THE ASSAULT CASE.
YESTERDAY'S COURT PROCEEDINGS.
The hearing of the amended charge of unlawfully assaulting Frederick Buxton, laid by the Police against, Mr Osmond W Hanby, editor of the "Mail," was concluded after we went to press yesterday afternoon. The information, by order of the Court, was freshly laid, setting aside the information which charged with unlawfully assaulting and causing actual bodily harm, an indictable offence. The following additional evidence was called by the Police after the closing of the report in yesterday's issue.
Thomas M. Wimsett, blacksmith, said that his attention was drawn to the scuffle between defendant and Buxton by the witness Bowers. He heard Bowers sing out "Hang to him, little one!" or something like that. Witness looked out and saw defendant and Buxton together with two sticks. Buxton was in a stooping position, as if he were getting off the footpath. He seemed to stagger a bit, and he then stepped towards the "Mail" office and picked up his hat. Defendant and Buxton both went into the "Mail " office; Buxton's head appeared to be bleeding a great deal. Witness afterwards saw defendant taking hold of Buxton by the scruff of the neck and putting him out of the door. Buxton then came across to witness's shop; his head was bleeding at the time.
By Mr Harley: Witness did not see any blows struck.
This closed the case for the prosecution.
Mr Harley having commented on the discrepancies in the evidence of the three last witnesses, said that the assault was not denied, but it had been committed under such circumstances and after such extreme provocation that if there had not been justification there was sufficient to show that the defendant was deserving of only a very light punishment. The letter which he (Mr Hanby) had received, and which Buxton admitted sending to defendant, was of a most offensive nature, the defendant being called, amongst other things, a swindler and a knave. After this letter had been written the defendant had determined to hold no further speech or communication with Buxton. The latter, however, went to defendant's office, and on being told to go out, he was not ready to go. The defendant picked up his stick, and without striking the man, ordered him to go. Buxton, instead of going at once, backed out slowly and laughed in a jeering manner and on getting to the doorstep gave defendant a parting shot by calling him a ''half-caste." Defendant then followed him out and chastised him. The term "Half caste," though not offensive when applied to New Zealanders, was a particularly insulting term when applied to people born in India, and the remarks and attitude of Buxton in the box showed that he was quite aware of the offensive nature of the term, and that he gloried in having used it.
The Magistrate: Yes; he said that if he did use the adjective "______" before "half caste" it was only because he could not find a stronger phrase. He was careful to impress upon the Court the fact that he intended to be offensive.
Mr Harley, continuing, said that Mr Hanby, being an Anglo-Indian, fully understood the nature of the insult. As to the wound on the informant's head, it was not more serious than a man might receive from a strong knuckle blow in a fight. It might be said that defendant had no right to take the law into his own hands but no man was more than human, and it was difficult to say what other remedy there was against such a person as Buxton, who deliberately insulted citizens, and, as he had admitted in the Court, gloried in the offence. When a person had cheek enough, after writing such an offensive letter as Buxton had written, to go into defendant's office and, when ordered out, to jeer at the man whom he had insulted, and then, on the top of everything else, to use, with deliberate intent to add further insult, the most offensive adjective before the most offensive expression that he had at his command, the only remedy open appeared to be to hide the man and take the consequences. Mr Harley then called
Osmond Wellesley Hanby, the defendant, who said that the letter sent to him by Buxton (already referred to) was the third or fourth of the kind. He felt strongly inclined to cowhide the man when he received the letter, but he was dissuaded by Mr A. P. Lucas. He gave instructions that no communications from Buxton were to be taken to him (witness). On Saturday last, Miss Newman went into witness' room and said that Buxton was in the outer office. Witness said "I will not see him." The next he remembered was Buxton coming to his room. Witness said "Go out of here! Go out of here! I want to have no more to do with you after the insulting letter you sent to me. If you were not such a shrimp of a man and half mad, I would horsewhip you." Witness picked up his stick and pointing towards the door, said "Go out of this." He did not strike Buxton. Buxton backed out into the public office, and witness said "If you want to see anybody on business see Mr Lucas." Buxton laughed in a most aggravating manner, showing all his gams, and for all the world looking like a hyena. Witness again ordered Buxton out. Witness had struck him up to this time, though he had his stick in his hand. He did not think that he had even hustled him. Witness heard Mr Lucas say something from his room. Buxton backed out to the street, and as he stood on the doorstep he said "You _____ half caste." That was the last straw and witness followed Buxton out and lambasted him about the legs and the lower part of the body. When he thought he had given Buxton enough, he turned him around towards Bridge street and said "Now go and lay an information." Witness then turned to go into the office again, and felt a blow on his head. He also appeared to have received a blow on his back. As he turned to Buxton, he received another blow on his lip. He then struck a final blow, which seemed to have drawn the blood. The low knocked Buxton's cap off, and as he (Buxton) went to pick it up he noticed the blood, and said. "Now, I've got you. Save us! Save us!" or something of that kind. Witness then went into the office, but he was so angered that be could not remember the sequence of what occurred afterwards. He had not intended to hit Buxton on the head; he only intended to give him a well-merited beating. Witness was an Anglo-Indian, born in India of English parents and educated in England. He was well acquainted with the fact that the term "half caste," as used in India, was one the greatest opprobrium. It conveyed the same meaning as the terms mulatto, quadroon, and octoroon did in America. It meant, in its general sense that a man's mother was not married, that he had Indian blood in his veins, and that he had not the status of an ordinary white man or of native Indian. As Buxton had said, they were neither "fish, fowl, nor red herring." At one time the half castes of India were specially legislated for, and they were altogether a very degenerate class. Till the the Ilbert Bill they had not the same civic privileges as pure whites, and they were known as Eurasians. The term "half caste" was a most offensive epithet in India, and if a person applied it to a white man he would most likely be knocked down. No one who knew the meaning of the term could stand being called by it, especially by a man he regarded with contempt. Buxton had once previously written witness a a letter on the subject. When Buxton came into the office after receiving the blow, witness took him by the scruff of the neck and put him in the street. Witness thought the man was shamming more than anything else.
By the Police: Witness did not follow Buxton out until the latter used the offensive term. When he called witness "a _____ half-caste" witness went out and thrashed Buxton with the small end of his stick. He had sufficient control of his temper to abstain from intentionally hitting the man on the head. He was not sure whether he hit him on the head twice or not. After Buxton came back into the office witness put him out, not forcibly, by the scruff of the neck. It was because his blood was making a mess in the office that he put him out.
This was all the evidence called.
The Magistrate said that the circumstances of the case were tolerably simple. The defendant had been visited by a person whom he had given orders should not he admitted to his presence. The reason for such instructions had been made tolerably clear by the production of the letter which Buxton admitted having written and which he had attempted to justify in the strongest possible terms that any person could attempt to justify his own conduct. The defendant, in ordering Buxton out of his office, was clearly within his rights Having ordered him out, he would have had a right to use moderate force in expelling him if he would not go. This, however, did not appear to become necessary. All that the defendant did was to assume a threatening attitude, and the evidence showed that no blow had been struck at this time. Buxton, on getting to the door, tuned round and launched at defendant the most offensive epithet that, as he had admitted, he could think of. He .had admitted using this offensive term with the object of exasperating a man whom, he stated, he believed to be already partly maddened by the use of stimulants. Any ordinary mischief that Buxton might have received under such circumstances had been brought on himself by his own conduct. No Court and no reasonable person would say anything differently. If the matter had gone no further thin the first two or three blows he (the Magistrate) would have been disposed to dismiss the case. But it had been shown and admitted by the defendant himself (who had given his evidence very fairly) that-he got so exasperated and not without reason - that he lost control of his temper, and he was not certain whether he struck Buxton on the head once or twice. Defendant had said that he did not intend to strike the man on the head, and he (the Magistrate) was disposed to believe that he did not intend to do so. He did so, however, and that he inflicted upon Buxton a temporary amount of injury and discomfort was, of course, manifest. The facts of the case amounted to this: The defendant, although justified in expelling a person who was intentionally insolent and who used language that was utterly unjustifiable, was not justified in going the lengths that he went to. It would have been quite possible for a blow struck in such a manner to have inflicted injuries of a most serious kind, and the Court could not lend its approbation to persons taking the law into their own hands in such a way. He could quite understand the difficulty that defendant was placed in dealing with a person who had insulted him to such an extent as he had been insulted, and, without wishing to be harsh to a person who had already received some punishment, he must say that he had not the slightest sympathy with Buxton; no reasonable person would have. Buxton deliberately did all that he could to provoke the defendant, whom be believed to be liable to an uncontrollable passion under the influence of "bhang." Therefore there could be no sympathy with him and the only question was what punishment the Court was obliged to inflict upon defendant, who, through his loss of self control, went much further in chastising Buxton than he was justified in doing.
At this stage Buxton held up his damaged garments (which he has been wearing for some years past) and said he wanted six guineas compensation for his gaiters. He also made a charge for three pints of bood lost.
The costs were fixed as follows: - Court costs 19s, witnesses' expenses (not including Buxton's) £2 18s. Total, £3 17s.
Buxton: Those are my expenses, sir.
The Magistrate: I do not think you are entitled to expenses, not having been summoned as a witness by the police.
There was loud laughter from the body of the Court at this stage but it was suppressed.
The defendant was ordered to pay the costs stated, and was fined £3 in addition.
The fine and costs were paid.
Mr Robinson said that although assault had been provoked by Buxton he would allow the latter half the amount of the fine as compensation for he damage to his clothes, etc. It is understood that the fine and Court and legal costs of the defendant are being subscribed by the public. -Nelson Evening Mail, 15/9/1899.
OBITUARY.
DEATH OF MR O. W. HANBY
A SUDDEN END
Quite a gloom was cast over the city last evening when it became known that Mr Osmond W. Hanby, editor of the "Evening Mail," had suddenly passed away. Mr Hanby had attended the Mayoral picnic in the Maitai during the day, and was about to return home, when he fell, and death ensued almost immediately. In the morning Mr Hanby was at his office attending to the early publication of the "Mail," and he appeared to be in his usual health and spirits. Later on he made his way to the Maitai, and at the Mayoral picnic did his best to add to the enjoyment of those present, especially the children. About 530 Mr Hanby made a speech, which he thanked the Mayor for arranging the picnic, and he then proceeded to go home. He had just got on to the small footbridge when he reeled and fell, and had it not been for the the presence of mind of Mrs Martin, who was near by, he would undoubtedly have fallen into the water. Mr Hanby was then quickly carried to the roadside, where all. temporary aid possible was tendered, and a doctor was immediately communicated with. On his arrival, Dr. Bett found it impossible to do anything more than to pronounce life to be extinct. The ambulance had been summoned, and the body was removed to his late home in Harper-street.
For some years past Mr Hanby had been under treatment for heart trouble, and as his medical adviser, Dr. Gibbs was able to give a certificate of death, an inquest will therefore be unnecessary.
Mr Hanby has been a resident of Nelson for many years, and has used his best endeavours to promote progress and prosperity. He has been the guiding force behind many a useful movement, and although he has not taken a personal part, his journalistic influence has always been felt. Many of the progressive steps made in Nelson during the past years have been the outcome, of his efforts. The late Mr Hanby was well known in Australasian journalism, and his marked ability was always recognised in the profession.
The deceased was born in India fifty-seven years ago. After spending his boyhood days in that country, he was sent to Dublin University, where he completed his educational course by taking a degree. For some time he pursued law studies but eventually gave these up to enter the field of journalism. His first appointment was in Launceston, but he changed to several parts of Australia, advance being made at each appointment. About thirty-two years ago he was chosen as one of the sub-editors of the "Sydney Daily Telegraph," on the establishment of that paper. He filled this important position for some years, but eventually resigned to take over the editorship of the "Bathurst Times." This he relinquished a few years later, and rejoined the "Sydney Daily Telegraph" on the editorial staff. In December, 1895, he received the appointment of editor of the "Nelson Evening Mail," a position which he has been since. The deceased was an enthusiastic angler, and at the time of his death he a was President of the Nelson Anglers Club and also chairman of The Nelson Acclimatisation Society. He also a Vice-President of the Nelson Institute, and was one of those who fought strenuously to make the Institute a free public institution. He was a member of the Nelson Harbour Board on its inception, and occupied a seat for a number of years, when he resigned. A year or more ago he was appointed a Justice of the Peace. There are two daughters and one son, - Mrs Robinson, wife of Mr E. C. Robinson, County Engineer at Stratford, and Miss Hanby, of Nelson. The son is the Rev. H. O. Townsend Hanby, vicar of Taumaranui.
The sympathy of the whole community will go out to the bereaved family in their affliction.
The Mayor of Richmond Mr James Hunt, on behalf of the residents of the borough, is conveying to Mrs Hanby letter of sympathy on the death of Mr. Hanby.
Many citizens have called in at this office during the day to express regret at the death of of Mr Hanby.
Mr W. H. Atack, manager of the United Press Association of New Zealand, has wired to the proprietors regarding the death of Mr Hanby, conveying an expression of regret.
Flags in the city were flown at half-mast as a mark of respect.
The funeral takes place to-morrow afternoon, leaving his late residence in Harper-street at 2.30pm. It is feared that the Rev. Herbert Hanby will not arrive in Nelson soon enough to 'attend his father's funeral.
AN APPRECIATION.
(By T. A. H. Field.)
It is seldom, that so sudden and tragic an end to a a career takes place in such circumstances as that which happened to the late Mr Hanby yesterday afternoon. At one minute, full of energy and cheerfulness, making a speech in his usual forcible and humorous manner, the next as he was on the point of leaving the scene of gaiety and enjoyment, falling down in a faint and quietly passing away in the amidst of those anxious help, but who were powerless to aid him. His last public act was speaking at the City Council recreation ground at the Maitai which he was personally largely instrumental in opening for the city, and his last public suggestion was that the citizens should purchase the adjoining land, and making it an ideal ground. Nelson owes him much for the manner in which he always took up local matters for the benefit of the city and fought them out to a successful issue — many instances of which will occur to all. It is to his judgment and advocacy that we owe what up to the present, has proved the salvation of the drainage scheme — carrying of the outfall pipe half-a-mile into deep water.
The late Mr Hanby was a man of great ability and exceptional literary gifts, who possessed a keen mind and good judgment, mellowed by a very extensive journalistic experience. His genial manner and the fund of good-natured humour he possessed made him easily accessible to every citizen, and one of the most popular men in Nelson. His faults — for he had some in common with all — lay on the surface, and were those often found with a genial, generous, unselfish nature. Those who had the privilege of his personal friendship knew his exceptional ability, his high sense of honour, and the sterling worth of his character. A fearless, outspoken man in the course of his journalistic career must make some enemies; but there will be few indeed who are not generous enough to forget such differences to join, with the city in mourning its loss and in its sympathy and condolences with his widow and family. None are better able to judge of a man as he really is than those who work under him. Their judgment is not affected either by superficial faults or by the glitter and tinsel of outside show - it was one if his staff standing sorrowfully amongst those beside him yesterday when all hope had gone who said "He was the best man in Nelson." It was an eulogy eloquent in its heartfelt simplicity. -Nelson Evening Mail, 2/2/1912.
Wakapuaka Cemetery, Nelson.
