WINDOW-BREAKING.

Auckland Star, Volume XXV, Issue 39, 14 February 1894, Page 8

WINDOW-BREAKING.

ALLEGED LARRIKINISM.

ASSAULT AND DAMAGE TO

PROPERTY.

A skbious case of larrikinism and windowbreaking was dealb with at the Police Courts to-day by Mr Bush, R.M. Matthew Parsons and John Parsons, two young men, were charged with that they did on the 7th February wilfully and maliciously damage seven panee of glass, valued at £3, the property of Peter Purcell, licensee of the Railway Terminus Hotel, Beach Road. Matthew and John Parsons were further charged with having on the same date unlawfully assaulted and beaten Peter Purcell. , Mr T. Cobter appeared for the complainant and Mr J. O'Meagber for the defendants. A plea of not guilty was "jlKtotter stated that Mrs Purcell had requested the two defendants to leave the hotel on the night of the 7th of February on account of their objectionable behaviour, and he went on to detail the manner id which the defendants were alleged to have broken the windows of the hotel. Peter F. Purcell, the prosecutor, deposed that he was licensee of the Railway Terminus Hotel in Beach Road. He recognised the two defendants. On previous occasions he had seen Matthew Parsons. On Saturday week Matthew Parsons and three others came to the hotel and asked for four drinks. Ihe girl at the bar drew witness' attention to the drinks being served, no one having the money to pay for them. They all eaid thab they had no money to pay for the drinks. Witness then asked them nob to come ipto the hotel again. On Wednesday evening laab witness heard the breaking of glass while sitting in the house, and on going outside into Shorb-streeb he saw the two accused. Witness ran after them ana stopped them. He asked them why they had broken the glass and who was to pay for ib. He recognised Matthew Parsons, bub the other kept bis head down so thab witnosa would nob recognise him. Witness then struck a match and saw who it was. John Farsone struck witness on the face on being asked to pay for the window. The defendant then closed with witness, and Matthew came to his brother's assistance. One of wifcnese 8 boarders then came up and tackled Matthew Paroona, while witness waa struggling with John. Witness gave them no provocation. They fell on the ground several times, and after the struggle was over John, one of the defendants, lay on the iootpabb, both of them promising then to pay for the glass. The boarder who had assisted witness went away, and one of the defendants made a rush ab him (Purcell). They had two struggles, and then both defendants ran away. Witnesß returned to the hotel. Aboub three quarters of an hour later, a knock was heard ab the door. Mrs Purcell wenb to the door, and someone asked her fco open ib. Mrs Purcell refused to open it, saying that she was going to bed. Another voice (thab of Matthew's), then said thab if the door was nob opened they would " break every b— window in the hotel. Immediately after thab the windows were broken. Witness ran after the fellows who numbered four of five. Witnosa trob within about 20yds of Matthew Parsons, and came back. He did nob think it was safe to pursue and catch one of them. In the tirat case the window broken was the bar window. In all, _aight windows were broken. Witness fo*fa ijbat the windows had been broken wiftn large stones (produced), which ho and Sergeant Clarkes picked up in the hotel, some in the bar and some in the dining-room. None oi the defendants over came to pay for any of the windows. The first window wa3 presumably broken by a hand being bbrusb through ib. • \ Mrs Purcell, wife of the crapplainanb, gave corroborative evidence as to the breaking of the windows in the hotafck. Thomas McCluskey depoae|»*hab he was boarding ab the Railway Terminus Hotel, and that'on Wednesd^ evening he wenb to aasiab Purcell in his s&ugglo with the two Parsona after they had broken the window. One of the Parsons struck Purcell and then the two of them tackled him. The defendants gob the worst of it, and both of them promised to pay for the windows. After the second window-breaking book place witness saw Bomo young fellows running Wro. Smothers deposed thab on Wednesday evening he was passing the Railway Terminus Hotel and saw two young fellows comoonb of bhe hotel, and one of them pub his nsb through the window of tho hotel. Witness could nob recognise either of them. ■ , , , For the defence ib waa contended that the two defendants were at home in bed at their father's houe&-ab the time th.at the windows were broken on Wednesday ovening. The defendants denied having broken the windows. • Tho defendants asserted thab they only struck Purcell in selfdefence, and thab he provoked tho assault by laying his hand on one of them. "The case was still proceeding as we went t> > press this afbernoon.