SENT TO PRISON.

New Zealand Times, Volume LVIII, Issue 2747, 19 February 1896, Page 2

SENT TO PRISON.

A TERM OP ONE MONTH FOR A WELL-KNOWN DOCTOR. By Telegraph.—Press Assoeinlton. Ckki3tchuk.cu. February 18. At the Supreme Court to-day tho'charge against Arthur do Eonzie, formerly house surgeon at tho hospital, of assaulting Richard D. Thomas, chairman of the Hospital Board, so as to cause him actual bodily harm, was concluded. The jury, after a retirement of 5. r > minutes, found the accused guilty of common assault.

His Honor said that the prosecutor was a public officer, aud it was in consequence of bis discharge of such public duties that the attack had been made upon hii i. Accused bad made application for an appointment, and it was the duty of the prosecutor to state at a committee meeting any circumstances in bis opinion bearing on the matter. Assuming that what had been said had been said maliciously, ho bad tho proper remedy. Accused had by false pretences entrapped the prosecutor into the office in which the assault had been committed. Ho (His Honor) was satisfied that the interview was planned with tho intention of coercing prosecutor into a withdrawal of tho statements, and it was open to considerable doubt whether there was not an intention of punishing him physically if tho explanation were not satisfactory. It was quite clear that the prosecutor desired at once to escape from the place he had been brought into. He was perfectly satisfied that the prosecutor had been prevented from leaving the office j ho was under duress, and unable to carry out his intention of escaping. He was satisfied that Thomas declined a discussion, as he might bo expected to do. Tho story for the defence that the accused could have believed that Thomas intended violence was an absurd story. The defence was a discreditable defence, and in the case of tho witness Brown was endeavoured to bo supported by deliberate perjury. The blow had > been struck deliberately, aud without a shadow of provocation. Tho assault was a premeditated and cowardly outrage on a public man in carrying out his public duties. This was not a case which could be met with a fine, and he would sentence accused to one month’s imprisonment, and as accused was a medical man tho sentence would be without hard labour.