1_ .«»■ ;.. — WHEN MONTEITH WAS EMPTIED OUT. What Happened at a Banmevirke Meeting. Lan Simson Under Cross-Examinatiou. The Prime Minister's meeting at the Dannevirke Drill Hall on November 28, 1911, was 3iot only attended with unrehearsed results, tout has been followed by the unpleasant aftermath sometimes following m the wake of heated political meetings. The aftermath took place before Mr S. B. McCarthy, S.M., at the Dannevirke Magistrate's Court the other day, when Henry Monteith, 64 years of age, sued • William George Francis Frame and H. Lan Simson for assault, claiming £101 damages from each of them. The assault complained of consisted m the ejectment of the plaintiff from the meeting and allegedly throwing him out on his head. Being an elderly man, he naturally suffered from the shock, which was accentuated by cuts and. minor injuries. Monteith is a professed SUPPORTER OF THE " DEFORM " PARTY, and presumably could not control himself when Sirjoe was addressing the .Dannevirke-ites. The meeting was anything but an orderly one/ and,' among ' other, ; interjections, Monteith Iqalle'd ou;t, <r What about the brewers?" , liafer'von, when, Sirjoe was speaking about -his return to the Dominion, Monteith, interpolated, "Yes, •with the title! "'* The next thing was that he was turned out neck and crop j by Frame, j with the assistance of 1 Simson. '■•■'-'.'' '■:■■■ Frame is a cqachbuilder, and had engaged/the hall for Sir joe's meeting, and he had to look after the seating arid keep order. According to him the meeting was very disorderly, and Monteith was particularly insistent; after being warned by the Mayor (who was m the chair) and the sergeant of police.; Frame went up to him and said, "Look here, Monteith, are you going to keep quiet, or are you going out?" Monteith retorted, m an excited manner, " Who the - aro you ?" The •chucking-out incident then ensued,, m the course of which Monteith seized Frame by the throat. They /both fell side by side m the vastfbule. _ Simson, who was sitting at the reporters' table, was watching the ejectment, and as, m his opinion, several people triad to interfere with the ejectment . . Ik A MOST UNBRITISH WAY, he took a hand, although someone told him to mind his own— businessMr Moore (m cross examination): You love .a little fracas?, ■ Witness: I am not a French scholar and don't know what you mean. ■ Mr Moore: Oh, come; you must I know what I mean. We'll, then, you | delight m being mixed up m a " scrap." Witness: Oh, I don't know. Mr Moore: You have been mixed up m a r lot of them. I have here, a long list of these little affairs. Is it true you 'assaulted a man named Davis m a. train at Auckland m 1900?; , . Witness: I pulled his nose for impertinence. HE CALLED ME A LIAR. Mr Moore: And the magistrate remarked that it was a serious case and fined you £5. Mr Moore: Is it true that ypu assaulted a newspaper man named Carrick m Napier with the result that he brought an action? Witness: I pulled his nose for impertinence. Mr Moore: Did you assault Charles, Robert Winston at Clive? Witness: No. Mi- Moore: Did you have an argument' with him? s . Witness: Yes. Mr Moore: And is it true you asj sauited a man named Gorbett at Readi ing's cafe? Witness: I do not know. Mr Moore: Well, did you pull his nose? j Witness: Oh, I threw a glass of I milk at him. j Mr • Moore: Well* what I suggest is I that when you saw the fracas m | question' you thought, " Here, 1 must I get into this." You did your best I and shoved Monteith out of the dooi\ [ His Worship said that the hall had I been' booked by Frame, pursuant to a resolution of : a committee, and to him had been delegated the duty of preserving order. Certain duties defvolyed upon the chairman, who was [ only justified m ordering any person j to be removed \vb 6 was disturbing the . proceedings. Monteith was responsible for ,a goofl deal of interruption, j and, after being warned, he was rightly ejected; tlie only question was whe- ; ther iinnecessary force had been used, ] ahtl his Worship was of opinion that j there had not been. The cases were dismissed, with costs— £s Is m Frame's Case 'and £2 10s m Simscm's [case. . ■
Permanent link to this item
"DEFORM DIVARSHUN.", NZ Truth, Issue 346, 10 February 1912
"DEFORM DIVARSHUN." NZ Truth, Issue 346, 10 February 1912
Using This Item
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.