A FAMILY QUARREL.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume VI, Issue 1578, 5 March 1919, Page 8

A FAMILY QUARREL.

SON-IN-LAW IN TROUBLE

SURETIES OP THE PEACE GRANTED.

A story of family trouble was told before Messrs IT. J. Crowther and C. D. Morris, J.P.'s, at the Magistrate's Court this morning. Altogether there were three actions.

In the first, William Bertie Gates proceeded against Frederick Jackson for sureties of the peace, on the ground that he had used the words, "I will catch you at the train and do for you." Julia Gates, mother of the former complainant, asked for sureties of the peace against her son-in-law, Gordon Steven Mills, on the grounds of insulting language. She also applied for a, prohibition order against him. Mr It. Twyneha'm appeared for the two complainants and Mr J. A. Cassidy for the two defendants.

Mr Twyneham said that the main cause of the trouble was the objectionable conduct of Mills whilst under the influence of liquor. On February 8 last the two defendants had called at complainant's house and used the language complained of. Sureties of the peace were therefore asked for against both defendants.

William Bertie Gatos gave a rather mixed account of the affair on tho Saturday evening, interspersed with other matters of family history. Mills had used insulting languago to his mother and Jackson had said he would see witness at 7 o'oelock on the Monday morning and do for him. Witness also alleged that Mills had torn up a photograph of his (witness's) wedding group. The pieces of the photograph, which the witness produced in court, were found by witness thrown over the fence into his place. His face in the group had been disfigured. Mr Twyneham: And you think that he will do it to the original?— Yes. Julia Gates said that on February 8, Mills was very drunk, and was foaming at the mouth. The witness said that Mills had often been under tho influence of liquor. Sho gave a long account of the family history, and said that "that man Jackson is really a dangerous man."

Mr Cassidy: You made disparaging remarks about the child of Mills? —I could not do that.

Well, ho thought you did? —He should bo more sure about such things. William George Gates, the father, gave by far the clearest account of the affair. He said that in the morning of February 8, Mills came to the house greatly agitated, with foam comingout of each side of his mouth. Mills said that Mrs Gates had made accusations against his wife. In the evening Mills and Jackson came along, and the trouble started. Mills said that Mrs Gates was a liar. Witness intervened, but Mills told him to shut up. Then the son intervened, but Mills repeated his allegation against Mrs Gates, adding a few more adjectives. Witness said that he felt like giving both the defendants a good thrashing, which they thoroughly deserved. He alleged that Jackson was well known to be a dangerous character.

Mr Twyneham called Constable Pearce and Mary Morris to give evidence as to the character of Mills, especially with regard to sobriety, but they both admitted they did not know much about him. Mr Cassidy countered this evidence by calling witnesses who said that Mills was a sober, hard-working man. The wife of Mills bore this out. She said that her husband was not a drunkard, and she did not wish to have a prohibition order issued against him. Mr Cassidy said that the case should be dismissed. It should never have been brought to the Court as it was merely a row over the back fence. It was a serious matter for Mills to have to find sureties. He had certainly acted hastily, but at the time he was smarting under aspersious cast on his wife and child. As for the prohibition order there was not a scrap of evidence why that should be issued. The bench held that Jackson and Mills should be bound over for six months in their own bonds of £lO each. The application for a prohibition order against Mills was refused.