FLAXMILL HANDS COME TO BLOWS

Manawatu Times, Volume LIV, Issue 6813, 17 January 1929, Page 10

FLAXMILL HANDS COME TO BLOWS

AGGRESSOR FINED. Two flaxworkers employed at To Mukanui mill, Tokomam, came to blows on the afternoon of December 7. They were Peter Galloway and Henry Cutlibert Stokes. The former came out of the encounter a little worse than his opponent and had to seek the attention of a doctor. He also informed the Police ot' the affair with the result that yesterday Stokes was arraigned before two Justices on a charge of assault and causing actual bodily harm. Mr. H. R. Cooper appeared for defendant and it was agreed to deal with tho case summarily instead of entailing tho expense of tho Supreme Court action.

Peter Galloway deposed that he and Stokes were working at Tokomani as fibre yardmen. Part of their duty was to push out fibre poles. One pole slipped and Stokes called him a stupid b—. Witness resented the allegations whereupon Stokes slashed him with tho hook lie used instead of his lost hand. The hook caused a cut on his chest and cuts on the face and he had to get medical attention. There had been no ill-feeling between Stokes and himself. As a result of the injuries witness was off work for a day and ahalf. To Mr. Cooper witness said that after the poles had been pushed out, they went on loading fibre. He told Stokes he would not allow anyone to call him the names used whereupon accused came at him and he was obliged to strike out in defence. Edward Lovejoy Patrick said lie had

known Galloway nine months and Stokes for a number of years. Both were quiet men. Harold Parr, who saw part of the fight, considered Stokes the aggressor. Galloway finally succeexled in getting hold of the hook and it came out of Stokes's arm. Galloway was an inoffensive sort of fellow. To Mr. Cooper witness said he heard Stokes call Galloway a little Scotch b—. The scrap lasted about three minutes. Mr. Cooper submitted that the affair was more of a storm in a tea-cup. A lot had been said about Stokes using the hook in his amputated arm, but nothing had been said of Galloway tackling a man who had an injured limb. The two had been described as decent fellows and after the fight had gone on working side by side. Stoke’s evidence would be that Galloway made a rush at him. Arthur John MeCluro said ho had a good view of the light and the first he saw was Galloway rushing at Stokes. Mr. Cooper: I suppose it, is a common thing to have a fight down at thc mill.

AYitness: That was the first I have seen for two years down there. Stokes entered the witness box to say that he didn’t remember calling Galloway names, but lie may have dene. If lie did use the words alleged, he had had no intentions of hurting his feelings. After pushing out the poles both returned to tho unloading shod. Gallowav then camo up to him and asked witness if he had called him a b—? "I replied yes," said witness, "whereupon Galloway stated ho would allow nobody to call him that and camo at me. I went over the truck aud Galloway grabbed my hook which camo out leaving the sheath which is iron-bound at tho end. It was that which caught, Galloway. After wc had been going at it a while Galloway called out to cut it out and wc stopped. Wo then went on with our work." Dr. Hunter Will stated that on examining Galloway he found him suffering from abrasions of the cheek, chest and back. There was no necessity for stitches although tho injuries wero evidently caused by something harder than a fist. Tho Bench considered Stokes was tho aggressor but viewed the offence lightly. They entered a conviction with a 10/- ’fine. Witnesses expenses amounted to £l/9/6.