"BEHAVED AS A LOW CAD."

Taranaki Daily News, 3 November 1917, Page 5

"BEHAVED AS A LOW CAD."

AND DESERVED MORE THAN HE GOT. HOWARD ELLIOT ASSAULT CASE, ■By Association. Auckland, Last Night. The charges against Charles Christopher Clements and Herbert Eugene McIntee, of assaulting Rev. Howard Elliott on October 15, were heard by Mr. F. V. Eraser, in the police eourt to-day. The information was laid by Rev. Elliott, for whom Mr. Ostler appeared. . Counsel said it was significant that the assault was committed when Elliott was leaving his house to speak at a meeting of the Protestant Political Association. He denied that Elliott had published any statements reflecting on relatives of Clements, the matter being contained in a letter written by and addressed to Elliott himself, to test the censorship. Tincontents of the first were revealed by counsel at the postal inquiry. The truth of the matter was that the assault was an attempt to prevent the right of fret speech. While evidence was being given, Elliott left the court. Shortly, afterwards, Mr. Ostler said his case had concluded. Mr. J. R. Reed, who appeared for accused, remarked: "Elliott has funked it and slunk out of court. It is cowardly to avoid going into the hox, and is. in accordance with his actions in attacking a dead woman. The action made it clear that he would not substantiate the grossly untrue statements he had made.'' The charge against McEntee was dismissed, the magistrate ruling there wns no evidence against him. Mr. Fraser ruled that in the absence of Elliott they must presume that he made the statements attributed to h!n». In giving judgment. Mr. Fraser said he was absolutely satisfied the statements regarding the chastity of the sister of Clements were absolutely untrue. "I can only say that, speaking as a man, I think Elliott, in making that statement in [public, behaved like a low , cad, and. sneaking as a man again, I am satisfied that he deserved all he got and a good deal more.-' He' expressed regret that . it was necessary to enter a conviction against Clements, but no other penalty vvas inflicted. Mr. Ostler's application for costs was refused.