DECISION RESERVED

Waikato Times, Volume 118, Issue 19759, 14 December 1935, Page 8

DECISION RESERVED

CHATEAU INCIDENT. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES. INJURIES TO LATE MANAGER. (By - Telegraph—Press Association.) TAUMARUNUJ, Friday. The hearing of the civil case arising out of the affray at Chateau Tongariro, National Park, was completed at the Magistrate’s Court, Taumarunul, this evening, before Mr R. M. Watson, S.M. Mr J. A. Gordon appeared for the plaintiff, Richard Cobbe, late manager of tjie Chateau Tongariro, and Mr W. Selwyn Averlll, of Hastings for the defendant, E. J. R. Seeker, of Hastings, farmer.

Cross-examined toy Mr Averlll, Arthur Sagar Bailey, of Auckland, said he did not see Sir Standish Roche being held by a porter and did not see him standing between Seeker and Cobbe trying to ward Cotobe off. By consent of counsel for the defence Mr Gordon submitted a report -from Dr. Cameron, of Wellington, giving the results of an X-ray examination of plaihtiff’s skull, showing a linear fracture of the left frontal and temporal region. Dr. Maurice Wells said he acted as locum lenens for Dr. Welby Fisher in September last. Witness examined Cobbe and admitted him to hospital at Taumarunui. Witness considered Cohbe’s injury serious, including a bruise of the brain. Witness supervised Cobbe in the hospital for a fortnight and then had him removed to a private hospital. The injuries could have been the natural results of blows made by a fist. The report made toy the X-ray expert was what he expected to find. Probably tile result would be a long period of impairment for any period of time from one year upward. Witness said he considered it necessary for Cobbe to resign his position at the Chateau. Dr. Welby Earle Fisher also gave evidence. This concluded the case for plaintiff. Case for Defence. Mr Averlll submitted there was no case for defendant to answer. This case, if proved, would form a serious criminal charge against defendant. In that case it would have to he proved who was the man who struck the blow that caused the injury. Plaintiff said he pushed Seeker and he fell. Plaintiff also said he could not remember who struck him afterwards.

The evidence of Bailey, who said he heard Seeker apologise for striking plaintiff had reference to a later period, continued counsel. Everything that applied to defendant applied equally to Sir Standish Roche. In the circumstances, counsel asked for a non-suit. Mr Gordon admitted that no one but the party saw the blow struck, hut any jury would decide that the blow was struck by defendant. The suggestion that the blow might have been struck toy Sir Standish Roche was ridiculous.

The magistrate said that in his opinion the evidence established clearly that defendant struck the blow. The application for a non-suit would he dismissed.

The Coiurt adjourned at this stage

Insobriety Denied.

On resuming Mr Averill said that defendant would admit he was knocked to the floor by plaintiff in the passage and that immediately following that, when lie rose to his feet, some blows were struck by both parties. But he would sfty that in striking out in the passage he did so only in self-defence. This would too borne out toy the evidence of Sir Standish Roche, who ■definitely was the first on the scene other than the parties concerned in the action. But defendant would deny he ever struck plaintiff the blow of which he spoke, and which he said was struck when he was looking through the bannisters.

Counsel would suggest that such blow could not have been struck by a man of defendant’s weight and strength. Both defendant and his witnesses would deny any excessive noise or insobriety. Tho two whiskies spoken of by porters were weak whiskies and the first defendant had that evening. When a request was made to him defendant did cause the party to be broken up. Later he heard Cobbe speaking very rudely to Miss Latilla. Defendant said lie was responsible for the party and was sorry if the noise disturbed anyone.

There were words between plaintiff and defendant and" the next thing defendant knew he was lying on the broad of his back, having been pushed or knocked over by plaintiff, continued counsel. When defendant rose to his feet plaintiff came at him again and both struck out at each other, hut Seeker did. not do more .than try to ward off an attack. Sir Standish Roche and Mr Barron would say' the latter dropped a tray from the stairs oix the first y floor down behind Sir Standish, and that was what made the-clatter. Sir Standish Roche then walked on to the stairs, picked up the salver and threw it up stairs again, when it was again caught by Barron. Evidence by Defendant. There might he comment that defendant did not make a counter-claim for assault and imprisonment, added Mr Averill, but lie did not waiit to make capital out of the trouble. The defendant, Edward John Richard Seeker, farm assistant, of To Awanga, Hawke’s Bay, in evidence, said lie was at the Chateau for a holiday and ski-ing. The party in No. 1 room started about 11.45 p.m. Witness denied that the two whiskies he had made him intoxicated. He had only one other whisky in tho middlo of the evening. After the party broke up he saw Cobbe talking lo Miss Latilla and heard him tell her to leave the Chateau. Witness said to Cobbe, “ 1 am responsible for the party. Will you talk to me." Cobbe said that witness was a conceited young puppy, that he was breaking up the hotel and that his party consisted of “ sluts and scalliwags." There was no one else in hearing when the remarks were made, continued witness. An altercation followed and blows wore exchanged, hut Gobbc remained on his feet. Sir Standish Roche I lien appeared on Die scene. They tried to calm Gobbc, hut lie went for witness again, Sir Stand-j-sh coming between them. Witness made no attempt lo hit Cobbe again. Witness slnled that, lie never apologised for hilling Cobbe, but had said, "I apologise for what 1 said to you.” (Continued in ueit column.).

Witness, feeling that. Cobbe wanted to hit him, offered to let him do so then, thinking it might end the trouble. Witness saw Cobbe coming downstairs next morning. He was then going about as usual. Witness would say it was impossible for him to fracture Gobhe’s skull with a blow of his fist. The blows were just sufficient lo keep him off and were struck for that purpose. Witness was not under the influence of liquor and Sir Standislf Roche was perfectly sober. Wrong Statement Admitted. To Mr Gordon witness said he had a cocktail before dinner, two glasses of dinner beer, a whisky and soda with Sir Standish Roche in his room at 9.30 p.m. and then two whiskies in the company of the porters. There were nine people in the room, but not all were drinking. One of the girls was not drinking and witness did not have one drink in the room. He was 25 years of age and did not drink much. Defendant was questioned about his statement to the police. When the hearing was resumed this evening defendant, in answer to Mr Gordon, admiLted he was wrong in his statement that Cobbe struck him with a ring on his finger. Witness struck Cobbe twice on the left cheekbone in rapid succession. Mr Gordon: You said Sir Standish Roche was perfectly sober? —Yes.

Mr Gordon: If he would throw paper from a waste paper basket about the lounge and throw a silver salver up the stairs what would he do if he were half-drunk? Witness: I cannot say. To Mr Averill, witness said that Miss Latilla had in her room on Friday, September 6, two bottles of vermouth, one bottle of gin, one bottle of whisky and one dozen bottles of beer. Witness bought it for her. That liquor was almost finished when the evening party took place. Miss Latilla had a cocktail party on the afternoon before this occurrence at which 36 to 40 people were present. Witness’ weight was just under li-stone. Sir Standish Roche In Box. Sir Standish O’Grady Roche, in evidence, said he was a member of the party in room No. 1. When the party broke up he went to the lounge. He upset a waste paper basket which liad the sweepings of ash trays in it, and it made a bit of a mess. They moved upstairs, and he heard Cobbe and Seeker arguing. Witness was then at the top of the steps, and both plaintiff and defendant disappeared out of view, though in earshot. Witness then went round the corner and found Seeker and Cobbe fighting. Witness ran between them and pushed them apart,' hut Cobbe went for Seeker again. Seeker made no attempt to hit Cobbe again. Continuing, witness said that Cobbe was - the aggressor the whole time. When the porters arrived Cobbe ordered them to “ knock out Seeker,” and then changed the order to “ lock him up in the cellar.” Witness never struck a blow of any kind. A silver salver was dropped from the landing just behind witness, who jumped. He threw it up to a man leaning over tho stairs, who caught it. Witness and defendant were perfectly sober. Dropping of a Salver. ■Mr Gordon: Were you not making a disturbance in,any shape or form? Witness: No, absolutely. Air Gordon: You told a porter to call the manager?—l said he could go and call the manager. I was not stopping him. Mr Gordon; What were you doing to upset the basket?—l picked up a brush broom and gave it one whirl round my head, and over went tho basket. Peter Winstone Netterville Barron, farmer, of Hastings, a member of the party in room No. J, said that Seeker and Sir Standish Roche were both sober after the parly. When they Jeff the party witness dropped a silver salver from upstairs into tho lounge and it was thrown hack lo him by Sir Standish. Witness kmocked the salver down to hear it make a noise. Ho was 21 years of age. He did not sec Seeker drinking in the room. Patrick Leslie Peacock, stock agem, of Waipukurau, another member of the party, said that Seeker and Sir Standish Roche were both perfectly sober. This closed the case for the defence. Mr Gordon recalled two witnesses in rebuttal of evidence, McKone and Stewart. They said they never hex'd Cobbe say “knock Seeker out.” Alt they heard him say was “ get Hie boys." The magistrate reserved his decision.