ELLIOTT'S ELEGANCE.

NZ Truth, Issue 59, 4 August 1906, Page 6

ELLIOTT'S ELEGANCE.

Dirty-minded Brute Presented at Court Once More.

The argot of the gutter is much more frequently heard m the Police Courts than the classics; when a sordid row happens between neigh.bofs or other quarrelsome people— for neighbors appear to be peculiarly prone to be quarrelsome— their lang uage isn't Chesterfieldian, nor are their, sarcastic remarks couched m the high falutin* terms one usually finds within the covers of prose poem novels, or hears on the stage. In fact it is particularly vile, and would absolutely shock refined people whose morals reach high water mark. There is one arrant scoundrel down Christchurch way whose tongue is as hot as a cinder, and whose past conduct •stamps him as being one of those beasts of society which the community gets rid of temporarily- now. and a.?ain by placing them under the rigidity of discipline which characterises life m gaol. His name is Samuel Elliott, and he was police courted —not by any means the first time— for using beastly language towards a married woman, Louisa Thompson, wife of William Thompson, baker, and with threatening her. Sureties were asked for. According to complainant, represented by Lawyer Donnelly, Elliott had frightened her children, and cast suspicion on their parentage by designating them m the old familiar way. He then came to -the fence which adjoins the two houses and reflected on her chastity m the most awful manner, and brutally invited her to i COME OVER AND SLEEP WITH | HIM. | (Why lie did so she couldn't say, :is 'ishe,. had never, provoked him. Her •husband was at tea at the time, and ■

heard the atrocious insult, but Elliott had disappeared inside by the time he reached the yard. The police were rung up. and they visited the house m which Elliott lives— a boarding house kept by Miss G-ourley— but as they found no disturbance there as •had been indicated they went away. Between 10 and 11 the same night Elliott is alleged to have climbed the six foot dividing fence opposite where complainant's daughters slept, and once again applied abominable epithets to them, aspersing their parentage. Mrs Thompson ran for a neighbor to ling up the police, and as she went out of the gate Elliott characterised her as a woman of the town. The police were let m by Elliott, who was m his shirt, but as there was no row visible they departed. Mrs Thompson said that none of her children were bastards ; she had put up with .Elliott long enough, and desired him to be restrained. In reply to Mir Graham, •who defended, she denied having sent defendant post cards, bub she had received some. The witness was about to .-'produce these, but was told by Graham to keep them m her pocket. Also, she had never emptied slops over the fence on to his garden seeds: nor had she abused him, nor boasted 'that she would vet see Elliott m gaol and would swear away her life to, get him there. The fellow had insinuated that she wasn't married to her. husband, and that her name was not Thompson. Complainant's daughter, under 12, was drageed into ,the dirty business, and the husband gave evidence. Throughout the whole affair, and knowing that .his wife was being maligned, he doesn't appear to have done anything to Elliott. There are evidently some husbands m the world .who can •. STAND A DEUCED LOT and say nothing. Yet Thompson had heard Elliott say over, the fence to his missus that he would kill her, at the same time using the. worst 'of opprobious ■ '.epithets to her. Law-' yer Graham said the case was a trumped , up one, Mrs Thompson having a down on Elliott, and/he would bring evidence to substantiate his statement. The defendant- himself absolutely denied using the. language imputed. to him y ._sr the. threat madehe hadn't spoken to complainant or her children at all on the day or night m question. Then he had to face some very • nasty quest.io ns from Lawyer Donnelly, but . he. 'admitted eveiything^that he: ; had only come out of gaol this year :for having; , WILFULLY EXPOSED HIMSELF from a window m the very house m which lie. was; now living ;. that at the trial Miss : Gpurjey, ; ;whp runs the place, ; had , f Lyen evidence m his favor , and this juxy .^disbelieved them bo«h ; that he had ; 'ljpen before the Cour*; for assaul^, and ".;, other offences. .Miss . Gpurlev ".- , a ; .. hatchet-faced, woman of uncertain ; age,, once again: .testified m Elliott's iaygrj'sas did an 30-year old boarder named 'Br'enrian^-neither had heard or seen any misconduct on defendant's part. ; . Then stepped .into the box Louisa Scott,,. a young lady of Jewish cast of features, vwho saict she had' seen I»rs .Thompson pitch slops over on to Elliott's garden to annoy him ; that on another occasion she saw her put her fingers to her nose and say to Elliott, "Monkey brand," and that at a divorce court sitting last year when the husband of her (Miss/Scott's) sister got a divorce,, Mrs Thompson told the witness that she would swear her life, her soul, away to get Elliott m gaol. It here transpired that Elliott was already m gaol a month at the tirme, having got a term for exposing himself. Mrs Thompson gave evidence ag-ainst Miss Scott's sister at the. divorce court, but Miss Scott averred that she had no , grudge against her on that account. Ifi the result th? Bench ordered elegant Elliott to keep the peace towards the complainant for half a year.