MAGISTERIAL

Timaru Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 12042, 16 April 1903, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL

TIMARU-WEDNESDAY, APRIL 15th.

(Before Messrs W. Makepeace Howe and A. Mills, J.P.s.)

DRUNKENNESS. Three first offenders were fined 5s each, or 24 hours' imprisonment. They were all strangers to the town. ASSAULT. John Le Geyt was charged on remand with assaulting W. T. Stevens, and also with using obscene language. Mr Moore appeared for defendant, and asked that the two charges might be taken separately. Accused pleaded not guilty to the charoe of assault. D

Sergeant Warring stated that about 11 o'clock on Monday night, Stevens came to the police station, complaining that lie Geyt had assaulted him, and he sent Constable Lewin to accompany him to the house of accu»ed, and shortly afterwards followed himself.

W. T. Stevens, labourer, an elderly man, gave evidence that he was going home on Monday night about 10 o'clock, and when opposite the Private Hospital the accused overtook him, and struck him three times on the face, knocking him down, and when he got up accused hit him again, and also struck him on the mouth with his knee. Accused crossed the road, and witness followed him to the next lamppost, to see who he was ; and there recognised him as Le Geyt, who lives near to witness. When they got to the brick wall at the corner I of the public hospital grounds, Le Gtyt | turned off to go in a different direction, and witness called out to him that he might as well go home, as he had renognised him. Accused then attacked him a second time, pulling his nose. After a struggle he got away from him, and went for the police. He Teturned with Constable Lewin*. and after calling for his son went to Le Geyt's house for an explanation : and accused came out and used more bad language. Cross-examined by Mr Moore, complainant, said he was quite sober, and was not standing on the footpath committing a nuisance : when accused overtook him, accused used insulting language to him and struck him. Witness said to him. " What have I done? Ido not know who yon are." and accused struck him again. Witness positively denied having struck the first blow. He had no grudge of any kind against Le Geyt. Constable Lewin gave evidence of the complaint, and of going to the house with complainant and his son, and Sergeant Warring corroborated 'this.

Mr Moore then put accused in the witness box. He said that he was "lorncr home between 10 and half-past, and was quite sober, having had only two or three drinks all the afternoon. He came upon Stevens, standing on the path outside the Private Hospital, and committing ■*, nuisance there. He spoke to him. calling him a dirty wretch for what he was doing, and complainant swung round his arm and hit him in the face, and then struck him atrain, knocking him down and over the putter. He got up. and hit complainant, perhaps twice, strictly in self-de'enre. He then crossed the road to avoid Stevens. and walked homewards. Stevens followed him on to the other Bath, usinir abusive language, and saying that if a third mrty came along to see fair play, he would firrht witness. When they reached the public hospital, complainant continued his abuse, and he therefore turned upon him. and said "If you want to know who I am, my name is Le Oeyt: I won't strike an old man, but I'll pull your nose," and did so, and Stevens then went away. William Ellis, labourer, who lives opposite the hospital, said that he heard a row in the street, and went down to the gate to see what was the matter. Accused and

Stevens were about a chain -up the road, but he recognised them both" by their voices. He heard Le Geyt say that he ■would not fight v tbe other, but would pull "his nose, give Him a shaKing, or words to that effect. Both men were perhaps not drunk, but were under the influence •f Kquor. Apparently Stevens was fol-

I° Wing £ 6 Geyfc ' and Le Ge yt was calling him a dirty pig. " w 1116 ,.? 611011 def erred their decision -until alter the second charge had been heard. OBSCENE LANGUAGE. Un this charge, Le Geyt pleaded guilty, but said that he had no recollection of having used any such language as was al-. leged to have been used Mr Moore explained that he had advised his client to plead guilty on this charge. Accused could not remember having made use of any bad language, but might ha.ve done so, being excited by what bad occurred earlier, and when he saw the complainant and his sen at his door he thought that they had come to renew the assalt. He could call a witness who was standing on the verandah of a house next door, but had heard no such language.

Constable Lewin then handed in a liapsr on which was written the abusive language which he and Sergeant Warring heard. Sergeant Warring said that all the neighbours, appeared to be in bed, and no,one about to hear the language, except a man and woman next door, who seemed to be listening. Mr sloore said this was the man he proposed to call to say that he heard no bad language. The accused again remarked that he might have used the words imputed to him, as he was roused after having been in bed some time, and being taken by surprise.

The chairman said the Bench had come to the decision with respect to the assault that it was not quite clear who was the aggressor, the evidence being very conflicting ; consequently they dismissed that case. With respect to the second charge accused would be. fined 10s and costs.