THE BOXING DAY RIOT AT TIMARU.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LIII, Issue 5953, 25 March 1880, Page 3 (Supplement)

THE BOXING DAY RIOT AT TIMARU.

i The trial of fch«tiriutere-.eame, on before< , judge/Ward on. JVloroh.2:-r- :. ~i. ■ ■■ \- Jeremiah Relly; Laurence,Towers, Patrick ■ P’iihea,. Patrick-; OlOonnpr,,.. Jamcai-iWataonj, John , Dinahy,- Maurice ,Mqy nahan, i Thomas; P’DrißpoUjaßdD^pielvOjJlfiefoMWroji* l^®l !®.^ for riotously-assembling in,a public place in. Timaru,ouDec.,,S6 last,_and with .awaultingi and beating ona Johu,Seidi: .v ,uv.-o; sioq ei!« She Court ww densely crowded; _and; great! public, interestwasj taken' .Inrithe.trjah ; . A*-, the accused were ,oallqdion,:tV»eiif bail,ith©jr were ; drawn up in: line, in ,front of.theidooks, She /indictment, baying.j beeni rcadr-otfer .to. them, they. were (Called upon.-,to; pleadrsepar ratoly, and, they,a’lpleadpd ‘(Nob Guilty j!’ j , |Mp Stout, defended -the prisoners,, and-Mr Duncan prosecuted on, tho part of the. Grown. i The <jwfc 3 uror called ,wa»: challenged by- : Counsel lor the ,'- ; -.ot an.-f; . ... Jllr Duflcan. knowat the outset s what-fh'js iJewyaedifolandiiintended ■ toldoi in; the (inatter-.-of challenge*. . • Stout intended.,,to .challenge for the. prisoners; separately, the papel-would: saonbcComcexT; hausted, and the Grown .would thefe baverto lake the cases against the prisoners separately. ■ Mr; Stout, said-ho held. A '.marked* but. in;hie . band, and if heigotithe.-mcp that euiiedshim,-. he would; not; require to -make Any-.Challenge^. ii ,should, onlyohalienge-jurors.whQ had,ex-i pressed opinions ,!upou, thoiKeasesibeforethe; Court and- Orangemens ; It could only .be. considered reasqnahiflthgfe'QrangemfiPfehOuld,! he, challenged, and,, h«.i believed; Orangemen themselves .would rathef! not be -called as. jurors. It wouidihe tih»e ;! enoosh iforhw, learned, friend =,to; ;ask. .the.question -Mhm hi(Mr Stout) had mode twelve challenges. -.a !r Mr Duncan asked.;,His .Honor to. make a; note .of the. fpot- that he had asked, .the. question. , , u«l\ Hia Honorsaidhe would do so. . Mr Stopt. made ifourteen challenges on behalf of the prisoners, and , the Crown, made four challenges, before a jury ;was, cm.panelled. '; ■ ' -i--.,'-. t ~r.u- -- v When twelve jurors bad, taken their seats in the jury-box, Mr, .Stout sold. he., wished to draw the attention of. the, Court to the fact that every Roman Catholic called had;been challenged by the Crown, ■ *i; ; ■>->•<■ i;, His Honor;(.There;is no, evidence that those challenged were (Roman. Catholics, mudI think the remark is quite uncalled for.,, v Mr Duncan thought Mr,, Stout should not., make such,removing i-.» *.!• !=-. ■> ?■•-- »--i h* Mr Stout: What I, have statedis a. fact, and I .consider it right to point it out. ,’ , , , : His Honor ; Counsel.must not enter into disoassion. Thoymuat address thc Court, t . The prisoners wore,then given, in ,charge of the jury,; and Mr Duncan opened theoasefor' the prosecution by. referring to- the evidence he intended, to call; And the law affecting riotous assemblies, ns. > i 1 Mr .Stout naked . that ■ all witnesses be ordered opt of-Courts.’! w .« - ’ >-'-.; ■ ; His Honor aaked. if, Mr Stout wished Mr Inspector, Pender, and; the Resident Magistrate to leave, thAOouxti , i •, ,% Mr Stout: I have .no Objection to. Mr Pen-) der remaining in Court, os he gave his evidence very fairly in the Magistrate’s Court,

andipbrhap# hiepmenoein Court isceoeHory; u the hsad of the polioe, but 1 object to any. biker witneaies being preient, no matter who .Mi»irii,4i(r«onoK uvw--1 Hie Honor ordered all witne»#ee out of Court. „ . , , The,' following witnesses were then examined:— -■:;■ /' ,

; Inspector Fender repeated the evidence given'by him in the Magistrate’s Court, and already published; < In cross-examinatioH ! witness said he was not aware of any law Which prevented people carrying firearms, unless they were carrying them for some unlawflil purpose. Some of the Orangemen had *yords. ‘ Bword# ’wore rather unusual weapons for ciyilians to carry in publiq. He did not consider it Would hive bead wise for him ‘ ( to arrest the Orangemen merely because hb ebw fc#o or three of them : marching, in pro* oeseidn ambd'With swords. Bis object was to prevent the commission of a breach of the 'peacb/f "■ ■' Bibhmond Beetbam said he was Resident Magistrate for- the Timaru district. He remembered Deo. 26 last. From information received he proceeded to the Foresters’ Hall ’When he arrived there he saw a body of Orangemen dressed in' their Orange scarves, with a crowd of people round them. A number of men came up from the railway station and placed themselves in front of the ! Qrattgemen. These then immediately began to shout to the Orangemen, “ Take off your ’Colours, we won’t allow them on.” The men got mors: excited bvery minute. He saw one man; Moynahan; and asked him what they wjßtited: and what they were going to do. ‘Moynahim said, M We will not allow the Orangemen to walk with their colours od.”’ J ' Witness ■ said, “They are not ’breaking the law by marobihg ; in J colours; but you will be breaking ’ the lew if ’you s try 1 to-: prevent thern.” He pointed out •that there were women . and Children 5 in the crowd, and 1 asked the men to behave themselves: peaceably. ’ The l mW got very noisy,, and witness could hot' induce' them to keep quiet, l! ’ There 1 was then a sadden rush round 'in the l direction l of the hew post-office, and witness got Cut of the crush as well as he -could; «He went over to where Inspector Pander was on horseback, .and the crowd then : gqt’bustling l ‘each l other, and there was a geneial mixing up; - Witness saw the Grangemien, and asked them to give over the idea of marching. One of the Orangemen pointed out that they were not breaking the law by marching - with their ■ colours on. Witness eaid r know" that, but the crowd are too many for us and too excited, aud it is necessary to prevent a breach of the peace if possible;" ' The Roman Catholics or the Opposing party them pushed ih oh * the Orangemen, and there'weto cries of “ttoroff their sashes; don’t allow 1 , them to 1 walk.” There was a general' 1 souffle/and witness, after holding a consultation with Mr Inspector Pend el*, read the fiibt Act. He l thought the reading of the IBiot Act wat highly necessary, as he expected every moment that blood would be shed. He observed the prisoners Moynahan and Towers ih the crowd, bUthe could not identify any of the /other prisoners. ‘- He I ’heard Towers and jumping Up ! and yelling, “ Tear ■thair colours/Off.” Borne little time after that he/observed I 'sOme men bolding an Ogangeman by the shoulders, and his scarf ■ was lying bn the ground. There was A general iSoufflo, and 4 good deol of dust; This 1 was before witness read the Biot Act. : - ■ ■ :To Mr Stout i Witness was not subpoenaed to give evidence in this case. He did not. : Volunteer to give evidence, and would much rather not have been examined. He was informed by the prosecution on Sunday night last that his evidence would be required. He 1 ‘ distinctly recognised Towers in the crowd. Tne - Orangemen retired into the Foresters’ ■ Hall'after the Biot Act was read. He did not suppPsethere wotdd have beCn any ne■ebssity ‘ fdV reading ’ thb Biot " Act if the 11 Opangemeri' had ' not' b6en ■ there with ‘ their "sashbs bn; He saw tvVb Orangemen with dtown ■swords'. The crowd kept together for about •tihreo-quarters of an hhbr. ‘ ; ! ‘ 1 / iDetebtive Kirby and .George Kimbcr repeated their fbrmbr , evidence, but nothing new'was bl)W}ited, the latter was sub- ' jected to. a rigid crossrexainination , by : Mr Stout,‘during; which. ln a answers created a good, dealbf amusement. (Constable Smart put in the letter which it was alleged O’Drispbll had sent to Moynahan, ‘ blwk in the, Union Bank b£ AusiJrhlia, proved the .handwriting to be o’Driscbii’s., ‘.'; John Eeid'repaated the evidence given by hirb in the Magistrate’s Court. . (•'. (ByEitoqt: Prangeism .is a secret society,]. ip r; , which, oaldw -jvore administered. , , .It , is. not a ./registered benefit society; There was; a time, in Ireland when Orapge processions; were . prohibited, ■: - but the law; waß repealed.^. »n. Orangeman, whep in Ireland, apd agpofi one tq,, (Laughter.) It is a'fnrt.that inlreland Orange processions,: often irritate. ; : Catholics,.and ; they both fuarrel. . They ofton.haye (rows .in Ireland, tis only bn two days ip,; the. year that they, re,ally :i quarrel., ,’lf an/Qrangeman meet»/a Eoman Catholic on August 15 he will quarrel, with him; and'if'a Oatholiq meets an Orange* , man on July 12 he will quarrel with the (Orangeman,. (Laughter.) Tliero are four swords in the . .Orange .Lodge, i and,the swords have to'be carried in,,all processions, according' to the- rules qf thej.Order. ; I 1 wore.au. orange' sash on Boxing Day, and it was torn off me,. ; Hugh Tqnycliffe repeated his former evidence,/ .. , ■ ■.... .... . v ,■■ ■

( . Donald Bleshford, ; a stonemason, residing new. witness, said-h? saw:acrowd in' Timaru preriops to the riotjon, Boxing Day. He saw O’Driscojl was. in the crowd, but he did not see .him, doing anything. C. W. Coburn, another new witness, said he remembered Dec. 26. Firsts saw Orangemen march, past, hi* house in the 1 direction of- the ( Bhchabites’ Rail; He qlso iaw- a crowd of ~ipen march outfrom,p’DrisooU’s,iD the fore.noon,; They went down iu the di-eotion Of ,the, hall., He; (witness); followed: them till r thoy formed a crowd in front of the Foresters’ Hall. The police .camo up with the Resident Magistrate,,and- the. latter advised: the crowd; ;po’t ito interfere with the Orangetneri, hor .create ; any diaturbanco, .as the law- did not 'prohibit the .Orangemen iwalsihgi : Inspector ilfender, moved .his ;.men du suChaihanneros , tio j cut off tho Orangomonfrom the procession Cjf; the - Friendly •.bocieties.; O’Driscoll was , present near. J^okeoa’s fence. '■ O’Driscoll said i fjUbw is your time,’i’ -or- .“This is j your time ; i«riwhrd*-.u'td»that effect. 3Je ((Witness) idistinotly heard O’Drisooll fay Dawn; Withthem.”.. This was at the time’ the irusbjwas.nmde: on the. Orange procession; He .saw "a man named Reid down on the ground arid a pumber of mon round,, hinut!..■cWitness Tyolupteerod hiseeryioes to. (he Resident Magisas a special con.stable, il-.-n.((!.!;;:•,-,;Q a! ! i'- ~ ... By ,Mr StohtiifHfl was first asked on Saturday to give eyid cape for.the prosecution. iJe, went tothe Police. Oilloo to My a- charge agaipst two constables of tamperfpg with him, and when, in” thß,o{lioe Detective Kirby asked him. what he knew about, .the riot cases, or whether he had been present during the time oi the rio;ts. He said, ‘( Yes, ho had been pro? sent,’’,-andbe;was then bold boiiwas wanted to . give evidonee. . ,Ho hid taken advantage; of ,thej„Bankruptcy;, Act recently Tho presiding Judge in this Court had; never ..told him (witness) (during the bearing of any, case.; that; ;he. (Coburn) was an unreliable, witness,; A witness wasrcilled do prove so, butbe; could not, and Cobura gained his case. Witness was; only summoned yesterday*, He - did not volunteer his services as- a witness, .neither was be au informer. He was a loyal subject, and when . summoned ;he came to; .Ccjurt dp state, ;»bat he, saw and nothing more. Heard pHrisooU; say, “ Down i with thcnti”; nr something ’to that > effectj,; buti did. noc hear him say-anything about, giving the mfen dS 100 to pull down, the colours. Kimber and; witness: had several, jconversations about 1 (he riot oases, pud , Ifirober tried, to'advise , witness to-go and give evidence for,the prosecution. ■ i • ; This closed the,case for-the Crown, and Mr Stbut called the following,.evidence for tho 'defence;— t ... - - < ■ 1 John iO’Rorke, da'' draper’s; assistant in TimarU, said c’iMoi was an' Irishman and a Oajtholic. Saw O’Priscoli between and 11 o'clock- on Boxicg, Day morning! O’Drisooll and he went down Lalt r street, and O’Driscoll bad a small child hr >.hn

George :street, they met the procession of Oddfellows and Forestm, and O’Drisooll stopped to speak to one lof them. When witness got f to ,tbo Fcresters’Hallhewas told the Biot Act had been read. ’ O’Driscoll was with witness.f He saw him in the crowd, bnt he took no part in the disturbance, ; By Mr Duncan : The child was not with O’Driscoll at that time.

i Andrew Sherrall, a coal merchant, said he J’as not a ■ Catholic, but a member f the Foresters’. Lodge., He met.O’Driscoll at the foot of Latter street on the morning of the procession. Witness was heading the procession. At the time he spoke toCTDriscoll be had a little girl by the hand. At that time he heard a great row at the rear of the procession as if a mob . were cutting the Orangemen off from the procession. Henry Balkie, an Oddfellow, corroborated the evidence given by the last witness. ' Jacob ievefn, soda water manufacturer, also gave _ evidence to the effect that he saw O'Driscoll holding a little girl by the hand at the corner’of Latter street. The procession was then coming along the street and the Orangemen bad off from it. O’Driseoll was ■only a hundred yards from the Orangemen at the time.

William Blennerhassetfc said he was a Protestant, and was at the Fores'era’ Hall on Boxing Day, when the Biot Act was read. Witness was moving about in the crowd. First saw O’Driscoll after the Biot Act was read. O’Drisooll was then doming towards the crowd from the direction of Jackson’s corner, i He appeared to have just arrived, and was not excited. !

George Davies, J D. Eogers, and Harry Stringer were called, to rebut Number's evidence. Mr Stout asked whether the Crown, intended toi proceed against Kelly, as there was no evidence whatever against him; His Honor: Kelly was present in the crowd, in the front rank. Mr Stout: So was the witness Ember. There-is no'evidence'of Kelly having done anything or said anything on the day of the riot

Mr Duncan said he did not intend to withdraw the case against Kelly. He thought •hero, was sufficient evidence of his presence in the crowd, and be would let his case go to the jury. Mr Stout addressed the jury at considerable length, and submitted that neither a not or assault had been committed so far as the prisoners were concerned.

Mr Duncan followed, and after reviewing the evidence, he pointed out to the jury the law affecting riotous assemblies.

■ His Honor read over the whole of the evidence to the jury, l and commented upon it at length. He pointed out the bearing it had as affecting the different prisoners, and stated that there was no evidence against the prisoner Kelly, except that he was in the crowd, and he thought upon , that evidence it would be very hard if the jury Convicted him. The jury retired to consider their verdict. Mr Stout pointed out that if the verdict was against him he would move for a new trial on the ground of misdirection by the learned judge in allowing O’Driscoll’s letter to Moynahan to go to the jury, as there was no evidence that in coming, to Timaru on Boxing Day Moynahan had acted on O’DriscoU’s instructions. Neither was there evidence that Moynahan - had received P’Driscoll’s letter before Dec. 26, or that he had brought his friends with him.. ' His Honor said he. should certainly not withdraw the letter from the j ury, The postmark on the envelope of O’DrisooU’s letter to Moynahan at Waimate was Dec. 24. Moynahan, with several others, was present at the riot, and it was for the jury to say whether, considering, all the. circumstances detailed in the evidence, they could reasonably infer that O’Driscoll’s letter was the cause of Moynahan and others appearing in Timaru ou Boxing Day. His Honor then called the jury back into Court, and explained to them the provisions of the Accessories Adb.”

The jury retired again to their room. The jury returned into Court: after an absence of two hours, and delivered a verdict of “not guilty ” against Daniel O’Keefe, Jeremiah Kelly, and James Watson ; and a verdict of “guilty” against the six other prisoners, all.of whom: were strongly recommended to mercy. O’Keefe, Kelly, and Watson were then discharged.

Mr Stout moved for a new trial'in O’Driscoll’s case, on the ground of misdirection by the; Judge in regard to the letter O’Drisooll had written to. Moynahan. This was refused; but pending the decision of the Supreme Court on a point of law raised by the defence, His Honor reserved sentence. / On the following day, Mr Stout moved for a new trial. The Crown had consented to ah application for a new trial at once, instead of compelling him (Mr Stout) to ask for a rate nisi, as Mr Duncan would rather argue the question now thanhave to come down specially from Christchurch to argue it.

■i His Honor:• Does yorir application refer to O’Driscoll only or to all the persons found guilty !l Mr Stout said his application referred to the whole of the prisoners, and his (grounds of application were, firstly, that the judge had erroneously admitted evidence, and, secondly, that he had misdirected the jury. 'JL'ho erroneous reception of evidence consisted in His Honor asking a witness whether he had ever seen any other procession marching in Timaru w -ik colours. The answer to the question. was “Yes; there was a procession formed by Father Henneberry, and the colours worn Were green.” How, this question, he sub■xnitted, was not relevant to-the issue the jury had to try, and not being relevant to that issue, it might have prejudiced the minds of the jury against the prisoners. The misdirection by the Judge, consisted of his allowing the letter of O’Driscoll to Moynahan to go to the jury, as there was no evidence to prove that Moynahan ever received the letter before the day on which the riots took place. There was no evidence that Moynahan was in Waimate at the time, neither was there evidence that he came to Timaru and took part in the riot on the strength of the request contained in ©’Driscoll's letter. He then quoted authorities, and argued at length in support of the, grounds submitted in support of his application., Mr ;Puncan, in reply, said as to Mr Stout’s ■fifst objectiqn he contended that His Honor (had a perfect right to ask the question objected to. With regard to the second objection,he contended the Crown was not ( bound to prove the, time at which Moynahan received O’Driscollls letter. It was sufficient' for the purpose . ot the prosecution that the letter was proved toh have, been written by O’Driscoll; that it was found on Moynahan after his arrest; that Moynahan claimed it as his private latter; that Moynahan appeared in timaru on Hexing Day, took part in the riot, and prevented-the Orangemen marching as requested in the letter. It was not always possible to bring direct evidence before a jury in criminal cases, but he submitted the Crown had presented a well connected chain of circumstantial evidence, and if was for the jury to draw their own conclusions after hearing that evidence. Ha submitted that His Honor had not acted wrongly in allowing tne letter to go to the jury, and that he had not misdirected the jury when he told them they could consider the letter and state whether from it and, the other evidence referring to it they believed that O’Drisooll bad been accessory to the riot. It would remembered; that the v jury were called back into Court and the. matter had been clearly explained to them by the Judge. -He would, on tbe;groundg stated, oppose the application fof anew trial, and in conclusion would submit that, /ft ; trial could not be granted- as against one of the prisoners; If a new trial were granted at all it would have to apply to ail the prisoners who had (been found guilty. Mr Stout having, replied to .'Mr Duncan’s argument, . . ■ o.U -» . ■ f . His Honor said he would ‘rule against Mr Stout ion' ithe • first wrongful'admission of evidence. He oonsiidered be had a perfeot right, to ask the question objected to; /but ! even supposing he had ’not, the 'question was riot one of sufficient importance to materially‘weigh, with the ’jury in t considering *their* verdict. With regard to the second point he should not grant a new trial, but if Mr Stout asked him he would reserve the pointfor the Supreme Court. Mr Stout said he would ask His Honor to t — • " J

the Supreme Court, and he (Mr Stout), 1 in> conjunction with, tftt Crown > 1 Prosecutor, wonld.state a: special CMe and submit it to His Honor for his approval and signature. _ His Honor s Then I will reserve both point* for the consideration of the Supreme-. Court on a speciri ease. __ Mr Stout said he presumed His Honor would accept bail for the prisoners until the point reserved was decided by the Supreme Court. His Honor: Certainly. I will fix the bait of each prisoner in his own recognisance of £2OO, and two sureties in £IOO each. The bail bonds were then executed, and the prisoners wore liberated.