THE WAIHI STRIKE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LV, Issue 129, 18 October 1912, Page 4

THE WAIHI STRIKE.

THE STRIKE CASES. ACCUSED GIVES ANOTHER CHANCE. By Telegraph—Press Association. Waihi, Last Night. ' The cases in connection with the charges of assault preferred by Jessie Beames against James Delaney, miner .find contractor, and the counter charge by Delaney against Neil, were concluded to-day. Mr. Cotter, K.C., in opening the case for the defence, addressed the Court, in the course of which lie pointed out that as a man with a family to defend "Delaney hehld that he was entitled to the free use of the public streets to pursue his calling, and not to be interfered with, if other persons felt aggrieved, the law was open to them to take proceedings, but the law should prevent them from interfering or wreaking their vengeante upon him. Delaney did not consider that the action of complainant was a personal matter, but that she, with others, was acting under instructions, cither expressed or implied, or in compliance with the wishes of a number of irresponsible persons, who by their actions had led by the nose certain persons who should be above such influence. Counsel proceeded to refer to the above as a body of irresponsible persons, who were seeking to dominate the whole of labor in Xew Zealand. Delaney had instructed him to say that he had no desire to punish anyone, further than asking the Court to give him that protection which every honest person was entitled to. It was a sad commentary, said counsel, upon the labor conditions of the Dominion that men willing to work had to proceed to and from their work guarded by a posse of police. It was also a sad com. mentary that those misguided individuali had made no effort to find out the on the subject. Counsel urged that if was the right of any person to earn hia livelihood in peace and comfort. Before commencing to indicate the nature o\ the defence and to review the evidence for the prosecution, Mr. Cotter said that the tactics of the strikers had been considerably altered lately, in that women had been placed in the forefront, and the men. from behind the skirts of the women, had sought to threaten or defy the law to take proceedings. In conclud- | ing, counsel said that Delaney came tothe Court simply to ask to be allowed i to carry on his calling in the usual way, , and to be allowed the free and full use t of the streets in the ordinary manner, ■ so long as he did nothing unlawful, and ■ for that purpose he asked the protection s of the Court. I James Delaney said that he had resided' ' in Waihi for seventeen years, and had • worked in the mine prior to the strike. 1 He bad since resumed hia work. When- ' ever he appeared in public he had not ' been allowed to move about the streets ' without molestation, having on all oc--5 oasions been subjected to "booing" and insulting language. He had done nothing to justify such treatment, unless it was 1 that those responsible held that his re--1 turning to work was a justification for , their conduct. Witness then detailed the circumstances leading up to the alleged , assault. As he passed into Hnszadd street with one of his children in hi# arms he saw one of the young women (complainant) draw a hatpin from her liat, and heard her threaten to run il into him. He put his right foot behind to keep the woman off, whereupon she threw the hatpin at him and rushed into the road and pulled up a stone, which j she threw at him. The stone struck him. s Complainant then picked up another j stone, and witness turned and seized her to prevent her throwing it at him.* II was then that Neil rushed in, and iy 7 rough and tumble ensued. After this he * r picked up his child and went home. 7 Arnold Belize, bank clerk, who had • witnessed the whole incident, gave cor--3 roborative evidence. /•»' The Magistrate said that he would 5 deal first with Neil's case. All the par--8 ties were more or less excited. The two " principal parties were Delaney and ' Beames. Neil came ,in almost nt the 5 finish.. So far as could tie gathered from the evidence, the facts were that Neil saw the girl being forcibly held by Delaney. He immediately made a blind ' rusli, and, according to his own state--3 ment, forcibly pulled the girl away. • Blows were struck. Neil evidently did " not understand the position when he in--7 terfered. Neil had candidly admitted ' that under similar circumstances he would have done as Delaney had done, and he (Neil) did not blame Delaney for r hitting liim. Neil had been candid in giving liis evidence. He thought Neil, ' prior to interfering, should have asked. what was the matter. Neil bad comj mitted a technical assault in the honest belief that Delaney was likely to injure 1 the girl. The Magistrate, addressing accused, said: "Do you understand that . you have given up 'booing' and '?cabf binb'? I ought to," proceeded the Mag- ; istrate, "record a conviction, but under - the circumstances I . don't." He would, be added, adjourn the case for three months, but if within that period Neil • failed to keep his word he would be > called upon to come up for sentence. Tn i connection with the counter charge for • assault brought by Delaney against Jos- • sie Beames, the Magistrate briefly rei viewed the evidence. He could not get • away from the fact that the girl had on ■ a previous occasion asked Sergeant Mili ler to let her, by order, get at Delaney ■ and his wife. She had also been previ--1 ously warned about using a hatpin. > With this in his mind, it was ditlkult. ■ for him to reconcile the evidence givenby the girl. Referring to Debiiiey's nl- > leged taunt anent his (Delaney's) turning round and making a remark about amusing the "push," the Magistrate said that he could not see anything in tbatto create such a frantic demonstration. All witnesses had agreed that the girls- , had got close to Delaney's 'heels, and tli« warning had been disregarded. It was a question whether Delaney's foot. hit the- girl or the girl hit his foot. The only independent witness as affecting this was Dr. Hyde. This witness had said that there was only a small bruise. Then, under cross-examination, witness said, that the woman coming to the boot might cause such a bruise. Delaney was not "scabbing" anybody. He was walking home, with his children, carrying one of°them in his arms. Under these circumstances it was not likely that -he would be looking for trouble, and lie was j'nstified in protecting them. The Magistrate then referred to the hatpin episode, commenting on the occasion wlien Beames had drawn a hatpin to use it against Constable Brown. Under the circumstances Delaney could not be seri- • ously blamed, or blamed at all, in putting out his foot to protect his children. The girl admitted calling out "scab," which in itself was an offence. She admitted the stone business and the hatpin episode. In conclusion, the Magistrate said that he would impose the. same conditions as he had in Neil's ease, and require a promise from her not to engage in "booing" and calling out "scab." There would be no conviction, but lie woidd adjourn the case for three months, on the understanding that her promise would be kept. Otherwise, at any time within that period she would be called upon for sentence. In regard to the charge against Delaney, he would dismiss this straight out. Benjamin Franklin, charged with using obscene language, was convicted and fined 20s. ~ . The other strike cases were adjourned till the morning.