POLICE COURT.

Pelorus Guardian and Miners' Advocate., Volume 29, Issue 41, 29 May 1917, Page 5

POLICE COURT.

SEQUEL TO STREET FIGHT,

At about 8 o 'clock on Saturday evening the main street of Havelock was the scene of rather a disgraceful melee, during which several men got more or less knocked about. It is not clear how the fight actually started, but it was evident from the evidence given at the Police Court yesterday that a man named William Percy Page was the cause of the whole unfortunate business, and the others concerned were drawn into it. Two men named George Sang and William Percy Page, both belonging to the same vessel now in port, were arrested on several charges in connection with the disturbance by Constable Douglas, who received a broken finger and other less serious injuries in doing so. Messrs W. H. Smith and F. C. Cowper were the presiding Justices, and the prosecutions were conducted by Sergt. Hansen.

George Sang was charged with being found drunk, and further with unlawfully obstructing the constable in the execution of his duty. He pleaded guilty to both charges. Evidence was given by Messrs C. T. Ferguson and E. H. Smith, J.P. . Constable Douglas, who had a previous knowledge of accused, gave him a good character. Accused was fined 10s, or in default seven days on the first charge, and £5, or two months’ imprisonment, on the charge of resisting the constable. William Percy Page had four separate charges preferred against him: (1) assaulting William Pike, (2) assaulting Arthur Greig, (3) obstructing the constable in the execution of his duty, and (4) using obscene language in a public place.

Sergt. Hansen 1 stated that accused was evidently at the bottom of the whole trouble. He went into the Masonic Hotel, and was refused liquor by the licensee. Shortly afterwards he was ordered out of the hotel by Constable Douglas. In the general disturbance which followed accused was seen to strike the constable when trying to arrest hum Accused had used the obscene language (as shown in the information) in a loud voice within the hearing of passers-by. E. H. Smith deposed that his attention had been drawn to the disturbance. Accused had struck at him when he endeavoured to pull him off the man Greig, whom he had down in the gutter and was punching him in the face. He described this incident as a brutal assault on Greig. He also described the fight between the constable and accused, and assisted to pull the latter off.

Evidence was also given by the constable and Arthur Greig. Accused stated that Greig had struck him first, and he did not recollect what happened afterwards. Accused, who had several previous convictions against Tiim for similar offences, was fined £2, or one month, on the first charge of assault; the second was dismissed; on the, obscene language charge he was fined £lO, or in default two months in Wellington gaol; and for resisting the constable was called upon to pay £5, or serve one month in Picton gaol. The costs amounted to £1 Is, making a total of £lB Is. Both men elected to pay the 1 fines.