CREATING A DISTURBANCE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume L, Issue 3918, 14 March 1929, Page 2

CREATING A DISTURBANCE.

PICTURE PATRONS FINED.

At the local S.M. Court this morning before Mi’. J. L. Stout, -S.M., Kelvin De Ridder and Charles Huff were each charged that on the 6th March at the Town Hall they did disturb a picture entertainment. De Ridder entered a plea of not guilty but Huff was not present to answer the charge. William Henry Coley, an employee of the Fox ton Borough Council and ticket collector at the Town Hall pictures said he knew -both accused. On the night of the 6th March De (Kidder’s dog followed him into the pictures and witness asked him to take the dog out. This he did in a very unsatisfactory manner on several occasions, the clog following him back on each instance and after half-time the dog was still in the hall and patrons in ’ the back were calling cut for its removal. Huff also called out and when spoken to challenged witness to put him out. Witness went for the police. Bags were being blown up and a general disturbance created.

Hugh Campbell Patterson, retired chemist, Foxton, said he was at the pictures on the night in question. There was an unnecessary noise created during the showing of the pictures, but who was responsible for it he did not know. Witness beard Coley ask certain individuals to leave the hall and they declined. The constable ultimately removed thejm. Adam Craig, retired, of Foxton, who was also a patron of the pictures on the night in question endorsed the previous .witness’s evidence. The disturbance detracted from the enjoyment of the entertainment. Constable J. V. Bell stated that at 9 o’clock on the 6th March Ooley complained to him that unnecessary noise was being created in the hall which lie could not stop. He said a man was in the hall with a dog. Witness removed De Ridder and his dog called out something which witness did not hear and he was also ejected. The lights were out and a number of others hooted and booed but witness could not locate the miscreants or they would also have been ejected. There had been no noise since the episode. To De Ridder: You were sitting there with the dog between your legs and refused to remove it for Coley. When ejected both, accused demanded their money back although the performance was three parts through. Kelvin De Ridder in evidence said ’ that he went to the pictures on the night in question, and after being there for a while sojmeoiie informed him that his dog was in the hall. Coley asked him to remove the animal which he did but Coley left the door open and the dog went into the hall again. At interval he kicked the dog out into the street but it came back again and he was in the act of taking it out when Constable Bell ejected hhn. He made no noise whatever in the hall. The S.M. said accused had no right to have the dog in the hall. Each accused would Jbe fined £1 with costs £1 each, as a lesson that they .must behave themselves while at a public entertainment.