Warning: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /nfs/c07/h03/mnt/178353/domains/unfitforpublication.org.au/html/plugins/system/gantry/gantry.php on line 406
1868, Dominic Rogers - Unfit For Publication
Text Size

 

The Newcastle Chronicle, Tue 8 Dec 1868 1

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
———
SATURDAY, DEC 5, 1868.
Before Helenus Scott, Esq, PM.

...

INDECENTLY EXPOSING HIS PERSON.

    Dominic Rogers (a lad bout fifteen years old) was convicted of indecently exposing his person, in a public place of resort, at Newcastle, on the 27th ultimo, and sentenced to be imprisoned in Maitland gaol for six months – at the expiration of which period to be sent (by recommendation of the bench) to a reformatory for twelve months. It appeared from the evidence that Rogers had most obscenely exposed his person, he having, in a state of nudity, intruded himself upon a number of the Industrial School girls, who were bathing on the beach.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Sydney Morning Herald, Wed 16 Dec 1868 2

NEW NOTICES AND QUESTIONS.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 16.

MR TIGHE to ask the Colonial Secretary,—Have the Government received a petition, numerously signed by inhabitants of Newcastle, praying for a remission of sentence in the case of Dominic Rogers, a boy 15 years old, who, on Saturday, 5th instant, was brought before the Bench of Magistrates at Newcastle, upon a charge of indecent conduct, sentenced to six months’ imprisonment in Maitland gaol, and recommended to be sent, upon the expiration of such sentence, to a reformatory for a further period of twelve months? Was the offence attended by any aggravating circumstances, in addition to the misconduct of bathing on the breaker beach, when females present? Was the boy abovenamed ever previously brought before a Court upon a charge of any kind, and is it intended to restore him to his parents, by remitting the remaining portion of his sentence? If so, when will it be done?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Empire, Thu 17 Dec 1868 3

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.

The Speaker took the chair at twenty nine minutes past 3 o’clock.
...

DOMINIC ROGERS.

Mr TIGHE asked the Colonial Secretary—1. Have the Government received a petition, numerously signed by inhabitants of Newcastle, praying for a remission of sentence in the case of Dominic Rogers,—a boy fifteen years old, who, on Saturday, 5th instant, was brought before the bench of Magistrates at Newcastle, upon a charge of indecent conduct, sentenced to six months’ imprisonment in Maitland gaol, and recommended to be sent—upon the expiration of such sentence—to a Reformatory, for a further period of twelve months? 2. Was the offence attended by any aggravating circumstances, in addition to the misconduct of bathing on the breaker beach, when females were present? 3. Was the boy above-named ever previously brought before a court upon a charge of any kind, and is it intended to restore him to his parents by remitting the remaining portion of his sentence? If so, when will it be done?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 17 Dec 1868 4

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.
WEDNESDAY.

...

CASE OF DOMINIC ROGERS.

MR TIGHE to ask the Colonial Secretary,—“1. Have the Government received a petition, numerously signed by inhabitants of Newcastle, praying for a remission of sentence in the case of Dominic Rogers, a boy fifteen years old, who, on Saturday, 5th instant, was brought before the Bench of magistrates at Newcastle, upon a charge of indecent conduct, sentenced to six months’ imprisonment in Maitland gaol, and recommended to be sent—upon the expiration of such sentence—to a reformatory, for a further period of twelve months? 2. Was the offence attended by any aggravating circumstances, in addition to the misconduct of bathing on the breaker beach, when females were present? Was the boy abovenamed ever previously brought before a Court upon a charge of any kind, and is it intended to restore him to his parents, by remitting the remaining portion of his sentence? If so, when will it be done?
...
IN the Legislative Council, yesterday,
    There was not a quorum present to form a Council, and the President adjourned the House until 4 pm this day.

———o———

IN the Assembly, yesterday,
    MR ROBERTSON, in answer to a question from Mr Tighe, said the Government did not intend to remit the sentence on Dominic Rogers, which was well deserved.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Sydney Morning Herald, Tue 22 Dec 1868 5

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.
———o———
NOTICES OF QUESTIONS AND MOTIONS AND
ORDERS OF THE DAY.
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 22.

QUESTION.

    Mr Farnell to ask the Solicitor-General,—Under what Act of Parliament did the magistrate at Newcastle convict the boy Dominic Rogers?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Empire, Wed 23 Dec 1868 6

PARLIAMENT.
————
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY,
TUESDAY, 22ND DECEMBER, 1868.

The SPEAKER took the chair at twenty-nine minutes past 3.

CONVICTION OF THE BOY DOMINIC ROGERS.

    Mr FARNELL asked the Solicitor-General—Under what Act of Parliament did the magistrate at Newcastle convict the boy Dominic Rogers?

    Mr JOSEPHSON answered, Under the 3rd section of 15 Victoria, No. 1.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Sydney Morning Herald, Wed 23 Dec 1868 7

NEW SOUTH WALES
PARLIAMENT.
———o———
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.
TUESDAY, 22ND DECEMBER.

...

CONVICTION OF DOMINIC ROGERS.

    Mr FARNELL asked the Solicitor-General,—“Under what Act did the magistrate at Newcastle convict the boy Dominic Rogers?”

    Mr JOSEPHSON in reply said, the 3rd Sec 15 Vic, No. 4. [sic]
...
In the Assembly yesterday,
    Mr JOSEPHSON, in answer to a question, said that the boy Dominic Rogers had been convicted under 15th Vic, No. 4.

 


1  The Newcastle Chronicle, Thu 3 Dec 1868, p. 3.

2  The Sydney Morning Herald, Wed 16 Dec 1868, p. 3. 

3  Empire, Thu 17 Dec 1868, p. 3.

4  The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 17 Dec 1868, pp. 2, 4.

5  The Sydney Morning Herald, Tue 22 Dec 1868, p. 5. 

6  Empire, Wed 23 Dec 1868, p. 3.

7  The Sydney Morning Herald, Wed 23 Dec 1868, pp. 2, 5.