CHARGE OF OBSTRUCTING THE FOOTPATHS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVII, Issue 11534, 20 November 1900, Page 6

CHARGE OF OBSTRUCTING THE FOOTPATHS.

MR. RICHARDSON AGAIN IN COURT. At the Police Court yesterday William Richardson, prohibitionist lecturer, was charged before Mr. H. W. Brabant, S.M., with having on August 5 ana 26 last caused a crowd to collect in Queen-street, so as to impede persons passing. Mr. Cotter appeared for the prosecution, and accused, who pleaded not guilty, was represented by Mr. Cooper, who asked that his client be allowed to sit beside him. in Court. His Worship: Very good; but I hope he will behave himself. Mr. Cooper: If he does not behave himself, I will not appear for him. His Worship: I feel bound to make that observation, on account of his behaviour on the last occasion he was before the Court. Mr. Cotter, for the prosecution, said that the accused was in the habit of giving addresses on Sunday afternoons in Queen-street, whioh usually opened with prohibition topics, but ended Tip in the accused criticising and passing remarks about persons holding positions of trust in the city, and it was mainly owing to the forbearance of his hearers that trouble was averted. It would be shown by the prosecution that on both occasions the subject of the charges that the accused did hold meetings, and that the fact of his doing so caused an obstruction, and the crowd was so large that passers-by were obliged to leave the footpath to go into the street. Sergeant Forbes said that on Sunday, August 5 last, the accused was lecturing in Queen-street with a crowd of about 300 people around him, completely blocking the footpath, for about an hour. Witness counted 12 ladies at least who had to take to the road in order to get past the crowd. By Mr. Cooper: Witness had requested the Salvation Army to move when they interfered with the traffic, but had nevei directed them where to go. He did not remember ever having seen the Army or any other religious bodies holding meetings actually in Queen-street. J. Basten and Constable Skinner corroborated, the latter stating that the police had instructions to attend the accused's meetings always, on account of the frequent disturbances which arose amongst the audience. Constable Carroll gave evidence in support of the second charge, and said the accused was lecturing in Lower Queen-street on Sunday afternoon, August 26, and had a large crowd of people around him, which completely obstructed the footpath. Witness requested him to move on and keep moving, but he only moved a yard or two, and then continued speaking. Witness dealt with the crowd in the best way he could, but the obstruction continued. , Evidence was also given by Samuel Marks. A. H. Phillips, and Constables Payne and McDonnell. . Robert Jukes Glover said that it was impossible for anybody to get through the crowd. Richardson was not orderly in his discourse, which was violent, and attacked people's characters. By Mr. Cotter: What did he say? Witness: Why, he called the Premier " Dirty Dick," John King a something else, and said he " stuff ed" the rolls. He also said Bishop Cowie was interested in hotels, and even said something about myself. (Laughter.) By Mr. Cotter: Then he was not orderly in his speech? Witness: I was nearly going to punch his head for what he said about me. (Laughter.) Mr. Cooper said he would call several reputable persons for the defenco, who would say that there was no obstruction. • The bylaw did not prohibit public meetings, but only when an obstruction was caused, and only two witnesses had spoken as to any actual obstruction having taken place. He submitted there must be actual physical obstruction, as decided in cases heard here and in England, and there was an inherent right for any citizen to hold any public meeting for the purpose of discussing public matters. Evidence would be called to show that the witnesses for the prosecution had exaggerated matters. He submitted that as the by-law made no distinction betweea the footpath and the road, there was no legal obstruction, as there was sufficient room in the roadway for anyone to pass up and down the street without in any way going near the crowd. A number of witnesses were called by Mr. Cooper, who stated that in their opinion there was no obstruction, some of them stating that the crowd was attracted by the antics of a drunken man who was annoying Richardson, and this was the cause of the obstruction. The hearing lasted all day, and was eventually adjourned till eleven o'clock this morning. .