"UNDER THE VAG."

NZ Truth, Issue 57, 21 July 1906, Page 6

"UNDER THE VAG."

CASSIDY'S-CURIOUS CASE.

A Mosiied Man Charged with jHaving. " No Visible."

With the break-up of what ,was alleged to be a gaming-house m Lower Cuba-street the 'tecs of Wellington have for the past fortnight or so been endeavoring to gaol an individual alleged to have been a principal m the alleged joint. This individual, whose name is >-Tames Cassidy, is a-clean-shaven young fellow, wno-as an amateur boxer is ■ said to •••have been.no small potatoes. Cassidy was carpetted by the "demons" under that grand old drag-net of the British Law, viz : the Vagrancy Act, and was, charged with being an idle and disorderly person having no lawful means of support. When arrested a fortnight ago last' Thursday, by Detective Cassells, who. was of course armed with awarrant, Cassidy had no less a sum m his clothes .than £65, Os lOd, which, as far as ocular demonstration's concerned, is very, much visible means of subsistence. The sixty odd quid, however, at that time, if it did not- , satisfy the , 'tecs that Cassidy had lawful :.mean£ 'of support, stood him m good stead as a means of obtaining temporary, liberty, on his -own-cash bail. . •: When the case" came ; on yesterday (Friday) week, to which date it had been originally remanded, the. police evidence was given. First, CassMy's ex-landlady' deposed that he had rented a room irom her. His hours were irregular. He got home sometime m the morning, and went out again m the afternoon. Probably he would have been staying there yet, had he iiot introduced a shy little stranger m petticoats into his room, and the landlady spotted ; her and objected, to the extent of ordering Cassidy out, and he went, owing one week's rent, the landlady m question ventured to inform Dr. Me Arthur, S.M. ' The evidence of Detectives Cassells and- Connolly was, as is usual m such cases, brief and to the point. They had known him for some time, had never seen or heard of 'him doing any work; had admitted that he didn't work. He was generally to have been seen outside the gaming school m Cuba-street and was doorkeeper. That the place was a gaming school the 'tecs had no doubt, as information had been supplied on that point, but when asked who supplied the information the. 'tecs declined to say,, and further refused the challenge thrown out by Mr , Herdman, who appeared for Cassidy; to tender evidence that the place was a gaming house. Indeed, the 'tecs claimed the right to give m evidence what (they had been told by others, the precedent for which claim was founded on a decision given m the Victorian Supreme Court. Mr Herdman of course looked shocked at such a proposal and contended that a charge of vagrancy was governed by the well-known rule of evidence that anything said m the absence of an accused could hot be admitted as evidence. Mr Herdmar fairly bristled with legal points, but as he and Chief Detective McGratb got all the more tangled up, Dr. MeArthur suggested that it would b? to adjourn till the 'following, Monday so that m the meantime both .the lawyer and the 'tec could read up their law. When under cross-examination Cassells was " requested to say whether Cassidy had not been 'singled out for this prosecution and whether he (Cassefll.s) had not m the bar of the Royal Oak Hotel threatened to make it hot for Cassidy. ; This the 'tec promptly denied, and Chief Detective McGrath, when he gave evidence, said that he had instituted the proceedings against, Cassidy and that Cassells had only executed the warrant. McGrath, however, admitted that another principal m the gaming school was allowed to leave Wellington as he (McGrath) was averse to prosecuting him because he was an invalid. / When the case was resumed last Monday, Mr Herdman had more points. This time he contended that the information should.be dismissed as it disclosed no offence ; and if that was not sufficient it should be quashod because the accused had answered the charge by being found m the possession of £65, which were sufficientmeans of support. Chief Detective McGrath contended on his part that Cassidy would have to prove that he had lawful means of support. . Dr. McArthur then announced, that he would reserve judgment on the points and would, hear what evidence Mr Herdman would call. A number of men connected with the Opera House were called and they stated that at different times and with different theatrical companies, Cassidy had been employed as stage carpenter. Others had seen him giving boxing exhibitions and had heard that he had, ,pupils whom he <'was teaching the noble art. This they /had heard from Cassidy. ' . . Here. Chief .Detective McGratti;interrupted with, "Oh, that's not evidence." ' '. "Not evidence-i?" retorted-' Mr Herdman ; '.'why, you claimed the police could give evidence of anything they had heard, and made all sorts of statements for which there was not a tittle of evidence." On behalf of Cassidy, the clerk of abookmaker named Law. said that the accused had made bets and had won as much as £60 and £70. . That was all the evidence and Dr. McArthur reserved judgment until Friday, July £o.