hartleys’ and Davey, up thed rain on the opposite side and a dispute arpse. Boyle, it was crossed the drain in the heat of the argument and defendant was alleged to have pointed the loaded gun at him. Edward Charles Boyle, in evidence, stated that he was a labourer, residing at the seaside. On the date in question, accompanied by C. Davey, he was proceeding up the drain when he met the Hartley brothers and a man named Parfitt on the opposite side of the creek. He could not recall what caused it, but an argument arose. The only thing he was clear on was that William; Hartley covered him with a shot gun. 'To Constable Owen: He could not remember any part of the argument but when they met on the creek they generally had a little argument. The S.M., facetiously: Possibly about poaching on each other’s fishing rights? (Laughter). Continuing, Boyle said that as a result of the argument defendant pointed the gun at him. Defendant did not know what he was doing. He was beside himself with rage. Mr. Cooper: You are possessed of an ungovernable temper yourself, aren’t you, Boyle?—'Not any more than anyone else. Some times I get_a bit put out. Didn’t you accuse Hartley of stealing your whitebait?^ —No, I don’t think so. And didn’t you say you’d thrash him? —No. Didn’t you tell Jensen that that was what you were going to do? — No. You have been fined for assault and using threatening behaviour haven’t you?—l stand on my “dig” sometimes. Yes, I suppose so. You can’t remember what the argument was about?• —1 did not take a great deal of notice of it. Why did you jump across the drain? —I didn’t. Were you quite sober ?—-I ought to have been. I haven’t had a drink for nine months. Yet you can’t remember what took place? —No it’s a good while ago. Isn’t it a fact that you were grossly insulting to the Hartley Bros.? —No, but if there were any words they would be pretty even on both sides. Did Hartley put the gun up to his shoulder and point it at you?' — Yes, and I was on the other end of it. How far apart were you? —The creek was between us. The whole affair ended up by you asking for a cigarette from Herbert Hartley?—Yes that ended the dispute. Cecil E. Davey, a shell merchant, resident of Manawatu Heads, was .the next witness called. Her had accompanied Boyle up the creek on the day in question. He related how the two parties had met and said that an argument had arisen between Boyle and his brother-in-laws. He and Boyle had remained on their side of the drain throughout, however. Royal Hartley had been sitting down with the gun lying on the side of the bank when they came up and had picked the gun up and threatened to shoot Boyle with it. He had pointed the weapon straight towards Boyle. When defendant picked the gun up it was broken open. It was a hammerless double-barrel gun and loaded in both barrels. Hartley had snapped the gun closed and s_aid, “If Boyle touches any one of us I’ll blow his brains out.” The argument lasted only about five minutes but witness did not know what it was about. Witness and Boyle were heading up the drain. Mr. Cooper: What for?: —We were fishing for whitebait I “I had left a. set net in the creek while I . went home, said witness, and on my way back I met Boyle on the beach and he walked up the drain with me.” Herbert Hartley passed witness on horseback. Witness never heard the first of the argument. Had no idea why Royal Hartley had threatened to shoot Boyle. Boyle said, “There’s three of you. The best thing to do is to drop the gun and I’ll fight the lot of you.” OVli’. Cooper: Didn’t Boyle accuse Hartley of stealing his whitebait? —I don’t know. How do you know the gun was loaded? —Ij saw the cartridges in it when it was lying on the ground a few yards away. The creek was only three : to four feet wide. Hartley closed the gun and held it under his arms. He did not put it to his shoulder and if anyone said he did it was not true. Constable Bell gave evidence as to having interviewed the parties

concerned after the incident as a result of information received. Defendant had refused to give a sign - ed statement but had said that about 11 a.m. on the day in question Boyle had accused him, at the creek, of taking 71bs. of whitebait Gut of his net? which he (Boyle) had previously set in the creek. A wordy argument had ensued and Boyle had made certain disparaging remarks about witness’s sister and called him several names. Accused said that he told Boyle if he did not take the words back and apologise, he would shoot him. Boyle thereupon jumped over the creek and accused picked up the gun, closed it and pointed it at Boyle’s feet. Hartley’s brother then rode between the pair and the affair quietened down. Wiitness confiscated the gun, which accused claimed was not loaded at the time.

Mr. Cooper said the evideince for the defence would be an emphatic denial of the fact that the gun was loaded. One barrel of the gun was useless and had no hammer. Boyle’s evidence that accused had placed the gun to his shoulder v r as proved untrue by Davey.

William Royal Hartley in evidence, stated that he was a labourer, residing at Manawatu Heads. He had been walking up the creek with Parfitt on the day in question when his brother rode up. Witness sat down on the ground and w r as talking to his brother when Boyle and Davey appeared on the scene. Witness and his friend had just passed a net set in the drain about 6 chains away when Boyle, who was approaching, looked at the net and ran up to where witness was but on the other side of the creek and accused him of taking his ’bait as well as several other things. Witness’s gun was lying open on the grass unloaded. He had previously had one cartridge in the gun but had removed it before he sat down. Boyle sprang over the creek and witness retreated before him. Boyle first of all accused' witness of taking his whitebait, then made insulting reference to witness’s sister and became threatening and violent. He took off his coat and called out “Come on all you s, come on!” Wit ness took up the gun to try and bluff him but did not put it to his shoulder. He tried to frighten Boyle because once before Boyle had taken to him with a maul. Witness tried to stop Boyle from jumping oyer the creek but witness’s brother rode between the two of them.

Constable Owen: Why did you have a gun with you? —We were shooting rabbits. The S.M. i(facetiously): Not ducks I suppose. The last time you took a gun out for rabbits you were convicted of duck shooting (laugh’ter). Constable Owen: Whose net was in the creek?- —Boyle’s. The S.M.: Boyle’s memory seems so convenient.

Constable Owen: But Davey says lie had a set net! —Well I only know what happened up the creek. The trouble first started over whitebait. Boyle had a net .set. We went along the creek ahead of him. Davey was six chains behind him. Boyle came hurrying up and found no whitebait in the net and accused witness of taking the bait out of the net. Afterwai'ds lie admitted that it was possible that the sand had washed out under the net and the whitebait had thus escaped. Constable Owen: Do you know anything about shooting when the police happen to be approaching the drain? —I don’t know what you mean. * You know very well that when the police make a raid on the creek a gun is fired to warn the whitebaiters!—No I don’t. The gun was for rabbits. At this stage Hartley was asked to demonstrate how he had presented the gun at Boyle. He said that it was a “fair dinkum lie” if anyone said he had put the gun'to his shoulder. •Constable Gwen: When you arc rabbit shooting do you wait’till you see a rabbit before you load up? No but when I am talking in company I always remove the charge from the gun. Constable Owen: Weren’t you mad with rage?—No. I ran away from Boyle. Joseph Henry Parfitt was the next to give evidence. He said he was a labourer residing at the beach. The S.M.: Not a fisher and shell merchant I suppose? (Laughter). •On the day in question, said witness, he accompanied Hartley rabbit shooting. The gun was not loaded when Boyle threatened Hartley, as witness had been carrying the gun previous to the incident and never carried a loaded gun. The gun was never presented at Boyle, but was held under Hartley’s arm all the time. Herbert Hartley gave corroborative evidence. He had arrived on the scene on horseback. Davey mentioned to witness that someone had been “lifting” nets in the drain. Boyle became “blind mad” and offered “all out for a fight.” Witness saw the gun opened after the incident and it was unloaded. After witness supplied Boyle Avith a cigarette he became pacified and they all went away together. The 'S.M., in summing up said there was no doubt according to the evidence, that Boyle and Davey had hidden certain facts from the Court, and had not given any indication of how the row had started. It was probably a fight over fishing rights. There did not appear to be any doubt that Boyle had threatened Hartley and he, being afraid- of what Boyle ivould

do, had presented the gun at him. Davey admitted that Hartley had the gun under his arm and did not 1 resent it. It seemed right and probable that there was no actual presentation of the gun to the shoulder. There was a certain amount of conflicting evidence with regard to the gun being loaded. However, Boyle had threatened the party and Hartley had threatened him that if he crossed the drain he would use the gun. The incident seemed to have closed amicably. He did not think the case was one which called for a fine and would be dismissed as trivial. He was perfectly certain that if any other person was threatened by Boyle and had a gun he would do the same as Hartley had. He was a man who had a reputation for pugnaciousness and was certainly bigger and more physically fit than Hartley.-

The ease was dismissed accordingly-