DISTURBANCE AT DANCE

Evening Star, Issue 21717, 11 May 1934, Page 9

DISTURBANCE AT DANCE

MOTHER-IN-LAW’S COMPLAINT PRIVATE CHARGE OF INDECENT LANGUAGE A disturbance between a man and bis mother-in-law at a dance on Easter Saturday in the Puketeraki Hall had its sequel in the Police Court to-day, when Anna Groves, a Puketeraki farmer, brought an information for indecent language against Arthur M'Leod. The complaint was heard by Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M. Mr B. S. Irwin prosecutediand Mr C. J. L. 'White appeared for M'Leod. Mr Irwin said informant was defendant’s mother-in-law. Other proceedings had been adjourned, the daughter and. the child returning to her mother at Puketeraki, defendant paying a certain sum. Accompanied by her daughter, informant went to a public dance in the Puketeraki Hall. Defendant came into _ the hall, and, when close to complainant, made an indecent reflection on her character. Defendant was removed from the hall, but later returned. He wanted to speak to, or of, informant, and again used a bad expression. M'Leod was under the influence of liquor, and was probably rankling tinder some feeling against bis mother-in-law as a consequence of the other proceedings. The informant said that she carried on a dairy farm at Puketeraki. The defendant was married to her daughter, and as they had had some domestic unhappiness, the daughter was living with witness. Witness was accompanied to the dance by her daughter. The defendant came into the hall with witness’s nephew, Joseph Groves, who sat next to witness. M'Leod beckoned to her nephew to go out, but the latter took no notice. M'Leod walked over' and told him to come away from the “ low clique.” Groves said he would he out in a few minutes. M'Leod came back, and, pointing to witness, made remarks casting reflections on her character. Groves jumped up and said “ Cut that out, now.” Defendant repeated the words, and was told by a man named Gillan to “ stop his dirty talk.” M'Leod closed his two fists and walked over to Gillan and said “ You well know me.” The doorkeeper came in with two other men and told M'Leod to go out, which he did, though he came back a few minutes later and made further remarks. Cross-examined by Mr White, witness said that she was not bringing the action for spite—she wanted peace. Witness told Mr White that she had not gone to the police because there were none nearer than Waikouaiti. Further cross-examined by Mr White, she said that she did not remember being told by the magistrate in a civil action that her evidence was unreliable. , She denied that she wanted defendant to lose his position as a result of this case. He was paying 10s a week now, and if he lost his position she would be worse off. Mr White: You are not fond of your son-in-law ?—No. He married my daughter, not me. Why are you so anxious to come to court ?—For protection. Mr Irwin remarked that the matter might not have reached the court if defendant had given an undertaking that he would not offend again. Mr White: Ho does not want to have anything to do with her. “ Well, why does he not he a man and give the undertaking, even at this late stage,” said Mr Irwin. The Magistrate pointed out that if the charge were proved it would be a serious matter for defendant. Mr White: He does not admit using the language. After further discussion Mr White said defendant would giye an undertaking not to go near informant. The Magistrate adjourned tho case for a few minutes to allow a settlement to be reached, if possible. On the court resuming the crossexamina.tion was continued. She denied that on occasions she had put out her foot to attempt to trip M'Leod. She had not had trouble with another man, her brother-in-law, at a dance in December, and she had not been ordered to leave the hall for using insulting language. She was not in the habit of using bad language to any person or any thing. Did M'Leod call you a rotten parasite?—No. Did you call him a mongrel?—lxo. Nellie Elizabeth Pile, a Kantanc resident, said M'Leod had referred to complainant as “a dirty common nor refer to M'Leod. To Mr White: She had discussed the incident many times since with informant. Further evidence as to the happenings at the dance was given by Sidney Gillan, an employee on the informant s dairy farm, H© stated that defendant had come over to him in a threatening manner and said: “ Do you well know me? ” Witness replied that he knew him. Joseph Groves, a labourer, of Puketeraki, said he had gone to tho dance with M'Leod. He did not sit down, but tho informant pulled him down on the seat. M'Leod came in and told him to “ come home from this parasite. Witness did not know what the word meant —he had not heard it before. When M'Leod asked witness to go out witness followed him. That was all M'Leod said. Witness hear the expression “ used in tho hall. , Mr Irwin said he thought he was entitled to treat the witness as hostile, but His Worship said ho could not treat him as hostile at this s f a K e r“What are you chewing? Mr Jiwin shot at the witness, who replied. “Chewing gum.” , r . “ Arc you chewing? ’ the Magistrate asked witness, who replied that he was. ~ . , His Worship said he would take the adjournment, mid told witness that lie must remove any chewing gum beloic Itc came into court.