ALLEGED ASSAULT.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLVI, Issue 14900, 2 May 1919, Page 3

ALLEGED ASSAULT.

Before Mr J. S. Barton, S.M. in the Police Court this morning, Harry Murray Home proceeded against Stewart leckie for alleged .assault.' Mr Hei appeared on behalf of the' accused. _ Complainant deposed thaft Leclne_ came into his shop to pay the rent. He complained that he, had heard that un-' less Home's wife and family were put out of his house Leckie would have to . go. Witness replied that it was so. Leckie then ' used flltny language ahd threw at witness a parcel, whiph flew behind the counter. He also aimed a blow which witness dodged. He then came round behind the counter and asked complainant to fight it out. Witness his boy for a constable, and his assailant cleared off. To Mr. Hei: Witness went into the icoom adjoining the shop and signed the rent book. The trouble did not start by Leckie accusing him of "faking" the rent book. Witness put stamps on the rent book, but he closed the book without ev^in looking at it. Alfred Horhe, son of the previous witness, corroborated his father's evidence. Defendant deposed that the trouble) started on Monday, when he called into I the shop ,to pay the rent. Plaintiff said "Hello, stranger, what are you doing here?" Witness replied, "To' pay the rent." Home went into the room behind tbe shop and receiped'the book. When he returned witness handed him the money. Witness then, asked him what he had "faked" the book for. He replied that it was his business— not witness's, and used insulting language. Home then asked him about separating him and his wife and witness called him a liar; Home picked up a large knife and struck at witness, knocking a sales book out of his hand. Witness then landed him a punch and Home sent for the police. Witness did /not think the sales book was marked. His Worship said it was a case of oath against oath, and he would adjourn the Court to enable the production' of the hook. To_ Home -Witness had been, a tenant •of his for eighteen months. 'It was not because he heard that Home was going to put him out that he {witness) came to pay the rent last Monday night. Witness was not annoyed at hearing of Home's intention. The parcel he was taking home was hot meat. Home was making sandwiches when witness came into the shop between 5.30 p.m. ahd 6 p.m: Witness did not go to the shop with the intention of having a row. _ The Court adjourned until 12.30 p.m. ■when the book was produced. "After hearing further evidence His Honor said the onus of proof was on the prosecution. The statements were conflicting. He had difficulty in accepting the version of the book having been knocked out of defendant's hand. There was^bad blood between the parties, and the feeling at the time of the incident was consequently increased. He felt a Btrong / suspicion that the version of the plaintiff was nearer the truth than that of tne defendant, but there was a doubt on both sides. Defendant would have the benefit of this, and the information was dismissed, no costs being allowed.