Mischief at Donglas.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXX, Issue 62, 17 June 1916, Page 5

Mischief at Donglas.

F.ToN FTH ROW f F?S FINED. .At, iho \K,gist ran's Court, Strai ford, before Mr W. K. Haseltlen, S.AI. yesterday, Thomas Cillard and \\ d liam Rae were charged with that they on .May lllitli, at Douglas, caused mischief by throwing stones, thereby damaging a bridle belonging to Curt Bredo .v, Defendants, aho were represented by Mr A. 11. Johnstone, with him Mr Trilby King, pleaded not guilt v.

Cortnule Brodow stated she resided with her parents at Douglas. On the 30bii of May she was at Copeland's store in the evening. She remembered seeing some people near the store. She saw two men stoop and pick up something, and a moment later heard a noise,'of something lotting the gates. X,,. long afterwards another stone was thrown, and it sounded as though it hit something. Her brother’s horse was tied to a post. The horse jumped hart: and ran up the road. She went up to two men (the delendants), and asked what they threw the stone for. The men replied they had not done anything. After they had thrown the stones the men ran hack and tried to conceal themselves by sitting on some boxes. There were five or six girls near the door of the store at the time of the occurrence. Defendants asked witness how could she see them do what was alleged when she was in the dark? Witness replied that she could see them against the .light background, Defendants then asked her how she knew they had frightened the horse: could it not be a man who was standing near by, or did another horse not come along and frighten it. Her brother was in the store.

In answer to the Magistrate, witness replied that the men were apparently sober. Witness spoke to her brother in the presence of the defendants, tolling him what happened, and that she had got the two men. The brother replied: “Why didn’t they own up like gentlemen.” Gillard wanted to light her brothers, but she stepped between the two men. Mr Johnstone cross-examined witness, and asked if the night in question was not very dark and whether the horse could have been seen across the road.

Witness replied that it was dark, hut the horse could he seen. The horse was standing in the light. She did not know if there were any horses in the paddock behind the shop. Five or six girls and a man were nearer to the defendants than she was. Tlie people were about two yards away. The men persistently denied throwing any stones. She did not see the flight of the stones, but saw the motion as if a stone was thrown, and she heard them find their mark. She saw the defendants pick up the stones’. Curt Bredow, brother of the last witness, said that on the evening of May 26, he was at the store at Douglas. While in the store his sister came in. and in consequence of what she fold him, he went out and said to the men that if thev had done what was attributed to them they should own up like men. One of the men asked him if he was looking for trouble and stepned up to him. Witness, in reply, told them to be careful, as they were liable. The men then withdrew. Before [he stones were thrown, his horse was tied up to the post. When he wot the horse hack some time later lie found the bridle broken. The fact) that draught horses were in the paddock would not make his horse restless. William Rae, residing at Douglas, said he was .at the store at Douglas at about 8 o’clock on M" 7 26. He did not throw any stones .oe any thrown, or see tlie horse .. eak away. In answer to Sergeant Dale, witness said, there were two men, besides himself, and five or six young ladies outside the store at the,time. Tho charges against ’both tfie defendants were dismissed. On the application of the police, further charges of throwing stones against Thomas Gillard and William Rae were withdrawn. \ William R. Wateson and Frederick Needham (Mr Johnstone, with him Mr Trilby King), pleaded guilty to charges of throwing stones to the danger of persons and property and thereby causing damage to a motor car. 'Mr Johnstone said the defendants 'admitted to the police the charges against them. The train arrives m Douglas at about-7.30 in the evening, and there is always a largo number of people about waiting for the mails. Whilst the boys were waiting, a motor car passed and they threw some pieces of road metal. Whether the damage to tho car had been done by tlie lads be could not say. The act was an extremely foolish one, hut there was no evidence of malice or mischief. The boys were exceedingly sorry toi what they had done, and Mr Watson, snr., had told him he would pay lor tho damage done to the car. Sergeant Dale said tho case was rather a bad one, as the stones had struck the driver and a lady passenger Sergeant Dale said ho had been instructed to ask for severe penalties. Larrikinism was very bad at Douglas, and the police were continually having to visit tho township. As illustrating the treatment a settler named Bredow had received ol late, the Sergeant said his sheep dip had been dynamited and his gates blown up. . The Magistrate imposed a hue of 20s each, and ordered the accused to pay £1 damage to the car, £1 12s witnesses expenses, and 17s Court costs. A fortnight was allowed in which to p.tv the money. In imposing the fines, the Magistrate remarked that he wanted To impress on the defendants and others, that as long as he was Magistrate in the district he would no-,"allow such acts. 11 the police brought a case and it was proved whether there was parochial feeling or not—he would impose heavy hues. Larrikinism and throwing stones at people would have to lie stopperl.