OBSCENE LANGUAGE

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19339, 1 June 1937, Page 2

OBSCENE LANGUAGE

MAORI MEETING HOUSE AN INTIMATE DISCUSSION FINE OF £2 IMPOSED A fine of £2 and costs £3 Is was imposed* upon Mann Terekia, Waituhi, for using obscene language during a public meeting in the- Takitirnu meeting house on April 13. The accused, who was represented by Mr. A. A. Whitehead, pleaded not guilty, but admitted using some of the words on the charge sheet. Senior-See geanl ,T. F. H. Maonamara prosecuted. Tureki Pore, farmer, Waipaoa, said Jio was one of ,1 he trustees of the Takitirnu pa. The meeting, which was on April 13, was open to the public. The idea of the meeting was an endeavour to make peace between a certain family. There was bad feeling between the brothers generally. The meeting, of which the witness was the chairman, desired to elect a committee to decide the dispute. Mann Terekia interjected during tho discussion, and the witness, as chairman, told the accused to keep quiet. The accused then made use of the lam guage complained of. There was an attendance of 20 or 30 people, including a number of women. Discussion on Three Women To Mr. Whitehead, witness said that ihe accused objected to tho way the meeting was being conducted. Mr. 'Whitehead: Did he not say that he called out that lie would not like to have his wife talked to like you spoke to here? The witness: Yes. Mr. Whitehead: You were discuss* lug three women very intimately?— * Yes. You were discussing whether they had venereal disease or not? —Yes. Publicly, amongst 20 or 30 people?*— Yes. That was his first objection, —No, he did not object to it. Did not one of these women tell you that she had been examined and treated by Dr. Brown? —Yes. Did he not say that that was a matter for tho marae committee?— Yes. The senior-sergeant submitted that the cross-examination was irrcvelaut. His Worship said that Mr. Whitehead might be leading up <to something, and he had the right to proceed. Mr. Whitehead: Did he not say that he would not stay arid listen to women being talked about, like that? The witness said he did not remember, but >the accused got up to go home. Submission of Provocation Tommy Smiler, labourer, Waituhi, who said lie was temporarily a member of the committee, stated that about 10 women were at the meeting, and must have heard the language complained of. Constable Allan said that when interviewed the accused said he was annoyed when ho got to the meeting iof he was disappointed because 1m thought he was going to a Labour meeting. The defendant, in evidence, said that he was a returned soldier. He said that at the meeting some of the women were being talked of as being “hot.” The accused said he suggested that tho matter should have been dealt with in private. He made his objections in an orderly mariner, but the meeting was carried on despite the objections. Ito admitted lusing certain words but not all oi those complained of. To the semor-sergeanl, the accused said that he was fined £1 for wishing to go home, but he had not paid it. Mr. Whitehead submitted that even if the accused was found guilty of using obscene language, there was provocation. He had never experienced a case where there was so much provocation as this. The whole meeting seemed almost an obscene procedure. His Worship: Why did lie not pay the fine? Mr. Whitehead said lie did not. know. His Worship: Anyway, T shall double their amount and make it £2.