PROHIBITION LECTURER.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXX, Issue 3826, 23 August 1899, Page 7

PROHIBITION LECTURER.

ALLEGED BREACH OF BYLAWS. PRESS ASSOCIATION. , . AUCKLAND, .Tuesday. The Police Court was crowded this morning, when f the .well-known prohibition lecturer, Mr William Richardson, was' charged with -breaking'-the city' bylaws by holding public meetings in the streets. Among"; those present were tho Mayor (Mr D. Goldie), tho Revs W. J. Williams and W. Ready, and several leading prohibitionists. The ■•defendant ;wa4 nHarged with hav-( jnz at Aueklrindj ■ on' July--30th, -unlaw'fully committed a breach of paragraph 6 of,,bylaw. 2,6 .of. the... City, Council; by holding ,a public meeting,an Quay. : streeit, so as to impede persons passing. A' second information" charged -the defendant with having on the same day caused a' ; number- of vpernpiis; to - cpngregate in Qxiay ' strbotj 'so : as-'f6"' imtfede pass-ers-by. ■•■■■■ _; : Mr Cooper, in opening the case, said the defendant had been; accustomed to hold meetings in Quay street. Latterly the crowd assembled there bad been a very great one. The crowd was attracted by the meeting held under the auspices of Mr Richardson. Counsel submitted that there had been an offence under bylaw 26. The law on the point bad'been’recently settled in England. It "had been laid down by the Chief Justice that .no individual member of the public had; any right to cause persons to collect'in a public street/ and further that a public street existed for the uninterrupted use of her Majesty’s subjects. His Worship: . Does not “the Salvation Army occupy streets? -- Mr Cooper admitted that - the Army did. It might be that the Salvation Army was. technically breaking Abo bylaw,, but it did not follow that'because tho City Council permitted the? Salvation. Army or other religious organisations to hold meetings in the streets the Council must on that account submit to any, person holding discussions in'the public street on disputed questions. Sergeant .Forbes(gave' evidence, as to the crowd in the street. It was most orderly, and.no one complained to him of obstruction, or of being unable to got past. ■ ' Constables Sims and Payne gave corroborative evidence. The latter’said that the, south side of the footpath which was blocked by the crowd during the meeting was a great “lovers’ walk” on Sunday afternoons. (Laughter.) Mr Reed: Is it iri the interests of lovers that these proceedings have been taken?

Witness: Ob, I. don’t say that. (Laughter.) Other witnesses gave evidence iri support of the charge. In cross-examina-tion they ; stated .ithatW they did not notice any passors-by actually impeded by' the crowd.; ' When; people wanted to get past’ the crowd* 'gave way and let them through. , . , , f . Mr Reed, for the -deferic©, submitted f.hat there -was...no,case.to answer. The meetings, held by -Mr illichardson were not the Only 'irieetiiiga' of the kind iheld in , =■ -.The - Salvation Army met'‘in Wellesley "street oh Saturday nights, causing a large crowd to collect. Ho wished at once, to say, on behalf of his client, that of course the latter was in entire sympathy with the ' Salvation: f Army.. It was ■' only with a view of pointing out with what partiality it was-httempted to enforce the bylaw in question that he referred to tho Army. It was a strange thing that - " there ’was' s n6 J evidence of any complaint having'“been . made -by the general public about traffic Being impeded. Moreover, * Mr 'Ricbsrdson had never been requested to disperse tho crowd, nor had any of the latter been asked by the 1 police to move on. In the circumstances,’ it would seem that tho present action had been taken with some other end in view than the prevention of impeding the traffic. His Worship held, however, that there was a case to answer, and Mr Reed accordingly called evidence for the defence.

William Richardson, the defendant, stated that he was a temperance' lecturer employed by the Prohibition League to lecture on temperance in Auckland. When he first came to the city htPhSd an interview with the Mayor (Mr ; Goldie)- and asked v him if there wore any : bylaws which he (witness') U’as likely to infringe, as he purposed speaking in the open air.' The Mayor replied that he had no power to grant such a concession, because there was a very dangerous bylaw in existence. Witness reminded him that a number of meetings were being held in the street,' and the Mayor replied that they were all illegally held. The Mayor also told witness that it would be better not to make an application for permission to speak, but rather to go round to a street facing the wharves, where he would be within the Harbour Board's jurisdiction. : " Quay' street was tho place the Mayor directed witness to. On tho first Sunday witness stood where the Salvation \ Arpjy __ held its, meetings’, but the police objected to his following the Army,"and ho their went round to Quay street. On five Sundays put r pf. six there >■, absolutely'hb"trafilc;wi that street. ; Also for *he defence, ■ the ’ Rev _ J. Williams, Mayor Goldie,’ Mr Speddiug and others were called, ; The ..Mayor said that Mr Richai;dspn.’s, version of .his conversation with' him 'was probably correct. He could nob remember the exact details. Tho Mayor denied that

tho City Council originated the prosecution, and referred to correspondence between Inspector Cullen and the Town Clerk. The correspondence would show that the police had requested the services of tho City Solicitor for the prosecution. Judgment was reserved till Saturday.