HASTINGS STREET FRACAS

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Volume 58, Issue 73, 29 April 1929, Page 9

HASTINGS STREET FRACAS

MELEE IX GREEK CAXDY K1TCHEX. SEAMAN AND GARDEXER BEFORE COl'RT. An echo of a fracas tliat was keenly enjoyed by quite a few spectators in Hastings street one evening last week vvas heard in the Xapier Police Court this morniug, when Charles Williams, gardener, of Xapier, aged 66, and Albert Perrv, able seatoun, of H.M.S. Diomede, the latter in uniforni, bearing a good conduct stripe on his arai, appeared to answer cliarges of assault and wilful mischief. Senior-Sergeant Powell conducted ihe prosecution and Mr IV. E. Barnard represented the accused, who pleaded not guilty. Senior-Sergeant Powell stated that on the night in question hoth the accused entered the shop of Denuis Callencos, confectioner, of Hastings street, opposite the new post office. AVilliams asked for c-hewing gum and hought a dozen packets. When told the price lie stated that lie would not pay, li owever, hroke two of the glass containers and then came behind the counter and hit the Greek. Ilis companion followed, and then other people joined in and there was a regular Donnvbrook, ihe sailor getting away, liut ultimately being arrested.in Diekens street. Damage was done to the fittings in the shop, induding the sealcs. Dennis Callencos, informant, gave evidence along these lines, his hroken English giving his examiner ratlier a hard tusk. Cross-exaniined, witness stated that the two accused were singing and dancing inside the shop. He thouglit thev were drunk. Evidence was aho given by John Callencos, hrother of the first witness, an 1 John Cross and Herbert ITowlett, eye-witnesses of the fracas. Two of these latter deposed that the seainnn did not talce much part'in the early proceedings and seemed to want to get away. Constahle Howell. wlio arrived on

the scene of the fracas afterwards, stated that both men were intoxicated. He liad no difficulty in persuading i'-.em to acconipany him to the station. PLEA ALTERED. In answer to Mr Barnard, witness stated that as far as AVilliams was concerned, witness had known him personally for a long time and there was nothing previously known against hira as far as the police were concerned. - - This completed the police c-ase. . - At this stage Mr Barnard asked the leave of the court to alter his jdea oi not guilty in AVilliams' case to oue of guilty, tlie necessary loavo being granted. Accused, Perrv, in evidence, stated that on the evening of April 2.3 he was on leave and was staying with the other accused. On tliis particular evening they lvad had some drinks, but witness personally was not drunk. He admitted going to AVilliams' assistance. He came into the figlit when it had started and if it. hadn't been necessary to defend AA'illiams he would not have taken part in the fight at all. He wanted to get AA'illiams out of the shop and away. He cleared 0|R when AA'illiams was out of the shop, as it was getting too liot for _ him. There were six of them after him. "You can't tell me, vou know, that a British Tar would clear away from six men. He'd be carried away first and good luck to him," rexnarked the Magistrate to witness. . Mr Barnard stated that he mtended calling evidence as to AVilliams' previcus good character and remarkcd that he had been positively' iuundated with applications hy person s wlio ha l emploved AA'illiams as a gardener anrl were willing to te.stify to_ his excellent character and generous disposition. H'was anxious to call this evidence _ as AA'illiams' appearanco might be against him. "Oli, we don't go hy appearanees. vou know, Mr Barnard. There s many a rcd nose got tb rough indigestion an 1 not hy l)eor, " romarked the Magistrate," in ruling that this evidence was not necessary. Evidence was called hy the defence, hc-wever, to sliow that the scales wero not ver.v hadlv damaged. in regard to Perrv, Mr Barnard pointod out that in liis case he woulfl be doubly pnnishod as he would have to answer for overstaying his leave as well as for the present trouhle when he rejoined lns ship. Counsel nrge'J that in this ease the evidence rather tended to show that tlie seaman did his best to keep out of the trouhle and only joined in to go to the aid of his companion, wlio was a far older man t.hnn he annenred.

Tfis'-Worship dealt wifh Perry first, imposing a fine of £1 on the first .chaj-ge- of assault and convicting and discharging him on the second charge o; assault. On the charge of wilful damage, accused was convicted and fined- £2, costs. In the ca«e'of AA'illiams a conviction and a fine of £2, and costs were entered on the first charge of assault, accused was convicted and fined 10s, and costs on the second charge, and C2 and costs, on the charge of wilful damage. Accused was further ordered to pay £7 on account of the daniage done.