A PUGNACIOUS PUSH.

NZ Truth, Issue 108, 13 July 1907, Page 5

A PUGNACIOUS PUSH.

THE CAMBRIDGE TERRACE TIGERS

Have a Day Out!

And the Consequences Thereof.

The operations of the Cambridge J Terrace Push, mentioned extensively j ! last week, are varied, but are mostly attended by violence. On Prince of Wales' Birthday, at about three m | the afternoon, somebody damaged the shop of Wong iHow>, at the corner of Willis and Ingestre streets, and last wsek Frank Carroll was charged at Wellington Police Court vjith breaking a glass panel m the f'-oor, also j with obstructing Constable Drummond m the execution of his duty. The evidence for trie prosecution), as elicited by Sub-Inspector O'Donovan, was that Carroll came alon-g. shortly after 2 o'clock and tore the blindI from the shop window. The shop was closed on account of the holiday. Wong Kong who lives with Wong How, came 'amd replaced .the blind. Carroll tore it down again and threw it m the gutter. The patient Chow wont to recover the' blind for the secjond time, and Oa-rroll and other youths hustled Mm and wanted to fighft. He retreated into the shop and surreptitiously : sent for a policeman. He closed the door, and Carroll smashed m a glass panel. Constable Druiwmond arrived, m plain clothes, and Carroll was pointed' out to him as the youth who had perpetrated the smash, which had occurred at about 3 p.m. Then a melee ensued. The constable stated that Carroll was standing opposite the shop with othei* boys, and the bobby proceeded to arrest him- He seized Carroll, but the boys with him USED FEET AND FISTS ON HIM, and Carroll also kicked Mm and triedi to 'get his teeth into him. Eventually he was obliged to let his prisoner go. To Mr Wilford : He was m plain clothes, and was dragging Carroll towards the Chinaman's to have him identified. , Did you tell him you were arresting him ?— I could swear I did not. You surely do not suggest that you have any right to take a man out of the street and drag him to a Chinar, man's without a warrant ?— I took/ him to have him identified. Witness, continuing,' said the boys who had tackled him were Carroll, Henry Herbert Andrews, and another boy, whom he could not catch. He had placed his knee oa Carroll m. the course of the" struggle. Why did you let 'Carroll go ?— I was fair done ; I was simply beat, and I let him go. Two yellow persons blew out a match, and testified m support of the above, with the aid of an interpreter. All three were at one time near the witness-box, and Mr Wilford directed attention to the fact that a previous witness was prompting the ■ Mongol then m the box. THE PROMPTER WAS EJECTED. Mr Wilford said that the damage, if any, was not inflicted by Carroll, but by another boy, who would himself testify to the fact. He called— Bert Andrews, who "figured m the Cambridge Terrace case, and stated that he came -to the shop, then closed, shortly after two, to get a packet of cigarettes. Knocked at the door, and no one came. One of the glass panels hadi been broken previously, and the -hole was blocked by a piece of packing-case/ He knocked at this hard, and it ""fell m. To Sub 'lnspector O'Donovan, witness admitted that he was a member of a gang of which Carroll was one, and had appeared m the Court earlier m the week. There were, six m the gang. Frank, Carroll stated m" defence that hie arrived on the scene shortly after 3 o'clock. He had nothing to do with damaging the Chinaman's shopA man dressed m ordinary clothes gfot hold of him, and said, ''You'd better come along with me." Witness strung ed across thie road and I^rumnrond seized him and carried him back again. Carroll fell down, and Drummond placed his knee on his chest. The prostrate youth called for assistance, and Henry Andrews pulled the man from him. After a further struggle Carroll escaped. The policeman, who was m plain clothes, did not explain why Carroll was to go with him. T,o Sub-Inspector O'Donovan : Last January witness was CONVICTED OF ASSAULTING A CHINAMAN on the same spot, and he then swore that the Chinaman had struck him first.- ■ / Thomas Frank Corbatt,' carter, corroborated this story. After Carroll broke away Cortott asked the constable "What right have you to interfere with those l,aids 1" He replied, "I'm a constable," and opening his coat, showed one end of a 'handcuff. Corbett said : "That alters it." Doiring the struggle he thought seriously of assisting the boy. Irene Carroll, sister of Frank, saw the constable with has knee on her brother's chest. The constable did not say he belonged to the police force. ' James Llewns, a painter, saw Carroll thrown down by the man. He thought it was a drunken row. He was certain that the man who .tried to take the boy was under the influence of liquor. Hje could easily have taken the boy himself if he were a constable, and sober. Sub-Inspector O'Donovan : You are the first witness to say the constable was drunk ?— I can't help that. I'm tell : n>; the truth. A sirl of about thirteen ' named Tot Smith saw Andrews push m the board protecting the broken panel. The Sub-Inspector proposed to call , j the constable and others m disproof 1 of the allegation that THE CONSTABLE WAS DRUNK. Mr Wilford said he did not make this evidence part of his case, although Corbott was willing, to testify to the same effect. Magistrate Ridclell viewed the allegation with suspicion, and said he did not want further evidence. He convicted Carroll on the charge of damage, and fined him 20s and costs,, witnesses 8s ; to repair damage at a cost of ss. In connection with the second charge of resisting, the constable was m plain clothes, and accused might not have heard Drummond say he. was a constable. This change iwas dismissed. A rhnr.ne against Henry Herbert AikMvws of obstructing the police was Also dismissed^