Result of a Bailiff Siege.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume I, Issue 59, 27 October 1887, Page 2

Result of a Bailiff Siege.

ENTRY—OBSTRUCTION—TLE SEQUEL

AN INTERESTING CASE.

Ar ths B.M. Court on Tuesday Willonghhy Brassey, solicitor, was charged with assaulting li. G. Direy, bailiff. Sureties of the peace were also claimed, Mr Kenny with Mr Watson appeared for the complainant, and Mr defended himself.

The defendant objected to be bound over. It there had been an assault committed he was liable to be punished for it, but he knew of no authority whereby a person could claim Hitt eties only. He bad no objection to the charge being gone into, but he would point out that as the information was drawn up no conviction could hu rticoi’-led.

Mr Kenny eaid a plea would have to be made.

Mr Brassey said he refused to he bound over. The Court could take that for what it liked—l plead not guilty. Mr Kenny said the information was laid in accordance with the J.P. Act. and contended that it was not necessary to expressly say that sureties were required in addition to any penalty. His Worship said he was satisfied the information was in accordance with the Act. Mr Brassey asked that a note Be made oi: his objection. In opening the case Mr Kenny reviewed the evidence f*r the prosecution at some length. During his address he gaid a man named Kenny ejected one of the g&rtlson. [Mr Booth •It Was hot yourself.] Mr Kenny answered in the negative, and con. tinubd, arguing tha’ if a bailiff were ejected after having once < ffected a po«ses•i >n a forcible re-e try was justified by law. lie would nnt alone piovo that peaceable pOMPßsinn had been taken but that the defendant had promised after he had ejected Feary who was in charge; to give up peaceable possession. This was in writing, and it was not until that promise was broken that a forcible re-entry was made. In concluding his remarks Mr Kenny said Mr Direy was afraid of defendant, more especially as Mr Brassey had, in Mr Sievwright‘s officej threatened to look Out for Diruy on a dark night and take it out of him. Mr Sievwright would prove this. Mr Brassey protested Against any sfioh remark being made. In the first place it had nothing to d<> with (he case, and he was sure Mr Sievwright would any nothing of the sort. Mr Kenny continued, and said that if an officer of the Supreme Court acted in the manner complained of, what could- they expoet fmm those who were ignorant ot the law? If siieli conduct were, allowed no hill

of sale could be executed unless a contingent if the permanent militia was procured from Wellington. The proceedings were only compmible with anarchy and chaos. W. Sievwright deposed : Was instructed by Mr Edwards, solicitor, to distrain for rent. Mr Kenny » When were you first asked to • li«train ? Mr Brassey asked what the question had to lo with the assault. It appeared as if they were trying to bring out irroveletit iriAttet to injure him. Sti h a course was disgraceful. Mr Kenny : Will you admit the lights of tenant and landlord existed between yourself and Mr Edwards?

Mr Brassey: Certainly. Witness : Signed warrant, and* instructed Direy to proceed under it. , Saw Di.ey on the •vening of the 12th, Mr Kenny : Dn you object to the conversaion wnh Mr Direy, Mr B ? Mrß assey: Yes, because I don’t believe he speaks lhe truth; Witness! J-lad many interviews with Brassey, and he (Brasspy) always maintained the bailiffs had no right, on the property. Bras'ey had always promised to pay, and believed he had endeavored io do so. Instructed Direv to re-enter. On the 15th received a letter from Brassey saying that the rent, would be paid at, 2.30 o'clock that day. The moiny was not paid, and instructed Direy to take “quiet” possession. Used the term “ quiet ” because Brassey had said he would give up peaceable possession. Had received a letter from Brassey since the 15th.

Mr Brassey objected to anything being gone into since the 15th, the day of the assault. The questio is were only being asked to draw out needless information. Any man who would stand by and see his house broken into would be a cur. He was glad he was in the position of having to defend the action.

Mr Kenny Went on to show that he was justified in getting in the evidence, when Mr Brassey said he was m»t astonished at even a Magistrate being misled. Witness: Direy was afraid he had no authority to make a forcible entry, and I gave him an autllorit •—Woodfall on Landlord and Tenant. Brassey had paid £l9 10s on account and £H for costs. A conversation took place at my office on the 17th between Brassey and Direy, Brassey seemed angry with Direy for having taken possession. Chere was something said by Brassey about paying Direy out dark night and treat him a little more roughly than he had done. Direy was alarmed by thia threat and drew my attention to it* To Mr Bracey : Ate you serious in saying that I said if I got Direy in the dark I would pay him out ? Wi ness: Suine.hing like that. I am

certain some such word* were used, L. G. Direy : Am bailiff employed by the Sheriff. Beceived the warrant (produced) from Mr Sievwright. On Wednesday, Ootober 12th, executed the warrant, G. Feary being my assislant. Put Feary in charge. Saw a servant in the homie and told her the object of my visit. Took an inventory of the drawing and dining rooms, Served a copy of the warrant and the inventory on the servant and asked her to give them to Mr Brassey. Authorised Feary to remain in charge, in writii g. In consequence of a report went up to Brassey's house on Friday, Oct. 14. and saw Brassey and another man at the gate, Tried to open the gate, but Brassey opposed. Then went to the side gate, but was also obstrueted. and could not get in. On the next day went up again, aimed with a law book on the question of making a forcible re-entry. When I go' to the house I had C. Priestly, G. Feary, Mclntosh, and another man with me. Went in at the side gate and went to ■ho side glass door. Saw Jones, Brassey’s

He I* fus/d, and I produced my warrant, bj holding it. up in front of him. Also showed him a letter writien by Brassey offering to give up peaceable possession. Jones still refused, and I went round the house and found the doors and windows all locked. Then told Priestly to break in one of the glass French doors, opening on to the verandah. Priestly broke two panes of glass and the divisions so that he could get in. As Priestly was getting through the aperture Kenny (Brassey’s servant) and Brassey came up. Kenny, I think, pulled Priestly back. Brassey told me to clear out, and violently pushed me off the verandah. He then took off his coat and came at me in a thieatening manner. Finally he laid violent hands on me. and I resisted. There was a tussle and we both fell. Both got up, and I then saw two

of my army leaving—Mclntosh and my friend. When we weie on our feet again, Brassey rushed at me a second time, and I resisted and we both fell. Got up, and Brassey rushed at me again, and w*boih fell. I concluded I was not strong enough to continue it, and retired. Was present in Mr Sievwright’s office on Monday the 17th October when Brasbey was there. Mr Brassey objected to any evidence being given as to any convention on the 17th as it had nothing to do with the case of the 15th. The conversation referred to never took place.

His Worship said in the first place the information set out that the informant was still in bodily fear. Mr Sievwright had said some such conversation, as required to be elicited from the witness, took place. Mr Brassey said that was from what Mr Direy had afterwards told him (Sievwright.) His Worship said Mr Sievwright had said he had heard some such remarks made himself.

Mr Brassey said he (Mr Sievwright) had said, “ I think so however, if His Worship liked to look at it in that light hetoa d doso H His Worship said he could take Mr bievwright’s word.

The "itn ss continued : In Mr Sievwright’s office Mr Brassey said he would meet me some dark night and take it out ol me.

Io Mr Brassey: lam frightened you wil assault me. I take yohr own words for it lou never offered to go up With rile to you: house. Had men ready to go into the housi tn hieak in if you did not pay the money Kicked at the door. Was not sure who it wai who pulled Pi iestly away from the window We fell three times. It is not a fact that ; only paid Feary six shillings a day for hl day’s work and received ten shillings. Ire ce *yed ten shillings a day for him. G- Feary: Whs amongst the unemployed a present. On Wednesday, October 12, wa taken up to Mr Brassey’h house by Mr Direy When he was holding possession Brassey lei him out to the gate and put him out, Toll Brassey he had the keys and would not givi them up. The witness corroborated M Direy’a evidence on all points, except the on as to his pay. In answer to Mr brassey the witness salt Direy had paid him fid a day. He signed i receipt for more money. He received Iron Direy 31s altogether. He put in for £2 10 and thought he was signing for that, bu Direy said he had crossed it out. He (Direy said he had only got bo much for doing th work.

L. G. Direy re-caHed: I paid Feary 80s and have not charged Mr Hievwright more than I have paid the men.

W. Sievwright recalled: Only paid Direy 30rf for Feary, as I comddered his claim excessive.

Charles Priestly gave corroborative evidence as to what occurred between Direy and Brassey. Some of nis answers caused consiiierable amusement.

Mr Kenny ; Who was the man who pulled ynu auay from the aperture in the window? Witness: I think he hfis the sariie name as yourself (laughter).

Mr Keuny : What did Mr Brassey do to Mr Direy ?

Witness: He went for him in -tv fighting attitude, and Direy then said, •• Num.'ll your time to get in/’ but I was interested in the tight. . Mr Kenny: How many times did Direy ami Brassey close ?

Witness : They closed three times and fell three times. Direy's face Ml on the earth and he got up and winked and blinked. (Laughter.) Brassey fell like a cask of pork (laugnteiji and winked and biinked like an old hen Laughter.) His Worship here remonstrated as to the way in which the Witness wks giving his evidence; Witness : I could not help feeling amused, as 1 like anything of that sort (laughter.) It was a rough and tumble.

Mr Kenny : Who commenced the attack ? Witness; Brassey always made the attack. This closed the prosecution. Mr Brassey said he felt glad in the interest of the.public that he was placed in the position he was in, although he did - not envy b. ing in that position. The action was one worthy of full notice, and the principals in actions such as the one before the Court should understand the position their actions p uced themselves in. In the present case a Uistreas warrant had . been issued for £45; drliiuh wks signed by Mr Sievwright, solicitor, as a duly authorised agent. There was absolutely uu proof that Mr Sievwright waj a duly authorised agent, but he was not going to tdad advantage of that. Possession was taken ahd certain property levied on. The rent was destrained for up io October 1, and the warrant was dated October 11. The Property Law Consolidation Act, section G2, sub section 2, said that whenever rent was in arretir for 21 days a landlord could distrain, but in this instance the rent was not in arrear 21 days. The goods in tile house did not belong to him, and he told Mr Sievwright so; a id lie would not see other people’s property sacrificed for hurt self. The law was that no laudiUrd shall destraifi upon property thkt did not belong to the tenant. There was no kcSAUit committed, but if there were he was perfectly satisfied that he was legally justified to do so. Leaving Feary in charge was ultra Vires. The Act cleatly set down that no delegation can be made in the warrant. The warrant in the present action was directed to an officer or his assistants, wheieas the law did not permit of it. There was no force used to Feary. He went out peaceably and without force. He had always contended that tne bailiffs had no right there. He would be the last to break the law, and it was not until Feary was outside that he (Brassey) demanded the key. Trie key was given up quietly. No doubt, Mi’ Sievwrigut had acted under the instructions of his principle, who was a solicitor, and who, he hoped, would have to account for his actions. The letter he sent to Mr Sievwright stated that peaceable possession would be given up at 2.80 and he would have done so if ha had been allowed. At 2.30 the complainant came to his office in a condition he had no right to be in, and declined to wait until possession was given up. Luckily he heard chat a force of men hau gane up to take possession. When he went up he found tnat two drunken men— Direy and Priestly—were smashing in the French door. Any man with the least com-

mon'sense womd have seen that the French uuor would have opened outwards, and the men-were trying to kick it in. He asked them to desist, and pushed Direy off the vemnduh. He fell down, and sat down on a flower bed and quoted Woodtail on Landlord and Tenant. Direy gut up and he (Brassey) pushed him away again, and ultim.ately led mm out. Mr Bra&eey contended, and quoted cases in support of his cu-uieniioii, tnat he was perfectly justified in acting as he hud done. It huu ueen too often the case that homes were broken up illegally, and then the parties had had to have recourse to civil law, without getting justice. He had been prepared to fulfil nis pleuge, and give dp posses.,ion quicLiy, but had not been allowed to do so. No one

Kould say that he had ever broken a contract ne had entered into: he would scorn to do , so. Tne case was one that should never have been brought into Court, but he was not sorry as, peihaps, he was better able to contest such an action than many others. W. R. llobiu sou, solicitor: Remember being at Brassey's house on October IfiiiT Messrs Duey, Feary, Priestly, Mclntosh and another person was there. Mr B.assey requested the men to leave. Taeie was a French window smashed. The bund wua injured. N«-xc saw Mr Brassey urging Mr Direy to go away, thou saw him Duey “ collapse.” This occurred a second and a third time. Could not say whether Direy was drunk. Would say tnat Direy was not in a fit state to conduct the business he was en gaged in. Mr Robinson at this stage graced at Mr Brassey, when— Mr Kenny said : Don’t look to Mr Brassey

lor an inspiration. Mr Robinson; Thank you I I am not looking at him or you either. Mr Keuuy ; You would not geF any from me. Mr Rjbinson : Il is no use looking to you, as 1 wou:d not get any. (Laughter,) Mr Kenny : You have made a serious allegation against Mr Direy, What is youi reason for saying he was not sober ? Mr Rubinsun : I don’t tnmk any man that was sober would sit down on a flower bed, m the way Direy did, and read Woodfall on Landlord and Tenant. Mr Kenny : Thea you say that because a man sits on a flower bed and reads Woodfall that lie is drunk. Why, Mr Brassey and j have been reading Wo >dfali, but you woulu not say we were d uuk ? Mr Robinson : Wny, were you sitting on a flower bed ? (Laughter.) After some more questions as to Mr Direy's state the following interrogations were put Mr Kenny: Why did you go up toßtassey's? Mr Robinsun : I don't know I need answer that question.

Mr Kenny : But you must. I insist upon

Mr Robinson : I need not answer every question you put to me. Mr Kenny : It may be very inconvenient for you to answer the question.

Mr Robinson: Oh, inconvenient indeed I Thank you ! Mr Brassey said to me, “ Come up old chap,” and we went up. Mr Kenny : Are you in the habit of going up to Brassey’s on Saturday afternoons. Mr Robinson : No. Sometimes. I wag up on Saturday evening and had a good dinner. Mr Kenny: “ Happy is the man who can say he has dined.”

Mr Brassey : Don’t you dine Mr Kenny? Mr Robinson: Mr Kenny does not look like as if he did. (Laughter.) Mr Brassey denied tint Mr Robinson knew what he (Mr Brassey) went up home for. Priestly and Duey were not sober. I To Mr Kenny : There was no rent due to Mr Edwards. it was interest on the purchase money of the house.

. R ’ N ' J ,? on » that Direy w U ‘■BOrewed.” He W.a neither drunk noi iober He raw Direy duing on the flower bed. Judging by his actions he should Bay Direv was not sober. The French door was a good deal damaged. * After Mr Kenny and Mr Brassey had ad. dressed the Court judgment was reserved until Wednesday. ‘ Yesterday afternoon His Wor.bin gatt his judgment. He said in giving judgment be would first revert to the admission nitfa by the defendant that the rights as between landlord and tenant existed between himself and Mr Edwards—that was the foundation of the action. The second entry was made by the bailiff under instructions hom Mr BieV* wnght, agent for Mr Edwards, the entry was made nn inventory was made pi thafurnitpiein twq rooms, and Mr Fearv wna left in charge Defendant came to the house, and took Feary by ths coat collar and led him outside the gate. There he demanded possession of the keys; one was quietly given up, but the other was produced under a threat. Coming to the second entry, the on. at which the assault was alleged to hkve been committed, His Worship reviewed all the evidence, and said tha question was •• Was the fust entry a good and proper one ? ” In bis opinion it was. On tha second occasion no doubt there was an assault: Direy wai pushed down. After looking carefully at th. authorities quoted he considered th. first entry was a good one. and that the com. p ainant was warranted in making a second forcible re-entry. The defendant would be ~®~ ennte of Court 13-<, counsel’s fee £2 2m, and witness expedites £l. As regards the second part of the infortriatfon--claiffiing sureties of the peace—he would make no order as he did not think Mr Direy had any. thing to fear from the defendant. Mr Brassey gave notice of appeal, and asked the Court to draw up a conviction * ny P roo «®<iiiigs iii the meantime, The Court agreed to this. A second information claiming Sureties of the peace was withdrawn. Mr Brassey claimed costs, and said hl could produce authorities to show that a a solicitor was entitled to costs when defend' ing himself. The case was adjourned till to day for. aigumcnt.