The Inspector and the Slaughterman.

Auckland Star, Volume XI, Issue 3219, 13 November 1880, Page 2

The Inspector and the Slaughterman.

COUNCIL ENQUIRY.

A £ PECIAL meeting of the City Council, for the purpose of enquiring into certain charges preferred by Mr Woolfield (Inspector of Abattoirs) against a slaughterman named Murray, was held this morning. There were present:—Messrs Waddol (ActingMayor), Goldie, Montague, Thompson, Offer, aud Fleming. Murray was also present, Councillor Waddel opened the proceedings by reading the formal complaint, which was as follows :—" The following are the circumstances which took place at the Abattoirs, and the language which James Murray made use of to me on the 3rd and sth November :—On the morning of the 3rd November, on going my usual rounds, to inspect the abattoirs. I was met by Murray at the door of his abattoir. He said, " What the h do you mean by that letter" (referring to the one dated the Ist November, which was written by the order of the Council). He then challenged me to come out and fight him. I said," What I have written is by order of the Council; do not obstruct me in doing my work. I wish to have nothing to say to you." He then put his clenched list within an inch of my face, aud said, "You little , by I w ill murder you the first time I get you by yourßclf. X will break every bone in your body. He kept following me about and obstructing mo in passing in or out of the doorways. P. Mo.vlan was close to both of us all the time, and heard the whole of this, A carpenter named James Hedley heard a portion of this abuse. His memo is forwarded for Council's information. Adam Kay (Mcssrslrelund'scarter)also heard part. His memo, is also forwarded. On Friday morning I was upon the drafting pen, inspecting the cattle, which had just arrived from Buckland'a sale yard. Murray at that time went to the abattoirs from his cottage, and Moylan delivered the letter from the Town Clerk to him. Murray came ever to the drafting pens; asked me the meaning of it; used abusive language, and cursed and swore. He endeavoured to intimidate me and obstructed me in carrying out my duty. Moylan was present all the time and heard tbia. Joseph Byera was also present. His memo is forwarded.—EDWAßD WOOLFIELD, Inspector, City Abattoirs." James Hedley, carpenter, Adam Kaye, carter, and Joseph Bycrs>, certified that they had been witness to Murray's insulting conduct toward the Inspector. Patrick Moylun was then called in, and, In reply to a question, slated that he had delivered a copy of the charges to Murray, who had been at the office that morning, but had since gone away. Moylan then went on to say that on the day in question, Murray accosted the Inspector with reference to the erection of a fence, and wished to fight him. Tho Inspector declined, saying that he was only executing the Council's order, and Murray then swore that whenever he caught the Inspector by himself he would give it to him. as far ac lie could recollect the obnoxious words stated in the complaint wore made use of by Murray. His conduct was calculated to obstruct and impede the Inspector in the execution of his duty. He was not aware that Murray had ever received provocation from the Inspector. Cross-examined by Mr Murray; You have always paid your rents regularly. In answer to (Jr. Waddel, Mr Murray stated that he had made use of some objectionable terms but had not uttered the approbrious epithets stated in the complaint. Tho Inspector had done him great injury, and instead of him carrying a six shooter for protection it should be witness himself. However, he was not afraid of inspector, six Bhooter and all. He had been 18 years in Auckland, and no such charges bad ever been made against him. The cause of his primary grievance against the Inspector was a letter which he received from him.

A discussion having ensued with reference of mode of proceeding with the enquiry, Or. Montague asked what was the direct cause of Murray inviting the Inspector to fight. Mr Murray replied that the cause was this:—"He received a letter irom the Inspector directing him to take down a fence within a certain time, and then immediately afterwards another letter was sent commanding ■ him to take down the fence at once, or clear out. The Inspector, in an underhand way, had heen going about trying to get birn dismissed. He knew the real cause, but did not like to state it openly. There waa a female in the question. Councillors Montague and Goldie thought that if the Inspector had committed himself in any way it should be stated. - Councillor Thompson said that if tho Inspector bad grossly misbehaved, Mr Murray was at liberty to prosecute him, but unless that misbehaviour bore directly; upon the present charge it was not a subject ot enquiry for them. Mr Murray hero produced and handed round certain letters for tho Councillors' inspection. A discussion took place as to the advisability of receiving evidence of an extenuating character, Mr Murray having two witnesses in waiting.

Councillor Goldie was in favour of its reception, but Councillor Thompson strenuously opposed it. He contended that the admissions made by Mr Murray were sufficient to justify them in recommending the Inspector to take the case into Court, when Mr Murray would have an opportunity of adducing any palliating evidence he might have. After the Court had given its decision the Council could take auy further action which it might deem necessary.

It was Ihcn formally agreed on the motion of Councillor Thompson not to hear the witnesses in waiting, as it was affirmed they knew nothing of the alleged obstruction.

Moylan and Murray having withdrawn, Councillor Thompson moved "That our solicitor be instructed to take the necessary proceedings iigainst Mr Murray for obstructing Mr Waolfield in the execution of his duty." Further thau this he did not intend to go until the case had been heard in Court.

Councillor Montague seconded.

Councillor Offer objected to private grievances being defended by public money. In cases where their officers were impficatcd they should have some guarantee that the case would not break down.

The other Councillors thought that the officers should be sustained until proved to be wrong.

The motion was then passed and the meeting terminated.