THE RECENT DISTURBANCE IN JOHN-STREET.

New Zealand Times, Volume XLX, Issue 8166, 18 August 1887, Page 6

THE RECENT DISTURBANCE IN JOHN-STREET.

At the Resident Magistrate’s Court yesterday, before Mr H, S. Wardell, Charles Stone and Charles D. Sherman, on remand from the previous day, were charged with obstructing Constable McAnnerin in the exe. cation of his duty while he was endeavoring to arrest a girl of ill-fame named Nellie Hamilton, in John-street, on Tuesday morning. Mr Gray, who appeared for the defence, reminded his Worship that he had intimated that the evidenoe of the defendants would disclose the fact that the constable had been actuated by a spirit of jealousy in the action he had taken against one of the accused. He was very , sorry to have to make these remarks, because any charge against the police appeared to weaken the influence of the force, but he thought it was his duty to bring the evidence forward. . Charles Stone deposed that he was a painter and decorator, and that he was at Mrs Harper’s house in John-street on Tuesday, morning. He heard a scream, and oh going outside saw the girl Hamilton lying on the ground in a drunken state. Constable McAnnerin was trying to get the woman on her feet. Witness knew that the policeman was a friend of the girl’s, and he thought that the constable was only trying to get her up and pat her indoors, and he therefore tried to assist him in doing-so. ' Assisted heron the way to the gate, when the eon-, stable told him to desist. Up till then he had ho idea that the constable intended to arrest the girl. ! Charles Sherman stated-that he was a inrf commission agent. He was in Mrs, Harper’s house in John-street between 2 and 3 o'clock on Tuesday morning, when he heard screams, and on going outside he saw one: of the girls belonging to the house lying on the ground, and ■ Constable McAnnerin was endeavoring to get her up. The constable made' use of very obscene language, and witness remonstrated with him. The constable replied that he knew witness,, and would deal with him afterward. • Witness took no fpart in the affair. He was subsequently arrested. To Mr Gray ; Was not cautioned in any way by the constable. Inspector Browne: Is it tfie duty of a turf; commission agent to throw 'dice on a race- ; course ? Mr Gray objected, on the ground that the question was irrelevant. The witness said he never threw dice on a racecourse. Inspector Browne: Does a turf commission agent play at three-card monte? Witness ? I don’t play three-card monte. His Worship smd he did not understand what the title of “ turf commission agent ” meant; It was new to him. He however did not think the questions Inspector Browne was asking were relevant. Inspector Browne asked the accused if he had ever undergone a sentence for larceny at Oamaru. The witness denied that he had. Mr Gray again objected. In. specter Browne : You say you never were convicted of larceny. Witness : No, I didn’t say that. His Worship ruled that the questions were not relevant. Inspector Brownesaid he wished to show the character of the witness: Alexander Forsy th, batcher, deposed that he was passing through John-street on Tuesday morning. There were a number of people about, and the woman Hamilton was on the ground in a very drunken state. Heard bad language used, but could not say by whom. Was in the house afterward when the police arrested Sherman, who seemed very much

surprised. Another witness was called, but he did not appear. Mr Gray said he would leave the case as it was. His Worship said he was not prepared to convict Sherman, bnb he was going to convict Stone. He said the duties of the police were at all times such as might at any moment place them in a very unpleasant position. Constables were but men, and were subject to passions like other men, and in this case a suggestion had been made that a constable, in gratification of a certain spirit of jealousy, had adppted a coarse of conduct he was not justified in adopting. He did not, however, think the evidence brought forward supported that contention. It appeared to him that the constable had acted right in arresting the woman, and he had no doubt whatever that Stone was perfectly aware that the constable waa]present in the discharge of hia duty. Stone had no right to assume that the constable was there in any capacity th»n that of hia duty. He, was not going to inflict a heavy penalty, because the obstruction was not a serious one. He fined Stone £2, and allowed him 7 days within which to pay the fine, or 7 days’ imprisonment in default. Sherman was accordingly discharged.