DOMESTIC INFELICITY.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume I, Issue 72, 7 March 1911, Page 11

DOMESTIC INFELICITY.

STIRRING UP THE HAPPY HOME. THE POLICE CALLED IN. Before his Worship, Mr. S. E. McCarthy, S.M., William May was this morning charged with using obscene language within the hearing of the public. Accused was not represented by counsel and pleaded “not guilty,” saying it was only “a bit of a row all over in an hour.” Sergt. Cruickshank conducted the prosecution for the police and called

Constable Heinsworth, who said that on February 18, at 11 p.m., he was telephoned for to Wellesly road. He found Mrs. May and her daughter, with other women, out on the street. In consequence of what he was told, he went into the house and spoke to May, who was lying on the bed with one of the boys. May asked his wife: “Are you going to keep me here with a constable?” She replied: “You can stay if you behave yourself.” The constable then retired and later the mother and daughter ran out on to the road and accused followed them, using bad language. He then went into Uie house again, but returned at once to the verandah using the most vile language to his wife in the presence of other women and children. Witness went

into the house again with the object of frightening accused, and making him go to bed. His wife threw her arms around his neck and cried, asking him to- go to bed. Witness then left. Accused, after asking a few questions, said he wished to call his wife, who would swear she never heard him use the words complained of. THE WIFE IN THE BOX. TRIES TO SHIELD ACCUSED. Caroline May, scik.l that accused was not under the influence of liquor when he came home. She did not hear the words in the information used. The constable came to her husband while he was lying asleep and pulled his ear and told him to get out. Witness said not to turn him out. It was too late and he could uot get a bed. The constable said, yes, he could; he had money. The constable also called him a mongrel and a cur. She was on the street, talking to a neighbour when the constable came, and accused was in bed. His Worship: Can you say whether at the hour you and your daughter were on the footpath and complained to the constable? Witness: When the constable came up and asked what was the trouble, a neighbour next door said : “She is frightened to go in.” His Worship : “What did you say?”

Witness: “Nothing.” His Worship: “Why did you not contradict her if it was not true.” Witness: It> was no good to contradict her;'she would only turn round and abuse me.” His Wotship: “What were women and children doing on the footpath after 11 p.m. ?” Witness-: “There were no children.” ' His Worship : “What were you all doing there? Please tell me at once. You should speak the truth when you come to a court of justice. Witness: “My husband was annoyed at being knocked up. He never knocked me about.” To Sergt. Cruickshank: This is not the first time the police have been to the house. Two policemen came a short time ago. Her husband was out in the yard. He was quite sober. He was sleeping in the yard. He had been a bit noisy and she sent for the police. His Worship: “What made-him noisy. He was quite sober, you say?” Sergt. Cruickshank: “You will not swear he was sober?” Witness: “Yes.” His Worship: “Now, will you swear he was sober?” Witness: “He was not quite sober.” Sergt. Cruickshank: “Was this the only time the police visited you ?”

Witness: “Yes.” Sergt. Cruickshank: “Was not “Constable' Rosanoski there?” . No answer. Sergt. Cruickshank: “Have they not been in so often £hat you forget ?” In reply to further questions witness said she was talking to neighbours and saw her husband on the verandah. She could not hear what he said, but heard talking. Sergt: Cruickshank said he would not push the woman, any further. The man was a Corporation employee, addicted to drink, and very quarrelsome when drunk. He had to send constables to the house four times in the last few months. A WARNING. His Worship spoke strongly to thg accused,. and pointed out that he was satisfied the wife had not spoken the truth. She would not tell the truth because she was afraid of him. He had no language to describe his feeling for the man who illtreated a woman. He was surprised the Corporation employed him. He would convict accused and order him to come up for sentence when called upon. He was not showing leniency, but only considering the wife and family. If he came up again he would be dealt with severely. He was liable to 12 months’ imprisonment.