Untitled

Otago Witness, Issue 3804, 8 February 1927, Page 35

Ihe Timaru Borough Council apparently is unable to make.its bus service pay,(remarks the Herald), but things probably would have been worse, had a tram system been installed. Speaking at a meeting of the Wanganui City Council, the Mayor (Mr Hope Gibbons') stated that the tramway revenue would be down about £lO,OOO at the end of the financial vear, March 31. Already Jlh o revenue was down £7OOO. The Mayor stated that a halt would have to be called, as they could not go beyond the limit of their financial resources. The Tramway Committee was going to investigate the position thoroughly, and would place before the council at an oarlv date a comprehensive report regarding the matter, and schemes for rectifying the posiln conclusion, the Mayor stated that AV anganui wag not the only city that was experiencing difficulty in making, its trams pay., as eities all over the world were having the same difficult v. '•.'• — The sperm whale can remain below the water for 20 minutes.

The following appeared in our Second Edition Inst w«ek : —

“A FOUL OUTRAGE.”

pHARGS AGAINST SEAMAN, y " TEN YEARS’ IMPRISONMENT. AUCKLAND, February 1. For what his Honor described as “ a Very foul outrage upon a woman, accompanied by violence of a very brutal character,” Altmar Leief Anderson, 'second mate of the American schooneryacht Fisherman, was sentenced in the Supreme Court to 10 years’ imprisonment. Anderson was charged alternately with Tape, attempted Tape and aggravated assault. He was found guilty on the first count. Mr Justice Stringer preeided, Mr Meredith appeared for the Crown, and Mr Hart for the accused. Complainant, a young married woman, living apart from her husband, stated that she made Anderson’s acquaintance in Lower Queen street after 11 p.m. on New Year's Eve, and agreed to go for a walk ■with him. He bought her a box of chocolates, and they went into Albert Park to see the year out. He brutally assaulted her, striking her repeatedly on the left eide of the head and knocking ■"it one of her front teeth. Having cover. I her head with a coat to muffle her screams, he committed the major offence with which he was charged. She called for help, and he ran away. She smelt no liquor upon him.

Melville M’Dowell, a carpenter, stated that the woman came to him in the park in great distress. Blood was streaming down one side of her face.

The police evidence was that Anderson had denied ever having spoken to a woman or having gone into the park, but said he was drunk at the time, and could not remember where he was. Mr Hart called no evidence for the defence. Addressing the jury, he said that accused, a Norwegian sailor, had only just arrived in Auckland, and did not know the city. The woman had undoubtedly taken him into Albert Park. Her conduct could have led him to only one conclusion about her moral character and intentions. Counsel mentioned that Anderson, though a Norwegian, had served with the French army in the war attaining the rank of captain. His Honor, summing up, said that a woman who .-'.ruck up a chance acquaintance at midnight as complainant had done ran a serious risk. However, no prior conduct on her part could have justified a man attempting to coerce her from the moment she refused or resisted. The only question was whether the complainant had consented. Her evidence that she had resisted was uncontradicted. Accused’s Juty, if he alleged consent on her part was to go into the witness box and deny ner ffcou 7 ' H sb® had consented there would have been no reason for violence, whereas she had undoubtedly been knocked ebout in a savage and brutal way. The jury, after Uiree-quarters of an hour found the accused guilty on the first count’ Mr Hart said he had nothing further I° I( sa y. °n behalf of the accused. ‘Prisoner,’’ said his Honor, “you have been found guilty on the clearest possible evidence of a very foul outrage upon a woman, accompanied by violence of a very brutal character. There is no evidence that you were, under the influence of liquor at the time.. However, on looking through . the depositions, I see there is some evidence that before you met her you had been drinking. But for that circumstance, which may have accounted for your brutality, I should have seriously considered whether I ought not to visit brutality with brutality and subject you to a flogging. Perhaps your offence was not premeditated, but you committed a gross outrage on a woman. For this you are liable to a very long term of imprisonment—in fact, imprisonment for life. The sentence of the court is that you be imprisoned for 10 years.” On a charge of stealing £74 from the master of the schooner, to which he had pleaded guilty, Anderson was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment concurrently with his other sentence.