POLICE U. PUBLICAN

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XVI, Issue 5130, 14 September 1895, Page 2

POLICE U. PUBLICAN

CHARGE AGAINST MR, J. 1 • MANDEL. __ i The evidence of Mr J. Mandel was continued in the Masterton S.M. Court, yesterday, in the case of alleged negligence in admitting the police, as follows : One Sunday night I heard someone moving about, and on examination found it was Stewart, and his excuse was that he had been looking for Charley, one of the employes. The constable was in plain clothes. On Monday, the 26th August, the Sergeant and Constable Stowart camo into the Hotel about a quarter past eleven. Thero was no one about, but in the Commercial Room there were five boarders and ono townsman, The Sergeant looked vound, and when at the Commercial Room questioned the right of the townsman being there. I said that he was a friend of a traveller present, and was his guest. The Sergeant said " This is the man who gets up petitions about the police and sends them to Wellington, and I will soe ' that this class of men go home at elevon o'clock at night!" The constables then went out, and I went to

the door with them talking, The Sergeant had told me about a petition which had been sent asking for extra police supervision of tlio town, When we got on to the vorandah Stewart said: "Look hero, Mandel,

if you allow that man in your house I'll put you up, as suro as eggs." When the police left, two townspeople came up to witness and said they heard the threat. .. By Sergeant McArdle: On the '26 th there were in the Farmers' Room, a number of townspeople and travellers who were boarders. I do not know at what timo many of tho visitors left the house but I deny that they were gambling. Ido not allow gambling, His Worship said that there was nothing to provent boarders playing for money, in a Hotel, so long as the game was a legal one under the Act. Poker, 100, euchre, whist and other games were legal, Witness continuing, said: The billiard room was always closed at eleven o'clock, I may have mentioned that I was told that cards were played all night at Phillips'. 1 told the Sergeant that ho shut his eyes to what was done in other houses, and tried to ruin me by bringing up all sorts of fiivolous charges, and that the Constable influenced the Sergeant. His Worship said that this would be a case of mattor over mind, not mind over matter, At this stago tho Court adjourned until 2 p.m. After lunch, J, Mandel in continuation of his cross-examination said: I cannot always say when customors leave the hotel, as frequently I go to bed before midnight. 1 will swear that you demanded that the doors

of the Commercial Room bo opened, There was 110 one in tho bar when yon came into the house on the night

of tho 26th ; several were in tho passage, but not in the bar. On leaving the houße Constable Stewart, in presenco of yourself, made the threat stated in my ovidence-in-chiof. You mentioned the party as being

at the head of the petition. It was after tho statement about Phillips that Stewart mado tho threat mentioned. Stewart remained behind Sergeant McArdlo, I deny that 1

came out of tho bar as stated by tho Constable on the night of tho 27th. I had tho key in my pockot and opened tho bar door from tho outside. 1 deny that there is any foun-

dation in the accusation that I was abusive to tho Sergeant wlion ho cautioned mo about several strangers in tho house, some four montliß ago. I thanked the Sorgeaut at tho time for tho information.

William Whitfc was called by Mr Pownall,

Sergeant McArdle objected to any evidence given by Mr Whitt, Ho \vns not seen ou the night in question. The objection was over-ruled. Wm. Whitt saidl remomber tlio night of Monday week. Saw the Sergeant and Constable Stewart with Mandel, como out of the Club Hotel. It was about a quarter past eleven. I was in company with Mr A, Hathaway, and the loud talk caused us to stop undor Hannah's vorandab, opposite tlio Club Hotel, I did not cloarly understand all that was said. It was about gambling. Mandel was protesting against the Sergeant's statement and offering £IOO to £1 about something. I heard Constable Stewart say, "If

you let that man Mason in your house, you will go up over it." Knew the Constable's voice, and what ho said was spoken loud. By Sergeant McArdleWas in company with Mr Hathaway. It was a week last Monday, though I

did not know what the date was till Mr Pownall mentioned it in his

question. Coustablo Stewart was standing about tlio ond of tho Hotel nearest the Post Offico. Yourself and Constable Stewart were close together when the remark was made, and you should have heard it, Frequently went to tho Hotol to meet commercial men and did not always leave bofore eleven o'clock. When the Constable served the summons, I said that I was not there, and did not wish to be mixed up with it, I meant the charge of refusing admission. I did not say that it was Hathaway who drew my attention to what was said. I know that it was not the barman, Charlie

Mason, who was roferred to. A, Hathaway said: I remember being with the last witness on Monday, 26th of last month, in Queenstreet, and saw Mr Mandel, tho Sergeant and Consfablo Stewart, near Murray's yeraadah, Mr Wliitt and I were on the opposite sido of the street. I heard an altercation between Mandel and the Sergeant on the conduct of the hotel. Constable Stewart made a remark to Mandel, It was," If you don't keep Mason out of your bouse you'll go up," That was about the last of tho conversation.

By Sergeant McArdle: When the altercation was finished, you went towards the Waipoua Bridge. 'AH three were apparently excited and wore talking loudly, Constable Stowart was oloso to Mandol and yourself when bo made use of the language. It was the last remark that I made, and he concluded that the remark was made to Mandel, I concluded that the remark was meant to apply to Mr T. G. Mason, 1 I think the time would be abgut-a ' quarter-past eleven. Ido not recolleot stating on the following day, that you made use of the language which I now say was made use of by the constable. " ; William Lys, nightwatohman at the Club Hotel, said: I was not in the Court when the evidence was

given, and did not hear any of it. I !remember the night of 'the 27th August. It was aboijt a (juarter or

twenty minutes past eleven, I heard j a knock at the front door when I was rolling np the matting in the front passage. I answeied, "Allright," arid after putting away the matting in the side passage, I came baok to the door and asked who was there. The answer was: "Police." I opened the door as fast as I could,, and there was no delay. From th{jt time I heard the knock till I opene* the door would be about a minuto and a-balf. There was only my lamp to give light in the passage. When the knock came at the door Mr Handel was in the front passage near the staircase, facing the baize doors and talking to Mrs Mandel. I could not say where Mr Mandel was when I oponed the door. When I opened the door Constable Stewart said: " There is no need to have run to give thorn the tip, thero are more ways of getting at you than one." He also said: " 1 saw you run." I . mado no reply, nor did I run. I lift the mat every night when the house/ | is closed. The gas to turned out : in the passage at elevon o'clock. It ( is my duty to attend to tlio lights in , the passages and lock the doors, and \ I do so at olevon o'clock.

By Sergeant McArdle: I did not see Mr Mandel or the police after I let the police in.. They went through tho passage. I was rolling up tlio matting; I heard no unpleasantness between Mr Mandel and the police^ Jolm Charles Mason, barman'stf the Club Hotel saidOn the night in question I locked up as usual, put out all the lights and handed the keys to Mr Mandel. Went up to bed and met Mrs Mandel. While talking to her heard a knock at the front door. About n minuto and a half elapsed before tho police wore admitted. Nothing was going on in the hotel at all which the police ought not to see. By Sergeant McArdlo: I closed the bar at eleven o'clock. Tho rap at the door camo betweon ten minutes and a quarter past elevon. I did not hoar the police make'uso of any harsh language. I was standing on tho landing. lam intimate with and have known Stewart manyyeare. I have nover heard him speaking harshly, or improperly of any gentleman in the town Thomas G. Mason was next called byMrPowuall. He declined to be sworn by Constable Stowart. On being sworn by tho Sergeant witness saidl remember clearly the night of August 26th. I was sitting in tho Commercial Room with a Mr Meiju of Wellington, Tho door was ope™ i by someone whom I took to be Sergeaut McArdle. I said " Come in Sergeant." The reply was "No, , there might be gambling going on." On the following night was again in tho hotel with some friends and was sitting in the Commercial Room at 11.30 p.m., when Mr Mandel came ; in and said tho police had paid him i a visit. No gambling or anything i improper was going on io tho hotel.

Mr Pownall said that Mr Masou had been called to show that nothing improper was goiug on in the hotel, and also because he wished to make a statement. .

By permission of the Bench, Mr Mason then went on to say that the police had acted improperly towards him on account of his having taken an active part in getting up a petition to the Minister of Justice, requesting police protection for tho town at night. Ho had done this because one of his .tenants, Mr J. Watt, had complained of sevfflfrfr burglaries, and he thought thing should be done. Constable Stewart and Sergeant McArdle had mado improper and insulting statements about him, which lie thought it proper to publicly refute. His name had been bandied about, and it had been stated that he had been gambling on this occasion, 'l'lio statement was a false ono and a cruol ono, calculated to injure a business man. He occasionally wentinto the Club Hotel, which he considered to bo one of the best conducted houses he had ever entered, and somotimes played billiards, but this was before oloven o'clock atnight. Ho belonged to 110 club, and met many presumably respectable people at tho Club Hotol, but could say that he had never gambled, and gambling, to' his knowledge, was not earned on at the Hotol. Ho had resided a good many years in Mastorton, and no one could accuse him of improper or dishonourable conduct, He strongly objected to the actiou of the police towards himself. By Sergeant McArdle: Tho inBulling romarks 1 alludo were you came in you said, " Oh, W might bo gambling." "

Sergeant McArdle said the words were used in a jocular way, and Mr Mason had quite misunderstood him. His Worship said he had allowed Mr Mason to make a statement because Mr Mason was under the impression tlmtimputations had been cast on his character in tlio course of tlio case. From his notes nothing to be ashamed of occurred, Mr Mason said it was not direct but merely insinuations. If Sergeant McArdle or those making the insinuations would put the matter in writing, he would "go for them." Sergeant McAvdlo Sftid lie wished to make a statomont.

His Worship said it irregular, but as ho had permitted Mr Maaon to do 60, he would also allow the Sergeant tho same privilege, Sergeant McArdlo, on oath, said: He thoroughly recollected the night of Monday, the 2Gth. Ho was not ono yard from Constable Stewart, who made no remark regarding Mr Mason; he would swear to that—as he stood there between himself and God. If Stewart hod made A remarks attributed to him must have heard them, Tho Bench: "But iiow about the witnesses. Sergeant ?" Sergeant McArdle; I cannot help it if there pre forty, Your Worship, ■ I still maintain the same. The whole thing is a concocted story \ Mr Mason baa no right to sit there shaking his head at me!

Mr Wliitt: "Your Worship, does" the Sergeant mean that I am a liar!" The Bench: " One at a time, if you please. I have quito enough on my hands already." Sorgeant McArdlo said perhaps: he had gono too far, The word " ooncoct" had slipped out unintentionally, Ho did not wish to impugn tho evidence of Messrs Whitt or Hathaway, but had Stewart made use of the words stated, ho must have heard him, and he would swear he did not hear any such language used, The Bench said that a de|y£ extraneous matter had beenadmjHs by the Court, as when attackslEre • made upon public servants in,any capacity, he thought it right that they should have the fullest opportunity of refuting them,and clearing the matter up, and he had therefore given the polico every opportunity. Regarding the alleged offence itself, the evidence was about as contradictory as it could bo. He thought, however, that' the' case could bo 'decided without ' bis being called

upon to say which of these two conflicting stories wiis the correct and truthful one. He considered thai the offence, under this section of the Act, must bo a refusal to admit the police in the execution of their duty, It must appear that the Constable demanded, in the execution of hit ■tduty, to be admitted, and merelj wp;nocking and saying " police," was, in bis opinion, not sufficient, & thirsty policoman might knock foi admission, and want a drink, and therefore a publican had a right tc refuse a man who merely knocked and said "police," just ao much a; anyone else. On the point of law thorefoio, tlio case would bo dia missed,