Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SHEFIELD ELECTION SEQUEL.

CHARGE OF ASSAULT AGAINST A

CANDIDATE. WILD SCENES IN COURT.

Extraordinary eceues characterised the hearing at the Sheffield City Police Court of a series of etHiunonses for'assault arising out of the recent bye-election in the Atterelift'e division. That contest was remarkable for the vigorous campaign of an unofficial Conservative candidate, Mr Muir Wilson, who secured 2,800 votes, but was yet at the bottom of the poll. After the declaration of the result Mr Wilson alleged that the official Conservative candidate, Mr Sydney Charles King-Farlow, struck hiin and smashed the hat he was wearing. He subsequently took out two 6umnioiK.es against Mr King-Farlow, one for assault and the other for causing damage to the hat, and tine eases were heard by Mr Wilson Mappin and Mi- S. Meggitt Johnson. Mr King-Farlow was defended by Mr George Elliott, K.C. Mr Wilson conducted his own ca.se. 'The court was crowded. • Mis King-Fallow had a scat by her husband. Mr Wilson said that tliis was the final act in the parliamentary extravaganza of Attereliffe. The question for their Worships was the very simple one of whether or not about 10.30 p.m. on May 4 he was assaulted by defendant, and hi.s hat damaged. After the counting of the voles ho had the very jolly position of being at the bottom of the. poll. He proceeded to quote from the speeches made during the ottering of a vote of thanks to the returning officer, and admitted that, designedly, advisedly, and intending to hurt—and it did hurt—he himself said : " My other opponent was so wari>ed by the. prejudice of others that he could not be fair, and has not been fair.'' Ho would repeat that statement now- in court. That was the beginning of the trouble. After the declaration from the balcony of the Town Hall he went into a committee room, and there saw Mr King-Farlow as-white asmarble. The defendant said to him : "You liar and cad." and struck him on the top of the hat. He would prove that the hat was cut, and this was the assault complained of. "Immediately behind me." Mr Wilson continued, "was Mru Kini»Farlow. and she threw hor arms romid me, otherwise, I frankly confess. I would have struck' him. It is the tin-d time a woman's arms have been round me that mine have not been round her."

This re-mark was gTeeted with laughter in court, but the mirth was quickly .suppressed. Mi Wilson went on-to say that lie had not- a single witixws of the assault, and stood upon hi* own word alone, but a weak case was often the strongest from its surroundings. He had since written demanding a.n apology from the defendant, but had received no answer. He did not wish Mr King-Farlow to be fined or even bound over, or ordered to pav for the damage to the hat. He had taken action because he did net wish people at the nextelection to say that he dare not mnimoii Mr King-Farlow. If such a thing were said of him, he would he able to°reply: " Yes, I did, and the magistrates thought it was unworthy of punishment and dismissed the case." —Mr Wilson Cross-examined.—

Mr Wilson was cross-examined bv Mr Elliott. He stated that Mr King-Farlow said "rude things" about him. Following Mr Wilson's answers to oilier questions counsel asked him to behave himself as a gentleman, and also whether he was accustomed to such treatment from witnesses.

Mr Wilson : I am not ;iccustonied to meet such an advocate as vou.

Mr Elliott : I quite agico with vou. Were you surprised at Mr King-Faiiow calling you a liar and a cad?—l wan not surprised at anything he said. It is language with wfiieh you are pretty familiar?—No; I have met a good many, though.

Hid you give a nice little speech on May 11? Is this material?

Mr Elliott: Mr Wilson is the only witness to the asstiult, and I am going to 6how by these questions what sort of a man he

Mr Wilson : Tlien I shall not answer them.

Mr Elliott: You made a speoch, did you not?—l don't know whether I did or not-.

Did yon say : " You know the chairman. He is a knocker off of linoleum, and you know what a vulgar chap he is. You have only to look at the back of his neck to see how much of my whisky he has concealed there?"—l don't- know anything about it.

And you are the gentleman who is surprised at being assaulted?— Well, you had better not try it on.

Mr Elliott proceeded to road further extracts from the speech made on May 11, alleging that Mr Wilson had said o'f a city councillor that he " was scarcely ever clean," had spoken of a member of Parliament as " Slimy Sam," of the lender of the Conservative party in Sheffield as " the heavy father, the biggest scoundrel of the lot," of a newspaper company as " the High street litre—the biggest liars out of ," and of a woll-known member of the Primrose League as " a lady of very considerable dimensions, as vulgar as she is fat."

Mr Wilson said that he had no recollection of many parts of the speech. Mr Elliott : Aro you in the habit of talking to people like that, and yet you resent anyone calling you a liar" and a cad ? —That is an impertinent question. After reading another reference to Mrs King-Farlow, Mr Elliott said to witness : " You are not a man."

Mr Wilson at this exclaimed : " If you tell me I am not a man I shall come down to you. It will take more than the chairman to stop me." Mr Elliott : I say if you use Language liko that you are a cad.

Mr Wilson : And T sav vou are a scoun drel. ' ' Mr Eliott : Another of votrr remarks is :

" I will paint Walkley blue and the ' heavy father ' red next " ?—Yes ; I shall paint Walkley blue next November, and you blue too, if you come to oppose me. Don't you know that your own conduct has been under '! — l decline to answer.

Have you not been discarded by your own law society?— Nothing of the kind. 1 resigned. What has thus to do with the case ?—I shall not answer tho questions. Mt Elliott continued his cTOss-exaniina-tion, Mr Wilson protesting vehemently. Eventually he said : " T shall come out of the box," and doing this he Teturned to his seat at the solicitore' table.

Mr Elliott's comment to tho magistrates was that the attitude of the gentleai-m was auite sufficient for him.

Mr Wilson : All I can say is that you are a scoundrel and a cad.

.\Lr Elliott making a TomaTk a momont later, Mr Wilson turned to him and said : "Don't make a fool of yourself. Nature has done it already very successfully." Mr Albert Harland, a member of the Sheffield City Council, gave evidence.' He said ho heard Mr King-Farlow fay to Mr Wilson that he was a cowardly liar and a cad for having said things when privileged that he would not dare to have 6aid outside. He did not see any assault at all. —The Cases Dismissed.— The Chairman, without calling upon the defence, 6aid that both cases would be difitniesod. Mr Elliott said that he would like to say "on behalf of Mrs King-Farlow that she gave the most emphatic denial to the statement that she put her arms on Mr Wilson. He characterised the case as monstrous, and asked for an order for payment of costs.

Mr Wilson was again on his feet protecting, and the Chairman told a police officer to make him eit down. A minute later, though, he was interrupting again, and the Chan-man said that uidws Mr Wilson kept quiet he must ask the officer to remove him from the court.

Mr Wilson retorted that this could rot j be done, as it was not a court of record. I The magistratee' clerk, however, said that tie magistrates had the power. Mj Elliott again saad that Mrs KingFarJow denied aw touchim; Mi Witoo.

Whether she did or did not, however, foi him to have used the language he had done against, her was an insult which he protested against in the strongest language of which ho was capable. Eventually the magistrates said that the complainant must pay twenty guineas costs. Mr Wilson protested against the order, v.nd said he should give notice < f appeal. A third summons against a commissionaire in the service of the proprietors of the. ' Sheffield Telegraph,' Mr Wilson alleging assault on the ground that the man pushed him in preventing him from going to the room of the editor of the evening paper, was dismissed.

_ A crocs summons by the commission aire against Mr Wilson was also die missed.—' Manchester Guardian.'

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD19090721.2.18

Bibliographic details

Evening Star, Issue 14117, 21 July 1909, Page 3

Word Count
1,476

SHEFIELD ELECTION SEQUEL. Evening Star, Issue 14117, 21 July 1909, Page 3

SHEFIELD ELECTION SEQUEL. Evening Star, Issue 14117, 21 July 1909, Page 3