ANOTHER ASSAULT CASE.

West Coast Times, 26 April 1910, Page 3

ANOTHER ASSAULT CASE.

i i lie Powelka limit was responsible for a case of assault ivliich came before Mr A. D. Thompson, S.M., to-day. The parties were Herbert Vaughan and William Abliot Weeks, who is an old man of .about sixty years of age, ' hv was charged with throwing large stone and striking him during a. heated discussion as to the character and personality of Powelka. Mr 11, D. Bagnall appeared for plaintiff, and Mr G. Moore for the defendant. Herbert Vaughan, farmer, of Awapuni, said that on April 12 last he nns at the factory at Awapuni supplying milk. Defendant and others discussed the Powelka incident at some length. Weeks took the side of .Powelka, and said that the latter was a hetter man than witness. Witness said that Weeks must be a confederate. Weeks got in a passion, and hold Powelka up as a hero and an innocent man. lie said it was the police who "'ere the guilty party, and tluat they shot Sergt. Maguire. Powelka, said Weeks, was; never there. Weeks also put forward the theory that the police stole all the. furniture for which the crime of theft was laid at the door of nn innocent man. The police, 'Weeks considered, wore the greatest set of blackguards in tho place, and far worse than Powelka. Witness came down and shook defendant. He turned to go away and Weeks picked np a largo, stone and threw it, bitting witness on tho top of the head. H. Hartly said tiiat tho defendant and plaintiff took sides on the question of Powelka. Vaughan said it would bo a good job if he wore caught. Weeks first used bad language. Vaughan called Weeks a coinfedcrate of Powelka Vaughan struck first in the tussle. Weeks threw a. stone. as V auglian wont hack to his dray, and hit him on the back of the head. To Mr Moore: Plaintiff hit Weeks twice before the latter defended himself with a stone. Weeks asked his opponent to stop bitting him. Weeks was hit on tho side of the head, and hit Vaughan once on tho body. To Mr Thompson : The two onntestants were fairly equally matched, Thp struggle did not last very long, To Mr Bagnall; Had never had a quarrel with defendant. Weeks was none the worse for tho struggle. After tho stone was thrown, Vaughan went to Weeks again and shook him. Weeks went home in his cart.

George Henderson said there was a lot of had language, both men swearing at each other, Vaughan said there was nothing gained in Weeks getting in a passion over a law breaker. Witness stepped in between the two men in the second struggle. Defendant was

enraged, hut plaintiff was cool until Weeks‘ahuscij him. Personally he did not know how many blows were struck or wlni struck first. The stone whs thrown with just about four- yards between each man. The stone canted Vaughan’s head to bleed, and his shirt was full of blood. Vaughan did not swear. Any man would lose his temper if sworn at as Vaughan was, Mr Moorp said that this quarrel was caused by Weeks taking up the position that Powelka was innocent tilt proved guilty, Win. Abbot Weeks, sixty years of age, said that he had a friendly argument to begin with about Powelka. \ aughan was in Jus cart, red witness said a man must ho given a trial before ho was comicted. Plaintiff called witness a confederate, and swore at him. Witney;; swore, hack, and plaintiff, jumped out of Ids cart and .hit witness? three times before ho retaliated. Witness threw a stone, which grazed plantiff’s bond.

'i he Magistrate, in giving judgment, said the trouble was brought on by Weeks. If tlie scuffle had ended the quarrel he would have treated the matter lightly. The throwing of the stone altered the complexion of the ease, '■nice this might, have proved much more serious. Defendant would be con vieteij amt fined Li!, with costs £1 os.