Post by nzbc on May 3, 2017 19:36:24 GMT 12
TROUBLE OVER WASHING.
TROUBLE OVER WASHING.
DISTURBANCE AT A CHINESE LAUNDRY. A charge of having assaulted two Chines© laundrymen, Joe Ben and Joe Poy, was preferred against Peter Olson and Denis Sheerin at tho Police Court, before Mr A, D. Thomson, S.M., this morning. Sub-inspector Norwood prosecuted, and Mr Gilford Moore appeared for Sheerin. Olsen was not; represented by counsel. It, appeared that tho accused men went to Joe Wah's laundry on Thursday night, and a dispute aroso over tho recovery of sonio washing. Some fighting took place, and it was alleged that Olscu struck Joe Ben, and Sheerin assaulted Joe Poy. Tho charges were dealt with separately, tho medical evidence in the case of Olsen, who pleaded not guilty, being taken first.
Dr. Stowe, who had examined Joo Ben's eyf, stated that it showed (ho_ effects of a severe blow. It was impossible at present to say whether it was permanently injured; if so, it would only be to a slight extent. He did not artieipato that tho sight would bo affected. Shoorin's case was then proceeded with. The defence admitted that Sheerin was the man who struck Poy. Joe Poy_ cook at an hotel in Dannevirke. said that ho was staying at Joo Wah's laundry, in Palmerston, He described tho occurrence of Thursday night, and said that Olsen wanted some shirts, for which he had no tickets. Wait looked in tho book, and told Olsen there was no washing for him. Olsen hit Joe Ben, and Sheerin, who had come in with Olsen. struck witness. Detectivo Quirke also gave evidence. Mr Moore said that the position with regard to his client was that he went with Olsen to the laundry. Ho came out while Olsen was trying to get his washing, and was on (he footpath, talking to two men, when Olsen, pursued by the Chinamen, ran past him out of the shop. Sheerin asked a Chinaman, who was standing by the Empiro Hotel, why tho other Chinamen were chasing Oli-en By way of reply tho Chinaman struck Sheerin, and the. latter in self-defence knocked him down.
Shecrin gavo evidence in support of this account. His Worship stated that iio was not at all satisfied that the blow struck by Sheerin wad struck in self-defence. A lino of £3 and costs was imposed, a week being allowed in which to pay. In the case against Olsen evidence, was given through an interpreter by Joo Ben, who took the oath in the Chinese fashion of blowing out a match. Ben, who is an hotel cook, stated that ho was in Wall's laundry with several other Chinamen on tho night in quasi ion. There was a quarrel with accused over some washing As Olsen was leaving the laundry ho threw two stones (produced), one of which struck Ben in the oyo, causing it to bleed freely. When the stone struck him he foil Accused then left tho laundry.
Joe Poy« Joe Young, .Too Wall and Detective Quirko gave evidence. The latter said he interviewed Olsen. and accused him of being mixed up m a row with tho Chinese. Accused told him that ho wont to tho laundry for his shirts and left, not touching tho Celestials. He, however, arrested him for assault, when (he Chinese identified him m the mart who threw the stones. Accused stated that ho had visited the lamulrv for his washing. He had lost his ticket, told tho Cliinoso so. and asked if he could get his shirts. Tho Chinese then asked him if there were any collars in his parcel and ho replied no. He looked at tho book with tho Chinese, and found that thcro was no parcel of Ins. Ho was then told that he had better come back next dav. Ho replied that he could hardly do that, as ho was going away. He then left, not touching the Chinese. Cross-examined, he stated that the washing had been at the laundry for about three weeks. Ho did not knoir exactly how many shirts there were. There was no disturbance whatever while he was in the laundry. Upon leaving tho place- ho walked across tho railway lino, and as far as ho knew no Chinamen chased him. Ho saw Shorrin later, but there was no conversation about the Chinese When, ho came outside '.ho laundry door Sherrin and two men wore just outside. Ho knew nothing whatever of the hurting of Ben. _ Accused was found guilty. A fine (including costs) of £7 3s 6d was inflicted, in default fourteen days' hard labour. Accused was given a week in which to find the money.
MANAWATU STANDARD, VOLUME XLI, ISSUE 9617, 16 SEPTEMBER 1911
paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MS19110916.2.43?query=Wah%20On%20laundry
TROUBLE OVER WASHING.
DISTURBANCE AT A CHINESE LAUNDRY. A charge of having assaulted two Chines© laundrymen, Joe Ben and Joe Poy, was preferred against Peter Olson and Denis Sheerin at tho Police Court, before Mr A, D. Thomson, S.M., this morning. Sub-inspector Norwood prosecuted, and Mr Gilford Moore appeared for Sheerin. Olsen was not; represented by counsel. It, appeared that tho accused men went to Joe Wah's laundry on Thursday night, and a dispute aroso over tho recovery of sonio washing. Some fighting took place, and it was alleged that Olscu struck Joe Ben, and Sheerin assaulted Joe Poy. Tho charges were dealt with separately, tho medical evidence in the case of Olsen, who pleaded not guilty, being taken first.
Dr. Stowe, who had examined Joo Ben's eyf, stated that it showed (ho_ effects of a severe blow. It was impossible at present to say whether it was permanently injured; if so, it would only be to a slight extent. He did not artieipato that tho sight would bo affected. Shoorin's case was then proceeded with. The defence admitted that Sheerin was the man who struck Poy. Joe Poy_ cook at an hotel in Dannevirke. said that ho was staying at Joo Wah's laundry, in Palmerston, He described tho occurrence of Thursday night, and said that Olsen wanted some shirts, for which he had no tickets. Wait looked in tho book, and told Olsen there was no washing for him. Olsen hit Joe Ben, and Sheerin, who had come in with Olsen. struck witness. Detectivo Quirke also gave evidence. Mr Moore said that the position with regard to his client was that he went with Olsen to the laundry. Ho came out while Olsen was trying to get his washing, and was on (he footpath, talking to two men, when Olsen, pursued by the Chinamen, ran past him out of the shop. Sheerin asked a Chinaman, who was standing by the Empiro Hotel, why tho other Chinamen were chasing Oli-en By way of reply tho Chinaman struck Sheerin, and the. latter in self-defence knocked him down.
Shecrin gavo evidence in support of this account. His Worship stated that iio was not at all satisfied that the blow struck by Sheerin wad struck in self-defence. A lino of £3 and costs was imposed, a week being allowed in which to pay. In the case against Olsen evidence, was given through an interpreter by Joo Ben, who took the oath in the Chinese fashion of blowing out a match. Ben, who is an hotel cook, stated that ho was in Wall's laundry with several other Chinamen on tho night in quasi ion. There was a quarrel with accused over some washing As Olsen was leaving the laundry ho threw two stones (produced), one of which struck Ben in the oyo, causing it to bleed freely. When the stone struck him he foil Accused then left tho laundry.
Joe Poy« Joe Young, .Too Wall and Detective Quirko gave evidence. The latter said he interviewed Olsen. and accused him of being mixed up m a row with tho Chinese. Accused told him that ho wont to tho laundry for his shirts and left, not touching tho Celestials. He, however, arrested him for assault, when (he Chinese identified him m the mart who threw the stones. Accused stated that ho had visited the lamulrv for his washing. He had lost his ticket, told tho Cliinoso so. and asked if he could get his shirts. Tho Chinese then asked him if there were any collars in his parcel and ho replied no. He looked at tho book with tho Chinese, and found that thcro was no parcel of Ins. Ho was then told that he had better come back next dav. Ho replied that he could hardly do that, as ho was going away. He then left, not touching the Chinese. Cross-examined, he stated that the washing had been at the laundry for about three weeks. Ho did not knoir exactly how many shirts there were. There was no disturbance whatever while he was in the laundry. Upon leaving tho place- ho walked across tho railway lino, and as far as ho knew no Chinamen chased him. Ho saw Shorrin later, but there was no conversation about the Chinese When, ho came outside '.ho laundry door Sherrin and two men wore just outside. Ho knew nothing whatever of the hurting of Ben. _ Accused was found guilty. A fine (including costs) of £7 3s 6d was inflicted, in default fourteen days' hard labour. Accused was given a week in which to find the money.
MANAWATU STANDARD, VOLUME XLI, ISSUE 9617, 16 SEPTEMBER 1911
paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MS19110916.2.43?query=Wah%20On%20laundry