EXPELLED BOWLER.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 11 February 1925, Page 7

EXPELLED BOWLER.

INTERESTING CASE

CLAIM FOR REINSTATEMENT

<Bv Telegraph—Special to Star.) U > WP.DLINGTUN, Feb. 10. The case in which James Dickson dievwright, journalist of Wellington, ,s pioceeonig against the Wellington oownng Cluu for £2s' damages and asking that his expulsion be declared null and void, is creating a good deal ot interest among bowlers in the city. The case arose out of soneone cutting plaintiff’s trousers at the green, i ohowing which a disturbance occurred. Plaintiff, it is stated, accused one T. Hymns of having performed the act. As a, result of subsequent incidents plaintiff was expelled from the club, after having been called on by the directors to apologise for having ailegdly struck at Jrlyams. lti cross-examination by Mr. Myers, plaintiff denied that lie was an angry man when he found his trousers were mutilated. He was only annoyed. In a remark made outside the green he was only poking fun at the match committee. “Do you seriously suggest to his Honor that you said it jokingly?” “Well, it was more in sorrow than m anger.” Mr. Myers: “That does not answer my question.” Mr. Sievewright: “It was said jokingly. As I said in my letter, I did not for a. moment believe that any member of the match committee had done it.” Mr. Myers: “Then why did, you do it?” Mr. Sievewright: “We sometimes do things we don’t mean.” “Oli, do we?” said Mr. Myers, with emphasis. “If you saw that Hyams resented the remark, why did you put it up to him and suggest that lie had done it ? Plaintiff: It was not putting it up to Hyams in a direct way. I said it was very like the act of a man who hid another chaps’ bowls .to prevent him from playing with them, because they belonged ■'to the club.” ‘‘Did you not mean Hyams when you said that?” “Yes.” “"Were you still joking when you suggested Hymans did it ” “I said it was like a certain action. £ was still joking. • He could take it to himself if he wanted to.” “Do you still say it was a joke?” “Well, if you had been there you would have laughed.” Mr. Myers: “I am sorry yon have sucli a poor opinion of me.” Mr. Myers: “Hyams did not treat it as a joke—lie called you a liar!” “He called me a damn liar.” Mr. Myers: “He was not joking then; lie seemed to be telling you the truth.” Plaintiff: “What, when he called me a liar.’’,’ Witness said the bowlers on the green were laughing at the affair, though he saw it was getting serious. He may have called Hyams a miserable pimp, but he was not sure. It was not the .language one member should use to another, nor should one member cut another’s trousers. Counsel asked if it was not a fact that plaintiff would have been expelled in 1929, hut for Mr. Salek’s friendship to-wards him. Plaintiff said he had never heard of it. Mr. Myers: “You were nearly expelled in 1920, were you not?” “I don’t think so. In 1921 they sang that I was a jolly good fellow, and sent me away with a bowling team. I was a great chap.” “Yes. I would like to consult some of the others about that,” rejoined the counsel, who then asked whether it was not a fact that in 1920 Sievwriglit had to apologise to the Club for his conduct. Plaintiff replied: “Oh!, yes, yes, that’s right, because there was a defference over the selection of men playing matches, but that has nothing to do with this case.” Mr. Myers: “That .is not for you to say.” Plaintiff : “Well I am saying it.” 'Die case is proceeding.