FALSE TEETH BROKEN

Evening Star, Issue 19775, 27 January 1928, Page 7

FALSE TEETH BROKEN

A CHARGE OF ASSAULT An alleged assault, which took place on the top of the old Post Office during the process of bulling down the building was the subject of a case in the City Police Court this morning, George, Simon Ross being charged with assaulting David Cnlder Leach. Mr C. J. L. White appeared for accused, who pleaded not guilty. Leach stated in evidence that he was a stone-mason, and was in charge of that work at the old Post Office. Accused, who was working on the bottom floor, came up to witness, and said: “Get to out of it. There' lias been enough done this night." Witness told accused he was not his boss, and accused struck him. That happened on the parapet in Princes street. Witness told him not to he silly. Then accused struck him again. Witness went down, and complained to the foreman, Ross hit witness again, and said he didn’t want any “ cheek from one of the lower deck.” Witness’s false teeth were broken, also his spectacles, It cost him £o 15s to have nis teeth remodelled. To Mr White witness denied that ho gave “cheek" to Ross. He did not say that he -was a “ tradesman,” and that he would not take orders from Ross. Ross was partly drunk at the time.

Witness denied that he was always getting fellow-workers into trouble. He denied that be was the cause of two men being “ sacked " from the Town Hall job. Henry M'Grath said he heard accused tell Leach to pick up bis tools, and then he saw the two haring a "go.” Witness saw accused pick up Leach, and hit him again. Accused was downstairs, and went upstairs. To Mr White: There was some argument between the two before the incident. “Has accused interviewed you since?” asked the sub-inspector. ‘■‘You can’t ask that now,” replied the .Magistrate. “It’s too late now-to treat the witness as hostile.” Thomas Jones, employed at the old Post Office, said be know defendant through working with him. On the clay in question Ross had told Leach to pack up and not take any more stone off. Leach replied: “You arc not my b boss.” At that Ross replied; “ lam your boss,” and, on the spur of the moment struck him. He fell down between the rafters, and Ross told him to get up. On getting up Loach made as though to run away, but tripped again. Leach bad been taking the stone off, and witness and another man were sending it away. After the brawl there was no sign of blood.

Evidence was also given by Alexander Clydesdale, who said he heard Ross call out to pack up. He saw Leach fall over; it ivas not the blow which ■put Leach over Something which was said must have caused the trouble.

For the defence Mr White, called William Henry Murphy, who said Ross told Leach to do something. Leach replied that lie was a tradesman and would not take orders from Ross. It was Leach who caused the trouble. Leach told witness afterwards that his glasses were not broken.

Harry Henry Ross said be heard Leach use the remark quoted by other witnesses. The previous day Leach was working with witness, and on that day Leach let his false teeth drop from his mouth. “ I call it a proper shame, honor bright,” added witness. He did not see any blows struck; he heard the language. The accused said he was an underforeman and wont from tire “ top deck to the lower deck ” in the course of his duty. Witness told Leach not to take off any more stone and Leach answered him in the way that had already been stated.' Witness then pushed him. Leach had been “ sacked ” the previous day, but had been taken on again. To the Sub-inspector; Accused admitted that, he struck Leach. William Henry Allan, foreman, said lie instructed Ross to go up to the top floor and tell the men to stop work.

Witness said be did not see Boss strike Leatrh when they came down from tiie top. Boss gave him a push. The Magistrate said that, after listening to the evidence, ho thought there was no question that Leach was ready to resent any orders given, and it was quite probable that he'said lie would take no orders. The circumstances, however, did not justify • Ross in committing the assault lie did. 'Ross was in a position of authority, but his proper course was to report the matter. If he had any personal grievance against Leach, then he should have taken 1 any action he thought fit afterwards. If there had been no provocation a heavy penalty would -have been imposed. , Ross would be fined £l, with expenses of witnesses (£3), in default seven days’ imprisonment.