THE WAIHI RIOT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 12859, 6 May 1905, Page 3

THE WAIHI RIOT.

SEVERAL MEN FINED

CASK OF MISTAKEN IDENTITY.

[liV TBLKOBAPH.— COIIRIiSI'OXDKXT.]

W.viai, Friday. 'J'iik. Waihi riot canes were continued last night, when Ernest Jenkins was charged with inciting Daniel Collins to resist the police. The accused was Represented by Mr. Clendon, who said that in view of the opinion expressed by tin: Bench in Graham's ease lie had consulted with all the accused, and had recommended them to plead guilty. This they had decided to do. Jenkins then pleaded guilty, as also did James Payne, John O'Brien, ami Edward Woodward. Mr. Cleiidon then spoke hi extenuation, and referred first of all to the conduct of O'Brien and Payne, who he said were both in the company of Collins at the time of the arrest. They had followed the police down the street, and were under the impression thai if the handcuffs were removed Collins would proceed quietly. Both men were married and respectable citizens. Jenkin*, and Woodward, he pointed out, were young mm and liable to be led into any fracas going on, and* under excitement would lose their heads. lie asked that in [•aid; instance .' lenient view should be taken, and .< line imposed consistent with justice. Sergeant Slieehaii said lie would like it clearly understood that the police had only brought these cases forward as a, matter of ditty, and nut in a vindictive spirit. The police wanted (he town to be conducted in a peaceable .way. The chairman of the Bench said that a lenient view had been taken bj the justices, and it Has decided that each of the accused should be lined £5 with costs 7s, or in default 14 days' imprisonment. A young man named Win. Johns was charged with having wilfullj obstructed the police. Mr. Mueller appeared for. the defendant, and pleaded not guilty. Sergeant Shcehan said,that the offence was committed on the same evening as in the previous cases, Kvideme was given by Constables Clarke and Woodier, both of* whom were tain that they saw accused for a few minutes, lie had told them they had no right to arrest the prisoner. For.the defence evidence was given that the accused wad not present at the row, and had never left bis father's .shop, excepting to. .a fei minutes, until a little after ten o'clock. He then went into the Strand Diningroom kitchen next door, and remained there with the girls. He was not in Has-zard-slrcet on Saturday night, nor did he leave ivoscmonl-streel, where his father's shop was, Several of the waitresses, also J.,Wilcox, corroborated this statement, and the case was dismissed.