ASSAULT CHARGE

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume 32, Issue 32516, 13 December 1944, Page 6

ASSAULT CHARGE

WOMEN BEFORE COURT INCIDENT AT WHITIANGA DECISION FOR PLAINTIFF A decision for plaintiff. Frances Crosbie, married, of Whitianga, in a civil claim for £lOO general and £l5 special damages through assault by Margaret Plows, widow, of Whitianga. was given by Mr W. H. Freeman, S.M., in the Thames Magistrate’s Court on Tuesday. Mr Freeman fixed special damages, covering medical treatment, at £3/3/- and reserved the amount of the general damages. Both plaintiff and defendant were charged with assault by the Police (Sergeant N. S. Milligan) from the same incident. The magistrate said the case against Mrs Crosbie would be dismissed and that against Mrs Plows held over for six months to see what the position was then and her conduct in the meanwhile. z Mr J. W. F. Dickson, of Auckland, appeared for plaintiff and Mr A. G. T. Bryan for defendant. On July 17, said Nir Dickson, plaintiff as landlady went to see defendant. Words passed, and Mrs Plows got a stick and smashed plaintiff over the head. She was confined to hospital for a period and unable to work for some mouths. Evidence Of Plaintiff

Frances Crosbie, of Whitianga, said defendant was a tenant of one of hexplaces. She had not received the rent for some time. She went to see her about the water. She heard a noise and thought Mrs Plows was doing a haka, as she was dancing round, telling witness to get out and calling hex’ a wretch for turning off the water. Witness had not done this, however. Defendant said she would make a good job of witness this time. Defendant told her never to come to the house again, and witness replied that she had a perfect right to come between suixrise and sunset. Defendant then hit hex’ on the head with a broom handle, and everything went black. She was in hospital for some time, and had not been able to work on her farnx since or improve it. There was no justification for the assault. -To Mr Bryan, witness said she did not worry the Plows about getting out of the house if they did not pay the increased rent asked. She did not go to the house every Saturday and cause a row. There was not a good deal of quarrelling between hex- and Mrs Plows. She had never said: “She and her childi'en can go out into the street until they could find somewhere else.” At first Mrs Plows was kind to her, but later her attitude changed. After a vicious threat made to her two years ago she was frightened of Mrs Plows. She did not believe that because of the death of Mr Plows their attempt to purchase a new house fell through. She had not gone constantly through the house, only twice. She wanted the'place to live in herself. Witness denied that she had rushed at Mrs Plows and tried, to sieze her by the throat after Mrs Plows made a remark to her.

Re-examined, witness said she had not received any rent from Mrs Plows since Mr Plows had died. Good Deal Of Blood

Constable S. Tuckex* said there was no doubt the assault was serious. There was a good deal of blood lost. Mrs Crosbie used to work like a man. To Mr Bryan, he said Mrs Crosbie seemed to get on well with other tenants. To Mr Dickson, he said the assault took place at the washhouse door.

Janies Robert Norton, aged 22, an employee of Mrs Crosbie, said he went with her to Mrs Plows’ house to see about the water on July 17. Mrs Crosbie said she did not want to go on hex- own: she was frightened of Mrs Plows. He heard voices and later started to walk out toward the gate. He heard a smack and saw Mrs Crosbie lying on the ground a yard or two from the washhouse. Her head was bleeding- very badly. Since the incident Mrs Crosbie had not been able to work on the farm. Before that she worked all the time on it. Other evidence stated Mrs Crosbie had been a strong woman, accustomed to doing Iho work of a man. Submissions For Defence , Mr Bryan submitted tliat on the occasion of the visit of Mrs Crosbie the water bad been off for a month and Mrs Plows was doing her first wash for the period when Mrs Crosbie called

out loudly to her. Mrs Plows did not leave the washhouse, and Mrs Crosbie became excited and made some derogatory remarks, which led to Mrs Crosbie making a dash at Mrs Plows, who, with a broom in her hand, hit at

her a blow, which was made in selfdefence and fear.

Margaret Plows said she and her husband had lived in two houses of Mrs Crosbie. They left the first and l\lrs Crosbie bought the second while they were in it. During her husband’s life, she had no dealings' with Mrs Crosbie. There was strain between her husband and airs Crosbie. She referred to trouble with airs

Crosbie on occasions, on one of which a constable was called in. Her husband had sometimes had to tell airs Crosbie to leave. She had had occasion to complain to the Health Department about things at the house which required to be Attended to. airs Crosbie did not appreciate anything witness tried to do for her, such as giving ’her cups of tea. A while before the assault airs Crosbie told witness she could have a house at Puru, but witness could not go there. On July 17 she was tidying up the w’ashhouse when she heard airs Crosbie asking loudly about when she

was going away. Mrs Crosbie said she had had the water turned oxi for her owxx use, as she was going to stay. Witness was in the doorway in the washhouse and it seemed to her that Mrs Crosbie was going to enter the house.

Witness said: “The only time you are welcome is when you come to collect the rent.” Mrs Crosbie replied: “I didn’t come to collect the rent.” Mrs Crosbie also referred to her being a Maori. Witness said: “You call yourself white! I think you’re a disgrace to the race!” Mrs Crosbie replied : “Why don’t you go back to live in the Maori pa?” Witness replied that Mrs Crosbie was not insulting, her by saying that. “I believe where you are living is worse than any Maori pa in New Zealand.” As a result of this remark Mrs Crosbie seized her by the throat and witness struck her with the broom handle to defend herself. Witness had been frightened of Mrs Crosbie and knew she could work like a man. Mrs Crosbie said after the blow: “I’ll get even with you.” Witness did not see any blood.

To Mr Dickson, witness said she had not told the constable that Mrs Crosbie caught her by the throat, but had said she struck her on the chest. She had not paid rent since August, 1943, because Mrs Cros;bie had owed her husband £34, although Mrs Crosbie disputed this. In the last 12 months Mrs Crosbie had spoken to her only once or twice. After witness hit Mrs Crosbie on the head she did not go to hex- assistance. It was not true that hex- late husband had complained to the police about her assaulting him. Witness said she thought she had paid the water rate in the past. Magistrate’s View

Whatever the pros and cons of the case, one thing was certain, Mrs Crosbie had been struck a severe blow, said the magistrate. Plaintiff desired to get rid of her tenant and frankly said so, but when a person wanted to get rid of a tenant there was a certain legal way of doing so.

If was difficult to know how much of the evidence to believe. Plaintiff was a very difficult witness and defendant obviously could not remember anything detrimental to her. The blow struck was out of all proportion to any required to ward off an attack. That being so, defendant to, his mind was liable.