INTEMPERATE TEMPERANCE AGAIN.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVI, Issue 11202, 24 October 1899, Page 6

INTEMPERATE TEMPERANCE AGAIN.

CHARGE OF THREATENING A -j!# PROHIBITIONIST. I FAILURE OF THE PROSECUTION.At the Police Court- yesterday, before Mr. J§| Thomas Hutchison, S.M., Thomas Meehan hotolkceper, was charged with using threat, |p. oiling language at Auckland towards ffil- '-p liam Richardson. Mr. Baume appeared for the defendant, who denied tho charge. Mr. Richardso» H§ conducted his own ease. The complainant deposed that he wajTfjf® walking in the street when the defendant ;* nccused him of criticising him at & pubHof®: meeting, and threatened to "drop him" if.tfpsf repetition occurred. The colloquy alleged t6'®-;S have taken place was as follows:— Defendant?®!' remarked, "I heai you have been criticising that case of mine." Witness replied tiatflll he had, and defendant went on, "If you anything further about me I will hurt you, I This, and a later remark about " dropping" |Sfp' witness, made him seek the protection offcfsl tho Court. -WSi His Worship: What did ho mean by Wj "drop" you? Peoplo sometimes speak of dropping each others' acquaintance, you «§& know. vSgi: Witness replied that he understood shoot- ' ing was intended, and, in reply to a ques. • tion from tho Bench, as to whether he had *%-. been in America, replied, " No need to go to America for that sort of thing." , In further evidence, Mr. Richardson, re- inferring to the alleged conduct of Median .-%> said "Ho told mo on another occasion that -KI might bo lucky if I got back to Australia. M : That was when be was brought here on. my ; iw?-; complaint for serving a woman with liquor."/ : t" Under crofs-oxamination by Mr. Baume, witness said that he was a miner by occupa- 1 4$-' tion, but wan now working in Auckland 01 'SS behalf of the prohibition movement. Mr. Baiune: I think you get paid for it? Witness: Yes; I do now. < jsjfe Mr. Baume: You sometimes lecture on ;&$ the wharf, against the law? Witness Ido not think that it is a breach of tho law to do so. • \. -Jl Mr. Baume: As a matter of fact you wore 'IBconvicted for a breach of the law, were you '" tnot? ' . e; Witness: I was convicted, but the con- vS viction was ultra vires. ,'vy> Mr.Baume then referred to a letter written by Mr. Richardson on the licensing caso at ',V Otahubu, Which appeared in Saturday's issue ■-.%* of the New Zealand Herald. - Mr. Richardson admitted writing the let ■% ter, but objected to any reference being mads ftS to it, as it would prejudice the case. Mr. Baume: You wero speaking on the Jft wharf on Sunday week? ' ff' Witness: Yes. Did you refer to Mr. Median.—' : ' Havo you over called Mr. Median a mi» . V'' derer, a fiend m human shape, and belonging to a band of assassins? .-M* Witness: I havo used that language to publicans generally. : Mr. Baume: Did you not say on Sundaj week last that Mr. Meehan was a fiend in human form? I Witness: No. I referred to his actiol s'v in making this woman drunk. On being further pressed, witness said, "I might have said that his action was that ol .1 a fiend." . Mr. Baumo: Are you in the habit of ea!l-"jrf£ : , ing all publicans fiends and murderers. • Witness: Yes. Mr. Baumo: Did you not say that Mr. % Brabant adjourned tho case from day to day Kf for the purpose of being bribed by tre >£% brewers? ' >•£ Witnoss: I did not. I will tell you what I did say. I said in reference to the ease vfi being dismissed, and to the two adjourn- ijv ments, that I objected in the interest of < public morals, for these reasons, that they made it possible for the brewers' influence to ho brought to bear, and even for bribery to be used. « Mr. Baume: Did you not intend to envey to the public the impression that Mr. " Brabant was, or could have been, oribed? Witness: No. I said that since M«cb •££ last, except in this instance, Mr. Brabant f'. had never failed, so far as I could iiuige, .n s-jf doing his duty to the public, so far as the liquor trafßo was ooncerned. If you want ,-i;. mv opinion about the decision _ '* v Mr. Hutchison: I don't want your opinion. In reply to further questions from Mr. : .S| Baume, witness replied: 1 1 refuse to answer extraneous questions." ' ,; 0Mr. Baume: Then I shall ask His Wor- -i|; ship to commit you for contempt of Court, 'vfj Witness: Yes; there is a lot of that done. Try it next month. Mr. Richardson declined to answer a uumber of questions about private individuals, kit remarking: "I object to Your Worship per- fj§| mitting such questions. None of them refer • to that occasion, but weeks before." Ml 1 . Baume: I submit that he has through- ";|i out shown a consistent courso of blackguardly abuse against everyone who does M not fall in with his views. I submit that I have sufficient grounds to cause Richardson S to find sureties. Continuing, Mr. Baume asked the witness: |jr Did you not say that Mr. Meehan was a . • rascal, who ought not to be let loose on so- S'i ciety? ~;|v Witness: I don't remember saying that. • >!:. Later on, Mr. Richardson pompously re- ■*? ferred to himself as a " responsible man." ; K Mr. Baumo: Have you any property? Witness: There are other laws than civil laws, adding as he turned to Mr. Baume: "You are in the conspiracy, but you will not do it this side of the election. Yon will pet rid of an enemy one way or another." iff Continuing in this strain for some time, he ,'jfi accused the liquor party of shifting magis- . .'J trates and " threatening to make an earth* quake in High-street." He further remarked that a magistrate who refused to administer ,: ; -£ Iho statute laws should get seven years. ~?]*> Mr. Baumo, who after the adjournment had *'0 made a cross application that Mr. Richardson " be bound over to keen the peace, then called • ,££'• Mr. Richardson, and asked him if he was prepared to give the necessary sureties, and Vr. | not in th* future to call Meehan a " rascal," | "fiend, "poisoner," or "murderer," end | ocr-uso him of breaking the law. '"f4 ! Mr. Richardson said he would maintain his right to criticise Moehan in respect of '/v I the case referred to. - fwi Mr. Baitme then called Mr. Heed, lotelkeeper, for the defence, who testified as to the remarks made by complainant in reference to Median's case, and his calling Mcehan a perjurous scoundrel," and not fit to con- v 4duct a hotel, and that tho magistrate had been bribed. -rV; Similar evidence was given by Michael Col- S lins. ..ji The defendant, on being called, stated that 'ti he was tho defendant in a licensing case recently heard and dismissed. Ho was pre- ■:/ sent at one of complainant's meetings, and ¥f. heard his remarks. He had met complainant • in the street, and had told him that he would ' - lave to drop using remarks about witness, or he would get hurt. Witness was per- T lectly sober at the time. . \ •u®™ Worship said he would not entertain ft Mr. Daume s application. In giving judgmont, His Worship said the "8 complainant asked that the defendant be' .3 bound over to l-,iep the peace on the grounl ol using threatening language. It appeared to him that the case arose out of some an- }' terior case, in which the defendant was concerned. The criticisms on that ease were made on a certain day at a meeting held in 1 the wharf. The nature of those criticisms a seemed to His Worshin to be scandalous, namely, asserti?:? that Median ought to he S 1 in gaol. According to the evidonce, Richard- 'S son had characterised all members of the class to which Median belonged as rascals, fiends, •'§ poisoners. His remarks were not- directly <g applied to Meehan, but to a case in which . . Meehan was tried and found not guilty. Of $ course, judgments were subject to criticism, but it appeared on the evidence that scandalous statements were made against a brother H magistrate, which ho would dismiss with the i'./. contempt they deserved. As to the languago 'Jk used in reference ti the defendant, it seemed outrageous that a person found not guilty of ; : '- an offence should he classed as one to be in ■ gaol. It did not follow that persons using Je threatening language should escape, but it 2 appeared that the meeting of the parties was "( an ordinary one, andl Meehan was acting under vexation. % The information was dismissed, with costs tl io 7s. %