THE FELLOW THAT FORGETS FACES.

Wanganui Chronicle, Issue 12857, 28 January 1913, Page 4

THE FELLOW THAT FORGETS FACES.

TROUBLES ON A TRAIN JOURNEY

GUARD AND A PASSENGER

TICKET MUST BE SHOWN PROMPTLY.

That the guard of a railway train is | "top dog," and that it is profitable I for a traveller to show his railway ticket, when requested, without comment, was exemplified an the Magistrate's Court yesterday when a well-known commercial, represented by Mr Cohen, pleaded not guilty to two charges, firstJj, with having refused to show his ticket, and secondly with having used insulting language. The alleged offence occurred on the evening Waverley to Wanganui train, and it was submitted that when the guard asked for tho ticket, the traveller, who holds an annual, did not at first produce it, but later on did so, and at the same time oajled the guard a "mongrel." The guard admitted tnat he had an altercation with the same defendant on another section of the railway, the cause being somewhat similar. Guards, however, had to do their duty. Two other Avitnesses were called, and testified to the use of insulting language. One witnege said that he heard the guard called a "mongrel," and the other alleged that the defendant had told tho gmard that the only reason he had asked for the ticket was because " ho had no brains"—meaning (apparently that he could not remember those i who had season tickets.

Mr Cohen contended that the present cr»3o was a mere aggravation of something that occurred some months ago, and anything the defendant had done was in resentment of the insolence of the guard.

Defendant related the history of the case on the other line, and in connection with the present charge. The trouble, he said, had arisen because of the words he had used. "Oh, you're the- fellow that forgets faces," when tho guard asked him for his ticket. The guard then asked him what lie meant, and this led to a few words, whereupon another passenger interejeted a certain uncomplimentary remark to himself. Witness then eaid "There arc some mongrels an this world." This ne meant to apply to the passenger,, for the offensive remark he had made-,, and not to the guard at all. Ho abso^ lutely denied that he had always resenl tod guards'asking him for his ticket..- * The Bench considered that the defendant did show a disinclination ,to produce the ticket when asked at first, •and that he had used an offensive expression to the guard when the latter was only doing his duty. Both cases however, would be dealt with simultaneously. The first charge would be dismissed, and on the second, with usniff offensive language, a fine of £1 itfjfct costs 11s would be imposed. ,':