1914-07-06add

Magistrate Jelfs was ready to start the week off well.

As noted by the Times reporter assigned to cover the Police Court session of Monday, July 6, 1914 :

“Magistrate Jelfs, becoming aware of the beauty of the morning, arose somewhat earlier than usual today, and court was commenced at 9:25 instead of 9:30.”¹

“Serious Thing Even to Talk at the Police : Their Duty is Hard Enough With Interference From People Looking On”

Hamilton Times.   July 6, 1914.

It was a short list of cases on the docket. Two of those which caused some interest were those involving the frequently applied Drunk and Disorderly charge.

The first involved a woman :

“With hanging head, Mary Dinning stood up in the dock when her name was called to answer to the charge of being drunk and disorderly. It was her first appearance in court, and she evidently felt her position keenly.

“The Magistrate lectured her severely and told her of her duty to her husband and her children. Her husband told the Magistrate that he would take her back if she promised to reform. As she is from Scotland, the Magistrate informed her that she would be deported if she came up again and she was led weeping from the court.”¹

The other drunk and disorderly case was more complex and it centered around a fracas on John street :

“William Leishman and Mark Meins were accused by James Leishman with being drunk and disorderly. In a broad Highland accent, James told the court of his brother coming to his boarding house on John street, and molesting him. Constables Nunn, Kinnard and Gravelle, who made the arrest, stated that Meins and Leishman were both drunk and that Meins had resisted arrest. The Magistrate fined Meins $5, and Leishman $2.

“A sequel to this case came up later when Roy Feidman was accused by the same officers of interfering with the police in the pursuit f their duty. The evidence showed that Freidman had talked to the crowd who watched the arrest about the way the police ill-treated a prisoner.

“P. C. Nunn stated on the stand that Freidman had ordered him to let the prisoners go, although he did not lay hands on him. The constable immediately locked him up.

“ ‘This is a very serious case,’ stated the Magistrate. It seems that the citizens of Hamilton are prone to go against the police on every occasion, and an officer very often has his hands full in arresting a man under the influence of liquor. It is well for you, Freidman, that you did not touch the officers; I will fine you ten dollars.’ ”¹