AN ELECTION ROW.

Auckland Star, Volume XXIX, Issue 102, 2 May 1898, Page 3

AN ELECTION ROW.

POLICE COURT PROCEEDINGS.

Two young men named James Edmonds, alais Kitzgerald, and Albert Edward Glover were charged at the Police Court to-day with disturbing a public meeting, a school election to wit, held in St. James' Hall last Monday evening. There was a HtiCOild charge against both, of assaulting Thomas Armstrong, by striking him with their clenched fists.

Dr. Laishloy appeared for the defendants, and pleaded "guilty, under justifiable circumstances" on behalf of Edmonds, and not guilty to both charges against Glover. Mr Burton conducted the prosecution. Armstrong, a middle-aged man who described himself as a commission agent, said the meeting was a-noisy one. He was asking the returning oHicei a question when one of the defendants called out to him to "shut up." He replied, "shut up yourself," whereupon Glover struck him on the side of the head. They left the building after that, but witness came in again and sat down beside a friend. About'iO minutes after the first assault Edmonds struck him full in the face, saying-, "Take that, you old !" At the same time some one struck him on tho back of the head. He then heard Glover's voice, urging the other defendant to run away. Asa result of the blows, Armstrong was unable to leave his house for three days, his eyes being closed up and his face swollen.

Dr. Laishley: Were you not put out of the hall by a man named Worthington before the assault?— No.

Didn't you raise your stick as if to strike somebody ?— T did not.

In answer to further questions the witness said lie was " as sober as the most of them," and had not been drinking "particularly."

Constable Douthett gave corroborative evidence. He slated that (Hover struck Armstrong as lie was falling from the force of Edmond's blow. The first blow knocked Armstrong nearly insensible, and tho second was equally hard. Evidence was also given by John Gordon, who presided at the meeting, John Preston, Robert Findlay and William Earle, who were present at the meeting. Several other witnesses for the prosecution were examined after the luncheon adjournment, giving corroborative evidence as to the assault. The case for the pro-i secution occupied the Court till three" o'clock.

Dr. Laishley, in opening his defence, said that far from the accused having no right to be present at the meeting, it was a most hopeful and creditable fact that young men glowing up in our midst should evince such an interest in the education of the young. The case for tho defence was proceeding when we went to press.