RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

Westport Times, Volume III, Issue 453, 16 January 1869, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

Thursday, Jan. 14. (Before J. Giles, Esq., E.M., and S. Thorpe, Esq., J.P.) " THE LIBERTY OP THE SUBJECT." David Leslie, merchant, was charged with obstructing the police, and with interfering with voters proceeding to the poll. Inspector Frauklyn asked that Constable Pringle, by whom the informatiou was laid, might conduct the case, he being better informed as to the circumstances. J. A. M. Turner, called and examined by Constable Pringle, said : I remember going to the polling booth yesterday. There was nobody behetween me and the door of the booth. I saw Mr Leslie. He was behind me. He called to me, and asked me whom I was going to vote for. I answered him that I told nobody whom I was going to vote for. You told him he bad no right to speak to me. Constable Pringle : Did I speak to him in a respectful or disrespectful manner ? The Witness : You told him to go about his business —that he had no business there —or something to that effect. Constable Pringle : Were the words not that he was not to come there to interfere with voters going to the poll ? The Witness : You told him he had no business there. I did not hear the word " voters." Mr Leslie told you to mind your own business. Mr Leslie did not seem excited —not more than is usual on the occasion of an election. He was addressing me goodhumouredly, but he did not speak to me more than a few minutes. When you told him to mind his own business, you told him to clear out, and then you collared him. He did not interfere with me in any way; he never touched me. He only asked whom I was going to vote for. By Mr Tyler: The constable took Mr Leslie by one arm, and then took him by the back of the neck, and pushed him on in front of him. I heard Mr Leslie say " All right, all right; I will go." The constable was pushing him on. There were several other persons there as well as Mr Leslie. I saw you. I was standing with my back to the door of the polling place, looking towards Mr Leslie when Mr Leslie was calling out to me. He did not obstruct the constable or me in any way, in my opinion. Constable Pringle : Yesterday, at a quarter past two o'clock, I was at the door of the polling booth. Mr Turner was then coming towards the booth. Mr Leslie stopped him. I said to Mr Leslie " Be good enough, Mr Leslie, not to interfere with voters coming to the polling booth." He told me to mind my own business. I told him that that was my business, as I had a public duty to perform. He told me to go away out of that, or he would report me. I told him he had better go out of that, and not interfere with people coming to the poll, or if he did so I should take him in charge. He then defied me to take him in charge, and after he snid that I took him in oharge, and brought him to the lock-up. Mr Tyler: In what manner did he defy you ? Constable Pringle: He told me I could not do it, and then I took him in charge. There was no interference except by the language. Mr Tyler : Where was the obstruction to you in the exercise of your duty. Coustable Pringle: The language was an obstruction. Mr Tyler: Did he not say that you had no right to speak to him in that way? Constable Pringle: He did not. Mr Tyler : Did he not say so two or three times? Constable Pringle: I swear positively I never beard, him make use of these words. It was after he had said that he would report me that I took him in charge. Mr Tyler : In what manner did you take him into custody? Constable Pringle: In the usual mannor. I took him by one arm, with my other hand on his neck. I did not hurry him. I wanted to get back to the polling booth. I did not make him go out of an ordinary pace. I did not hear him say, " All right; I'll go." He said he " would see into this." Mr Tyler: The obstruction, you say, was what he said ? Constable Pringle: Yes. Mr Tyler: And what was the interference with the voter ? Constable Pringle: Speaking to him when going into the polling booth. This concluded the evidence. Mr Tyler said he did not suppose the Bench would consider there was any offence at all, but, with the leave of the Bench, he would like to give evidence, having seen the whole circumstances himself. By the 13th section of the Eegulation of Elections Act, there was no offence, supposing Mr Leslie had spoken to a voter outside of the polling booth. Dr Giles said the Bench was clearly of opinion, on the evidence given, that there was no case at all, and it would be a waste of time to go any further into it. Mr Tyler said the reason he wished it to go further was that he might be enabled to contradict the constable by the evidence of two witnesses. Dr Giles: But what is the use, when there is no case ? Mr Tyler: I wish to show that this ; was an unwarrantable and unjustifiable

interference with the liberty of the subject. Dr. Giles: There is no charge against the constable. What is the use of going into it? This case is quite clear. The whole root and gist of the matter lies in the alleged interference with Mr Turner. Tire question is what is the constable's duty at a polling booth, and how far can he interfere. The only duty imposed on him is to keep order. There are no special duties. And keeping order is to prevent any disturbance of the peace, but the dudes are not different from these of a constable at any other time. In this case there was simply one person coming up to another and asking him a question. It would be a monstrous thing if one man could not speak to another in the street, simply because he was going to a polling booth. There is no law to interfere with a man doing all that he likes to persuade a voter to vote for one candidate or another. If Mr Turner had said to Mr Leslie " I do not want to have anything to say to you," and Mr Leslie persisted in stopping him, it might have been different, but to say that a man cannet ask a question of another is the most monstrous thing I ever heard of. I quite believe the constable thought he was doing his duty, but itis certainly my duty to say that my opinion is quite the reverse, and that it was the constable who interfered with Mr Leslie, and not Mr Leslie who interfered with the voter going to the poll. Ido not think it is necessary to say anything more. The case is dismissed. Friday, Jan. 15. (Before E. 0. Reid and S. Thorpe Esqrs, J. P.) LARCENY. John Adams was charged, on the information of Grace M'Harrie, with stealing a pair of slippers. From the evidence it appeared that the defendant was in the house of the woman who laid the information, and, while there, a pair of slippers to her were found concealed under his waist-coat. The Bench considered that the circumstances were discreditable to the prisoner, but as the property was of trilling value, and as it was his first offence, he was discharged. HOESE STEALING. John Eunga was charged with takin.f from Simmer and Forder's stables i a bay gelding belonging to the police. Mr Pitt, as Crown Prosecutor, intimated that it was not intended to proceed with the case. Evidence of a wrongful taking of property could be adduced, but the lawrequired that there should be a felonious taking, and he was not in a position to say that felonious intent could be proved. The accused was a person well known, and not likely to be guilty of the offence with which he was charged, but he had only himself to blame for the charge being brought. ; He (Mr Pitt) intended to offer no evidence, and he asked the Bench to discharge the accused. The defendant was accordingly dis- ' charged. [The defendant in this case has called upon us to explain the circumstances under which the charge arose. He is a customer and acquaintance of Messrs Eimmer and Forder. On going into their stable at the South Spit, to obtain a horse to proceed to Charleston, he found no one on the premises, and ho saddled a horse which seemed [ suitable for the journey. The horse proved to be one of the horses belonging to the police, which had been put into Eimmer and Forder's stables, because the Government stables were full, and the police, on learning of the horse being taken away, telegraphed to Charleston for its recovery.]