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
1877, Alfred George Davis - Unfit For Publication
Text Size

 

Below also see: Evan Jones Whitton, 1883,
Evan Jones Whitton, 1884,
George Bright, 1886,
Evan Jones Whitton, 1890
Alfred Bridger, 1893

 

The Evening News, Mon 1 Jan 1877 1

NEWS OF THE DAY.
————

FALSE PRETENCES.

    A man of respectable appearance, name Alfred George Davis, [aka Alfred George Hurman; Alfred George Bridger; Evan Jones Whitton], was charged at the Central Police Court, on Saturday morning, with having, by means of false pretences, obtained the sum of £8 from one William Summers.  The cheque was presented in payment of cab fare, and on the strength of it, he rode about the city in prosecutor’s cab, and obtained some money upon the representation that the cheque was genuine. When, however, it was presented at the bank, it was found to be a forgery. Sergeant Mulqueeny, who had arrested the prisoner, was not prepared with the whole of the evidence, and a remand for one week was granted, bail being allowed.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Maitland Mercury and Hunter River General Advertiser, Thu 4 Jan 1877 2

GENERAL NEWS.
————

    A man of respectable appearance, named Alfred George Davis, was charged at the Central Police Court, on Saturday morning (reports the Evening News) with having, by means of false pretences, obtained the sum of £8 from one William Summers. The cheque was presented in payment of cab fare, and on the strength of it, he rode about the city in prisoner’s cab, and obtained some money on the representation that the cheque was genuine. When, however, it was presented at the bank, it was found to be a forgery. Sergeant Mulqueeny, who had arrested the prisoner, was not prepared with the whole of the evidence, and a remand for one week was granted, bail being allowed.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Evening News, Thu 15 Feb 1877 3

CRIMINAL COURT.
————
WEDNESDAY
(Before His Honor the Chief Justice.)

THIS DAY.

FORGERY.

    Alfred George Davis was charged with having at Sydney,  on the 24th December, unlawfully and feloniously forged a cheque for £10; a second count charged him with uttering the cheque with intent to defraud. The prisoner pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr Brown, instructed by Mr Castles. The case was a peculiar one, and showed how, quite unusually, a cabman was the victim. It appeared that at about half-past eleven o’clock on Christmas Eve prisoner went up to the cab stand at the corner of Elizabeth and Bathurst streets, and engaged a cab in charge of one William Summers. He asked Summers whether he had aby change on him, and he replying affirmatively, prisoner asked him whether he had sufficient to cash a cheque for £10. Summers could not do that, but at request of prisoner handed over £1, prisoner giving him to understand that he would be paid when the cheque was cashed, and he then, as directed, began to drive him about the town. In the course of a few hours prisoner, quite to the surprise of cabby, asked to be driven to the police station, and arriving there he asked permission of the officer in charge to write a note, but on being refused the envelope he tore up the whole note, whatever it was, and again went out to the cabman, who now asked for the cheque as payment, and as a guarantee that the transaction was something like genuine. In an offhand style prisoner gave him the cheque, and then as directed was driven to the Captain Cook Hotel, Randwick Road. Thence to the Paddington toll-bar, and back to Tattersall’s Hotel. At his latter place, the drive being over, there was some conversation as to payment, when it was agreed that the cabman should hold the cheque on giving a receipt, and agreeing to call again at the hotel on the following afternoon. The receipt which was given by the cabman, for the cheque was written by prisoner in the hotel and though prosecutor could not read he now recognised it by his signature (a cross) which was always drawn in a peculiar and not the popular style. Cabby went to the hotel next day, but prisoner was not there he saw nothing of him till the following night, when he strolled on the stand again, and sought to engage prosecutor and then another cabman. Summers, however, was not doubtful of his man, and appeared to be awaking to the startling reality that he, a city cabman, was being victimised, and strangely enough this idea was strengthened in a conversation with the other cabman, who told him that he had also lent prisoner three or four shillings, and got nothing for it. Prisoner left the stand, and prosecutor next day went to the City Bank, on which the cheque was drawn, and presented it, whereupon he found it of no value, and then he took proceedings against prisoner, who was shortly afterwards arrested by Sergeant Mulqueeny. The jury had retired to consider their verdict when our report closed.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Evening News, Fri 16 Feb 1877 4

CRIMINAL COURT.
————
THURSDAY.

    In the case of Alfred G Davis, charged with forgery, as reported yesterday, a verdict of guilty was returned. Prisoner then pleaded guilty to a second charge of forgery. Sentences—Two years’ hard labour for each offence, the sentence to be concurrent.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Sydney Morning Herald, Fri 16 Feb 1877 5

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
THURSDAY.

BEFORE his Honor Sir James Martin, CJ.

FORGERY.

    Alfred George Davis was charged with having, on the 24th December last, at Sydney, forged a cheque for £10. A second count charged the prisoner with uttering the same. Mr JL Brown, instructed by Mr AW Castle, defended. The case for the prosecution was that on the day in question the prisoner asked a cabman named Summers if he could change a cheque for £10, and the cabman not being able to do this, the prisoner borrowed £1 from him, and told him to drive to various places, and amongst others to the police station, where he gave him the cheque, which was signed “WW Tracy,” and was drawn on the City Bank; prisoner afterwards took a receipt which he wrote out from the cabman, and told him to work out the balance of the cheque, which was done. There was no such person known to the bank as WW Tracey, and the cheque, which was in similar handwriting to the receipt, was dishonoured on presentation for payment. Mr Brown called no evidence, but contended, in addressing the jury, that there was not sufficient evidence of prisoner having forged the cheque, or of guilty knowledge in uttering it, and that prosecutor’s story was improbable; that the cheque was given as an acknowledgment and not for presentation. The jury found the prisoner guilty. He then pleaded guilty to a second information for the same offence of forgery, though the Attorney-General stated that prisoner had, in this case, obtained no benefit by the forgery. Sentenced to two years’ imprisonment, with hard labour, in Darlinghurst gaol on each charge, the sentences to be concurrent.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Alfred G Davis (aka Hurman, Bridger) Gaol photo sheet 6

SRNSW: NRS2138, [3/6041], Darlinghurst Gaol photographic description book, 1876-1877, No. 1650, pp. 204a, 204b, R5099. p.1. SRNSW: NRS2138, [3/6041], Darlinghurst Gaol photographic description book, 1876-1877, No. 1650, pp. 204a, 204b, R5099. p.2.

 


Gaol Photo Sheet - Transcribed Details

No. 1650
No. on Gaol Register: 129/77

Date when Portrait was taken: 10th January 1877

Prisoner's Name: Alfred G Davis
(aka Hurman, Bridger)

Native place: Greenwich, London

Year of birth: 1843

Arrived        Ship: Lamuir
in Colony }   Year: 1856

Trade or occupation
previous to conviction  } Commercial Traveller

Religion: C. E

Education, degree of: R & W

Colour of hair: Dark brown

Colour of eyes: Blue

Height: 5' 6½"

Weight     On committal: 156
in lbs     }  On discharge: 

Marks or Special Features: One upper tooth out of left side

Where and when tried: Sydney Criminal Court
15 February 1877

Offence: Forgery & uttering 2 charges

Sentence: 2 years HL on each

Remarks: 16-12-82

 (Previous Portrait ...  ) 

PRISON HISTORY

Where and When Offence. Sentence

Wagga Wagga CC

Sydney CC


 

 

Sydney Q.S

 

Sydney Q.S

Water PC
Central PC

  3

15


25

25

16

25

29

20
21

10

  2


  2

  4

  4

  4

  1

  4
  4

1874

1877


1877

1879

1879

1879

1883

1887
1887

Embezzlement

Forgery & uttering 2 charges.
Pleaded guilty on one & found guilty on other

To Berrima Gaol

To Maitland Gaol

False pretences

To Maitland [gaol]

False pretences

False pretences (26 charges)
ditto

12 months HL Goulburn Gaol

2 years HL on each.
Sentences concurrent

 

 

2 years + 11 months HL.
Maitland Gaol

 

5 years Roads

|
| 12 months. Concurrent

Has been over in Victoria but no convictions known there - inquiry made.

  


  

Evan Jones Whitton, 1883 

 

Goulburn Evening Penny Post, Tue 27 Feb 1883 7

GOULBURN POLICE COURT.
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 24.

    Before Messrs Mackellar, GS Alexander, and Hayes.

    OBSCENE EXPOSURE.—Alfred Bridger [aka Evan Jones Whitton,   see also Alfred George Davis, 1877] was brought up charged with the above offence.

    Constable Marshall deposed: I arrested the prisoner between 1 and 2 o’clock yesterday at Towrang in the house of a man named Horn by virtue of the warrant produced, which I read to him; he asked me when it was, and I told him on the 21st; he said he was in Mr Horn’s yard that day; he asked me what hour it was, and I told him he would hear that to-day in evidence at the court.

    Thomas William Horn deposed: I live at Towrang; the prisoner has been stopping at my house for two years; he had been wearing a moustache, but shaved it off yesterday morning.

    Arthur Freeman, a little boy eight years of age, after being questioned by the Bench and his father (Mr WH Freeman) as to the nature of an oath and answering satisfactorily, was sworn and said: Last Wednesday I was playing on Mr McLeod’s ground, next to my father’s; my four sisters and Ella Hayes were with me; a man came there; he was in the street, outside the fence; (witness then described the exposure); he was there about a quarter of an hour; I never saw him before; it is the man now before the court; it was after tea, and we have tea at 6 o’clock.

    AA Kerr deposed: I live in Cowper-street; on Wednesday last I saw a person standing near the fence of Mr Freeman’s play ground; it was about ten minutes to 6 o’clock; some children were in the playground, which is between my house and Mr Freeman’s; I saw the man as I was going towards my house; he was is Cowper-street; to the best of my knowledge the prisoner is the man although he was differently dressed to what he is now; he also appeared then to have about three weeks’ growth of hair on his face; he appeared as if he was trying to shun observation.

    Arthur Freeman re-called: The man I saw outside the fence I pointed out to my father.

    WH Freeman deposed: My son Arthur pointed out a man to me on Wednesday evening about half-past 6 o’clock; I should say he was about 70 yards from my place; my boy made a statement to me, and in consequence of that statement I called to the man, he looked around, and when he saw me ran away as fast as he could; I followed him; he ran on the intersection of Clinton-street towards Horn’s timber-yard; I called out to some men to stop him.

    Thomas Hodgkinson deposed: On Wednesday evening last about half past 6 o’clock I saw a man running along Clinton-street from Mr Freeman’s place; Mr Freeman was pursuing him; I believe the prisoner is the same; the prisoner worked at Horn’s, and at the time I saw him running I identified him as that man.

    Corroborative evidence was by Mr Charles H Garrard, Manager of the Bank of NS Wales, and the case for the Crown concluded.

    Prisoner [Evan Jones Whitton] stated he was home at the time mentioned, but he did not remember having done anything with which he stood charged. He said he could produce witnesses to prove this, and the case was postponed until next Monday.

———

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 26th.

  Before Messrs Mackellar, Marsden, and Alexander.

    INDECENT EXPOSURE.—Alfred Bridger, on remand, answered to this charge.

    Charles Horn, called by the prisoner, stated he saw him on the 21st between 5 and 6 o’clock, when he sent him to feed the pigeons; his appearance is somewhat altered.

    Thomas W Horn, of North Goulburn, remembered the defendant being at his place from 3 o’clock to 7 o’clock on the 21st inst; he was in my company all that time; I was not subpoeaned [sic] to attend at this court; defendant I know to be a decent, respectable young man.

    The Bench found the prisoner guilty on the charge. He had been twice brought before the court on similar charges, but they were not sustained. He was ordered to be imprisoned in Goulburn gaol for 6 months with hard labour.

 


  

Evan Jones Whitton, 1884 

 

Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Tue 19 Aug 1884 8

NEWCASTLE POLICE COURT.
———◦———
AN OBSCENE SCOUNDREL PUNISHED.
———
THE LASH AWARDED.
———

    At the Police Court yesterday, before Mr Mair, PM, and Mr Ludlow, JP, there was quite an array of drunkards, and a serious charge of indecency was tried.

———


    An elderly respectably-dressed man, named Alfred Bridger, was brought up on a series of charges of having wilfully exposed himself to little girls and others. The prisoner was a sinister-looking person, and one likely to attract attention, owing to his singular appearance. He did not look as if he was quite in his right mind, and professed to be very deaf. When the news of his arrest on Sunday spread, several people came forward to identify a scoundrel who has been wilfully polluting the minds of little girls on the hill and near the reserve. As the person in question had a variety of disguises and changes of apparel, it was difficult to identify him with the man Bridger, now in custody; but the police had quite sufficient evidence to bring two or three cases against him.

    In the first case he was charged on the information of Mr Arthur Reynolds, builder, with wilfully exposing himself off Harold-street, Wickham,  on Sunday afternoon. Mr Moore, who appeared for the prisoner, pleaded not guilty, and Inspector Thorpe conducted the prosecution.

    Senior Constable McVane deposed to the arrest of the prisoner; he was coming out of a new building behind the Roman Catholic Church, off Perkin-street, with this picture in his hand (picture produced); when charged with the offence, prisoner denied it.

    By Inspector Thorpe: Have tried for a considerable time to arrest prisoner; he was quite sober when arrested.

    Arthur Reynolds, builder, deposed:— My wife and I were in our verandah yesterday at 11 am; our verandah faces Harold-street, Wickham; my wide could be seen clearly from the street, but I could not be so seen; my wife called my attention to something, and I saw a man passing; I looked and saw the prisoner turn the corner and go down the lane about twenty yards; I watched him; he exposed himself for a quarter of an hour; he was in a public thoroughfare; he was close to a door of my house; he did not attempt to answer any call of nature; he committed masturbation; I did not know if any one else saw him besides myself; my wife was in the verandah and did not see anything; but the man could have been seen by anyone who was in the public thoroughfare at the time; I tried to sneak on him, but he saw me coming, and cleared as fast as he could; prisoner was subsequently arrested on my information, after I had searched for him.

    In reply to Mr Moore, witness drew a plan of his house in Harold-street; and the spot where the exposure took place; witness did not want the Bench to believe that he watched the man for a quarter of an hour for amusement;  if it amused him, he would not have prisoner arrested; watched prisoner half the time thinking he was obeying a call of nature; one did not act immediately on an emergency; swore it was prisoner’s hand witness saw through his overcoat, and his person too; this was at a distance of fifteen yards; supposed the overcoat was in the hands of the police; saw the act of self-abuse committed.

    By the Bench: So far as I know, no one else saw him.

    By Inspector Thorpe: The overcoat was unbuttoned; I think the prisoner is gone in the head—a little silly; I judged he was silly by his actions, for no man of common sense would do what he did; he had sense enough to clear out when he saw me.

    This closed the case for the prosecution.

    Mr Moore, for the defence, asked that the case should be dismissed. The charge was a serious one, and the strictest and most conclusive evidence should be taken before a conviction. It was not everything a witness said and saw that should be given credence to. The witness Reynolds had, according to his own statement, watched the man for a quarter of an hour when a word might have stopped the act being perpetrated. Mr Moore would call one witness to prove that the prisoner was not in his right mind.

    Inspector Thorpe said that if Mr Moore adopted this line of defence, and called an unprofessional man to prove insanity, he must ask for a postponement.

    The Bench said they would take the evidence for what it was worth.

    Mr Richard Simmons, accountant, then deposed: I am astonished to see prisoner in this position; he was in my employ; he is a carpenter; I never saw him do anything out of the way; he was sober and industrious; he was always kind and liberal to children; his manner was peculiar and eccentric

    To Inspector Thorpe: He measures timber; he is pretty accurate in his simple measurements; he was not quick; I would not say his intellect was aberrated, [sic] but his manner is peculiar and he is eccentric.

    The prisoner [Evan Jones Whitton] was here sworn, but not examined, Mr Moore stating that the man was very deaf. He (Mr Moore) then urged that even if the Bench held that the disgusting offence had been committed, they should consider that the man was eccentric, and at times not accountable for his actions. He might not be a lunatic; but occasionally a fit might seize him irresponsible. Would they convict a man under these circumstances? The witness Reynolds, who had watched the man also thought that the prisoner was not right in his head. Mr Moore dwelt on this point, and also on the evidence of Mr Simmons, urging the Bench the palpable eccentricity of the prisoner.

    The Bench, after consideration, found the prisoner guilty, although the circumstances were about so gross as they might have been. Fined £10, levy and distress or two months’ imprisonment.

    The prisoner was then charged with wilful exposure in Church-street, on the 27th ult. Mr Moore for the defence. Pleaded not guilty.

    The housekeeper for the single policemen at the barracks, Watt-street, deposed: I know prisoner by sight; on 27th ult I saw prisoner at 2.15 pm in Church-street; he was exposed indecently, and was standing on the footpath; a number of children were passing at the time; he was perfectly visible to anyone who was passing, and was a disgusting exhibition; he was between Bolton and Watt streets; any person coming from Watt or Bolton street could have seen him; I have certain reasons for being positive that it was the prisoner.

    Mr Moore said the charge was so serious that, unless thoroughly proved, the case should be dismissed. He drew special attention to the fact that, though the last witness lived at the police barracks, she never spoke to a policeman about the matter from the 27th inst, when the alleged offence occurred, till a day or two ago. No children had been brought forward to say that had seen the prisoner expose himself, and there was no evidence to show that prisoner was not obeying a call of nature. Would the Justices convict his client simply on the evidence of the policemen’s housekeeper who never told anyone of what she saw, not even the police, at whose barracks she was living as housekeeper? No effort had even been made to bring one of the children who might have seen the man. He (Mr Moore) asked for a dismissal, as the evidence was not corroborated. In his opinion the prisoner was “daft.”

    The Bench gave the prisoner the benefit of the doubt, as the evidence of the respectable woman who had just left the box had not been corroborated, and as there might be mistaken identity.

    The case was dismissed.

    Inspector Thorpe said he had two case more, and the prosecution was in the same position, as there was no evidence in corroboration. If the prisoner was “daft,” he at least had sense enough not to perform his disgusting acts before more than one witness. He (Mr Thorpe) would try another case.

    The prisoner was then charged with wilful exposure in Blane-street. 

    The witness, a respectably-dressed and very intelligent girl, of about eleven years, deposed: I saw prisoner a week ago near Breckenridge’s paddock, at about 6.30 pm; he exposed himself to me and I ran away frightened; a girl, a friend of mine, was with me; he was at the corner of Blane and Auckland streets, not very far from me; prisoner was facing the street from the footpath; he never spoke to me.

    Cross-examined: I only saw his person for an instant; he then turned away.

    By Inspector Thorpe: I and the other girl ran away as soon as we saw what the man was doing.

    Mr Thorpe asked for a postponement in order to produce corroborative evidence, but Mr Moore objected, as there had been plenty of time for the prosecution to be ready with the case.

    Inspector Thorpe said the evidence had only accumulated on the arrest of the poisoner yesterday becoming known, and there had not been much time to prepare the cases.

    The case was remanded till the afternoon, another charge against the prisoner being withdraw.

    At 3 pm the case was resumed.

    The second witness a modest, well-spoken little girl, of about 13 years, whose parents are highly respectable, and who gave her evidence most intelligently, deposed: My father is an engineer; I identify the prisoner; I have never seen him before; A friend was with me when I last saw him, at Breckenridge’s corner, Blane-street; it was about 6.30 pm; prisoner exposed himself (witness here detailed what she saw). Had seen prisoner once before at the Honeysuckle Point station, where he was guilty of a similar offence.

    Mr Moore objected to the last portion of the evidence, but the PM said it was admissible in so far as it proved identity. Mr Moore desired that his objection should be noted.

    Cross-examined: The moment we saw the man, we ran away; I saw my friend today; I did not know she was summoned to appear as a witness that morning; we were about five or six yards from prisoner.

    To Inspector Thorpe: We ran away in consequence of what we saw.

    To the Bench: The man not facing the wall but was facing us, towards the street.

    Mr Moore spoke on behalf of his client, dwelling on the fact that the girls approached the prisoner before they ran away. It had been proved that the prisoner never spoke to them, never followed then, and although the alleged offence was committed in a public thoroughfare, there could only be produced two children to give evidence against him. If the Bench had the slightest doubt that the prisoner had wilfully and obscenely exposed himself, they should give him the benefit of the doubt, and allow that he was obeying a call of nature.

    Prisoner was found guilty, and sentenced to fifty hours’ imprisonment, and to receive twelve lashes, to be administered not less than six hours after conviction.

    The prisoner was then led out of the Court. The punishment will be awarded either this afternoon or in the morning, in the Newcastle lockup yard.

    For obvious reasons we have suppressed the names of the female witnesses in this disgusting case.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Sydney Morning Herald, Tue 19 Aug 1884 9

COUNTRY NEWS.
———◦———
(By Telegraph.)
(FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENTS)
——

Newcastle, Monday.

    An elderly man named Alfred Bridger, a carpenter by trade, was arrested yesterday for repeated acts of indecency before women and children. He was charged this morning with indecency, and was, for the first offence, fined £10, or, in default, two months’ imprisonment; for the second offence he was sentenced to 50 hours’ imprisonment and 12 lashes. A third charge was dismissed, the evidence being slightly confused, and a fourth charge was withdrawn by the police. The evidence, which is necessarily too gross for repetition, showed that the prisoner had been in the habit of indulging in filthy and nameless practices before children in all parts of the city, but, through wearing disguises, he managed to escape detection by the police till yesterday, when he was pounced upon by them in the act. He is to be flogged on Wednesday morning.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Thu 21 Aug 1884 10

THE FLOGGING OF BRIDGER.
———◦———

    The prisoner Bridger, who was fined £10, at the Newcastle Police Court on Monday, on one charge of indecent exposure, and sentenced to fifty hours imprisonment, and to receive twelve lashes on another, was flogged in the lock-up yard at noon yesterday. He was examined prior to the punishment by Dr Harris, who was accompanied by Dr Beeston, and was pronounced fit to receive the penalty awarded. In the yard were Inspector Thorpe (who superintended) Mr Chas Stokes, JP, Mr Creer, JP, Dr Harris, Dr Beeston, the representative of the Newcastle Morning Herald, and some policemen. The triangle was fixed against the wall, and the flagellator, a warder of Tamworth gaol, stood by with the cat-o’-nine-tails in his hand.

    The prisoner was led out of his cell pale and dirty, but perfectly calm and self-possessed. Whether he realised his position or was hardened to it, it was difficult to say, but he seemed quite prepared to undergo his punishment without fear. On being bidden to do so, he took off his coat, his vest, and his shirt, and as he stood in his pelt one behold the ruin of a fine torso through self-abuse. Bridger at one time must have been a wiry, muscular man of great strength. He was even now the remnant of a magnificent, if somewhat lean, frame; but the muscles are flabby, and the skin is unhealthy looking. On approaching the triangle he was told to lean forward, which he did. Each arm was then strapped in two places to the woodwork, and his feet likewise were bound to the bottom of the frame over which he was to be whipped. The flagellator meanwhile stripped himself of his coat, waistcoat, and shirt, and stood in his trousers and flannel—a thick-set, powerful man, whose arm could wield a fearful blow with the cat.

    When the prisoner Bridger stood stripped to the waist, his back had some lines on it, which the police seemed to think indicated that he had been flogged before; in fact, it is believed that Bridger is identical with a criminal who was flogged in Melbourne for indecent exposure; but Dr Harris said that the marks were not those of the lash, but were caused by the man lying on some rough material.

    When all was ready, the spectators drew back a few feet, and the flagellator began his work.

    At the first stroke a dull red line burst into view, running transversely along the culprit’s right shoulder blade down his back. Nothing, except a slight twitch of the flesh, indicated that the lash had been felt.

    At the second stroke the red line somewhat broadened, and the colour began to deepen into purple. Towards the armpit and the upper ribs were small spots, deeper in hue than the stripe of red, and these showed where the knots of the cat had touched the skin. A convulsive twitch was all the indication that the culprit felt the blows.

    At the third stroke the man shivered like as spasm, but only for a second. His teeth were clenched, and his hands were clasped tight; but he gave vent to neither groan nor cry. The shiver was painful to witness; but yet there was nothing revolting in the sight of the back, which was slowly growing a more vivid purple. The blood-red spots on the side had increased in number.

    At the fourth stroke the man flinched again but the action was mechanical rather than suggestive of pain. The red line on the back had broadened into a purple patch, with streaks beginning at the right shoulder blade, and ending in angry-looking spots towards the arm pit and ribs. The strokes were being administered in moderately quick succession; but in the intervals the human figure that was suffering made no sign. Only the head was up, not hanging; the hands were tightly clasped; and what manhood was left in the wretch prompted him to suppress any cry of pain or groan of distress.

    At the fifth stroke the purple patch, which was fast becoming a blotch, seemed to grow deeper in colour. The mechanical twitch of the flesh and muscles again convulsed the frame; but, in the short interval before the next lash, instead of the nerves becoming quiescent, they continued to quiver slightly.

    When the sixth and seventh strokes had been laid on, the bruised flesh blackened in some degree, and the blood-red spots near the armpits and the ribs began to get more numerous. There was still endurance and repression, but the punishment was beginning to tell. It was nothing terrible, and nothing in the least like the sensational description given by the metropolitan journals of the floggings in Sydney. The punishment, so far, and indeed up to the twelve lashes, was nothing more than any strong man could bear; at least, physically, leaving the moral torture out of the question.

    At the eighth stroke, there was the first indication of irrepressible human agony. The body seemed to collapse; there was a strain on the straps on the arms, and a loosening of the straps on the feet; but the culprit still held his head erect, and gave forth no sound.

    The ninth stroke seemed the most severely felt of all. The whole frame of the man trembled, and the knuckles of the clenched hands stood out white and bony from the grimy skin. The power of repression was evidently fast giving way to the instinct that impels a man to give vent to his pain in sound; but yet neither groan nor cry came from the creature.

    At the tenth stroke the man gave a convulsive sigh and shuddered. The patch on the shoulder blade had become a bluish black, relieved by the purple spots near the ribs which were caused by the knots of the cat.

    The eleventh stroke was given; and when the swish of the twelfth had fallen, the culprit’s head sank over the bar on which it rested, and the whole of the body strained on its four straps as if completely exhausted. Whether the exhaustion was relief, or whether the height of endurance had been reached, it was difficult to say.

    Bridger was then released. His first act was to put his right hand to his brow and eyes and wipe them. If he had wept, he at least showed no signs of it when he stood away from the triangle. With his right hand to his forehead, he walked with rather unsteady step to his clothes, and attempted to put them on. But he shook all over, and his heart could be seen beating with a regular thud, thud. His chest seemed sunken and his eyes were bloodshot. The constable assisted him to replace his shirt, vest, and coat, and when he was again dressed, handed him a stiff glass of brandy, which he drank neat, conveying it to his mouth with a trembling hand.

    He then drank some water, and was marched to his cell after he had refused to finish what brandy was left in the bottle.

    Shortly afterwards he returned, wishing to speak to Inspector Thorpe. He asked that a messenger might be sent to a gentleman who had employed him as a carpenter to make up the balance of the £10 fine which he intended to pay. Mr Thorpe having promised to attend to the matter, Bridger was removed. The money, however, which the prisoner expected as an advance was not forthcoming, and he will have to wait till he can draw out of his account at the Sydney Savings Bank.

    The culprit, Bridger, was, we learn, convicted of indecent exposure at Yass, on 26th February, 1883, and served a sentence of six months imprisonment in Yass gaol for the offence. As has already been stated, it is thought he was flogged in Melbourne for a similar crime, and that at one time he was a prisoner in the Maitland gaol. When he had a conversation with the flagellator after his flogging, he said that he would not like to be whipped again. He felt it terribly, and the tightness and pain across his chest were almost unbearable.

    During the afternoon Bridger suffered much from the after effects of his punishment. He said to police officials that he hoped no one else would ever be flogged in Newcastle, and that no one would suffer as he had done since his whipping.

    The infliction of the punishment did not occupy more than about five minutes, and the interval between each lash was not more than a few seconds.

————

(To the Editor of the Herald and Advocate.)

    Sir,—Will you allow a small space in your valuable paper to express the feelings of an indignant mother in the case of the scoundrel Bridger. Why was not the case postponed and a few more of the children compelled to attend and give their evidence in company with the two that were truthful enough to recognise him, and were compelled to be there against their will? And why should the feelings of one child, or one mother be studied more than another in a case of this kind, where all mothers who have had their children so insulted should join together to clear the city of such a disgraceful scoundrel? And if some of the idle fellows had left the Court while the poor children were telling their miserable tale, they would have deserved the name of men., which they do not now merit. And if those gentlemen who preside in the Court had only thought what the feelings of their own children would have been, if placed, in such a case—and it was just as likely to have happened to have happened to them as others—they would have, perhaps, tempered justice with mercy to the children, and heard the case with closed doors.

AN INDIGNANT MOTHER

    August 20.

————

(To the Editor of the Herald and Advocate.)

    Sir,—A thousand thanks to you, in the cause of humanity, for your leader of this morning, wherein you refer so disinterestedly, with well directed and sensible remarks re the case of the unfortunate man Bridger, who was sentenced to the lash, your well-chosen remarks stand out very pleasingly in contrast with the letter of the correspondent to the Evening News of 19th inst, who headed his letter with “A worthy candidate for the lash.” Surely “Correspondent” could not have read the evidence, or perhaps he would inflict the lash upon any man—sane or insane. It appears to me high time that the administration of the lash should be considered by a better council than two magistrates—certainly if Andersen’s case moved the sympathy of the public. This man, Bridger, is less culpable; not that the act of indecency is less, but rather much the worse of the two cases. I am of opinion that the inference to be deducted from the evidence is that the man is a sort of lunatic, and your question comes in very well chosen—What is to be done with such men? Why, Sir, when a man runs through the streets perfectly nude, as was the case in Sydney lately, would you sentence him to be flogged? The mind shudders at the thought. Those of mankind who have seen much of the world know too well the awfully demoralising effect of the sin that Bridger was committing; and it seems to my mind, from the evidence, that he was habituated to this degrading practice—hence, as in every continued case of pollution, arises that condition of deplorable man. The lash is better directed for larrikins, and no larrikin would allow himself to be seen as this poor lunatic was. Would to God that the Government would permit the circulation of such books as have been denounced by the authorities, such as “Things that do exist,” and others like them, given unfortunates opportunity to obtain information showing to what end they are driven. Would to God that parents and ministers of the Gospel, who can perhaps reveal these hidden evils the best, make it more fully known. There are thousands drifting on towards this unfortunate man’s end, and many in sheer ignorance. No wonder, then, at indecent exposures. Rather seek their recovery by imprisonment, and such other means as may lead them to better their condition. Apologising for taking up so much of your space,—I am, etc,

HUMANITAS.

  


 

George Bright, 1886 

 

The Sydney Morning Herald, Sat 20 Feb 1886 11

POLICE.
———◦———

    Mr AM Fisher, DSM, disposed of the business in the Charge Court at the CENTRAL POLICE COURT, yesterday, and Mr Whittingdale Johnson, SM, dealt with a number of cases in the Summons Court.

EXTENSIVE ROBBERY.
———◦———

    In the Water Police Court yesterday, before Mr Marsh, SM, a man named George Bright, alias Evan Joneshill, was charged with having stolen two diamond rings, value £60, from the dwelling-house of James Andrew Quinn, on the 31st October, 1884. Evidence was given to the effect that the prisoner had lodged for a few days in the lodging-house of the prosecutor, in Church-hill; articles to the value of £90 were stolen from the prosecutor’s bedroom, including the rings; the prisoner and another person disappeared about the same time, and a man resembling the prisoner pawned a ring about the period of the theft. The prisoner was committed for trial at the Quarter Sessions. He pleaded guilty to another charge of having in his possession two portmanteaus, a leather bag, a cheque bag, a receipt book, a gold albert chain, two lockets, a diamond stud, a silver brooch, a silver ring, and a number carpenter’s tools, suspected to have been stolen; and was sent to gaol for three months, cumulative on several other sentences.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Sydney Morning Herald, Mon 22 Feb 1886 12

LAW REPORT.
———◦———
METROPOLITAN QUARTER SESSIONS.

    The following is a list of the case which are to be tried at the Metropolitan Court of Quarter Sessions, commencing at Darlinghurst Courthouse this morning, before Mr District Court Judge Wilkinson:—

    George Bright, alias Evan Jones Hill, larceny;

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Sydney Morning Herald, Wed 24 Feb 1886 13

METROPOLITAN QUARTER SESSIONS.
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23.
(Before his Honor Judge WILKINSON.)

    The sittings of the Metropolitan Quarter Sessions were continued yesterday at Darlinghurst Courthouse.

SENTENCES.


    George Bright, for larceny, was sentenced to four years’ penal servitude,

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

George Bright, Gaol photo sheet 14

SRNSW: NRS2138, [19/9835], Darlinghurst Gaol photographic description book, 1886 No.3543, p. 27, R5102.

 


Gaol Photo Sheet - Transcribed Details

No. 3543
No. on Gaol Register: 1146-86

Date when Portrait was taken: 20/2/1886

Prisoner's Name: George Bright
(aka Evan Joneshill, George Brien, George Bridger)

Native place: Ireland

Year of birth: 1834

Arrived        Ship: Mercy
in Colony }   Year: 

Trade or occupation
previous to conviction  } Polisher

Religion: C of England

Education, degree of: R & W

Colour of hair: Dark brown

Colour of eyes: Brown

Height: 5' 9½"

Weight     On committal: 168
in lbs     }  On discharge: 

Marks or Special Features: Very deaf

Where and when tried: Sydney Q.S.
22nd February 1886

Offence: Stealing from the dwelling (5 charges)

Sentence: 4 years PS on each
Concurrent

Remarks: Plead Guilty

 (Previous Portrait ...  ) 

PRISON HISTORY

Where and When Offence. Sentence

Central PC

ditto

Sydney Q.S

Water P.C

ditto

St Leonards PC

Central PC

Water PC

28

  6

29

  1

  1

  2

  5

19

12

  4

  5

11

  2

  2

  2

  2

1875

1876

1876

1877

1877

1886

1886

1886

Indecency (2 charges)

Expose person

Receiving a stolen watch

Expose person

Stealing

ditto

ditto

ditto

4 months HL

3 months HL

6 months HL

6 months HL

3 months HL

4 months HL

4 months HL

3 months HL

 


 

Evan Jones Whitton, 1890 

 

The Bathurst Free Press and Mining Journal, Sat 14 Jun 1890 15

POLICE COURT.
———◦———

A YOUTHFUL ABSCONDER

    Elizabeth White, a young woman of about 18 years of age was charged with absconding from her apprenticeship with Even [sic] Jones Whitton.

    Sen constable Morris recommended that the girl be remanded for seven days, which was accordingly done.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Bathurst Free Press and Mining Journal, Sat 21 Jun 1890 16

POLICE COURT.
———◦———
SATURDAY, JUNE 21, 1890.
(Before the Police Magistrate [WA Steele].)

AN INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL GIRL.
EXTRAORDINARY CASE.

    Elizabeth White, on remand, was charged with absconding from her apprenticeship with Evan Jones Whitton.

    Accused had been apprenticed from the Industrial School, and Mr S[ydney] W Webb [Bathurst solicitor] appeared for the Superintendent of the School.

    Evan Jones Whitton deposed that he was a carpenter and lived in a lane off George-street; he had caused a warrant to issue against the girl but now wished to withdraw the information; I am married and yet not married; I mean by this that I am engaged to be married and having promised I consider myself married; the girl was bound to me as an apprentice; at her desire she was transferred to me from Sharman; the documents have been signed by the parties and have since been handed over to the Industrial School authorities. [I] was not asked for a certificate from a clergyman or magistrate showing I was a proper person to have control of the girl; in January or February last the girl came to me and lived with me until May 23rd; she was engaged in my house as domestic servant and house-keeper; was not required to obey any other conditions; I had not to pay her wages; while accused was with me we lived in a two roomed house; she had use of a third room; we expected to get a lady up whom she said was her mother; she is a relation of mine, but I declined to say in what way, as it will disclose family matters; she has lived with me as my daughter.

    Mr Webb requested that the witness should be cautioned, as there were reasons the court did not know for this line of examination.

    Mr [WA] Steele [Police Magistrate] said that he did not see why the caution should be given, as there was nothing that he could see would criminate the witness.

    Witness [Evan Jones Whitton] continued: I decline to say that I have represented myself as her father; I may have done so, but at the present time it would not do to answer it; when she went away I gave her permission to go to Sydney, and she promised to return; I am engaged to be married, but not to the accused; I never said that I was so engaged; I gave up the documents to the superintendent of the school by direction of the bench in Sydney; I had previously obtained from the superintendent an order to remove the girl from the house in which she was living in Sydney; could not say I am a widower; I have been married; while she was with me in Bathurst I used to walk about the town with her; she says I “tailed” her, meaning that I was watching her; have been known by another name, but Whitten [sic] is my right name; I decline to say whether I have been known as Bright or Brighton; decline to say whether I have been in gaol, and how often, in the colonies; know accused’s mother; dids not represent to the Industrial School authorities that I was a married man.

    Mr Steele asked if Mr Webb appeared for the Industrial School, and if he did he did not see how he could also appear for Whitton.

    Mr Webb said that the two were identical, as both the authorities and Whitton wished the cancellation of the indentures.

    Mr Steele said that he did not think Mr Webb could appear for the two.

    Mr Webb argued that if there were seven or eight prisoners in a case he could appear for all at once. He had received a communication from the Industrial School authorities instructing him to act, and he also appeared for Whitton as well.

    To the Police: I gave the documents up and afterwards took out the warrant for her arrest; I did this on the advice of the superintendent.

    Mr Webb said he had no further questions to ask and requested the cancellation of the indentures.

    Senior-sergeant Musgrove said he had evidence to call.

    Mr Webb said this was unnecessary as Whitton had declined to prosecute.

    M[r] Steele said that the evidence might have reference to the character of Whitton and he would like to hear both sides.

    Senior-sergeant Musgrove said this was and outrageous case, and the evidence of the girl should be taken.

    Mr Steele said he was determined to hear both sides.

    Mr Webb urged that this was not the place to sift these matters. The court had no power to act, and it was only by a Special Commission from the School that anything could be done. The court had no power after the prosecution was withdrawn.

    Mr Steele said he had no power to cancel the indentures as they had not been produced. He intended forwarding all the papers to the authorities so that they might be there dealt with.

    Elizabeth White, aged 17½ years, deposed: I have been apprenticed to Evan Jones Whitton from the Parramatta Industrial School since March 10th; It is about two years and four months since I was sent there; my mother sent me there, and about a year and eight months after I was apprenticed to Mr Shanahan of Coolabah, near Wagga Wagga; my step-father is alive and my mother lives at Chippendale, Sydney; her name now is Emma Darvan; I first became acquainted with Whitton when living in the Glebe before I was 12 years old; my step father Garvan took him to my mother’s place; he was acquainted with him; knew him by that name and since he was also known by the name of Brighton; often met at my mother’s place; he claimed relationship but mother said it was not so; he said I was his daughter when in Sydney and also after I came to live in Bathurst; have heard him call me his daughter; he often called at mother’s and used to see me when in the Industrial School; while at Shanahan’s I received a letter from Whitton but no money; he then represented himself as my uncle, and after as my father; I do not know which he is, but do not believe he is any; I had told mother I had not a comfortable place, and he wrote and asked me if I would come to live with him; he told me in a letter that he was married man; it was in a letter to Mrs Shanahan which he wrote to her; after this I was transferred to him and I signed all the documents; Mrs Shanahan, Mrs Walker, Whitton and I signed the papers; my fare was paid for me and Whitton met me at the railway station; he told me his missus would soon be back home; when I signed the documents I thought he was a married man; the house we lived in had two rooms; I slept in the bedroom and he in the kitchen; a little girl named Gaskell used to be with me sometimes; I met her in the Salvation Army and she used to come and stop with me sometimes; he twice tried to get into my bedroom but I had the door barred; I was then undressed; I did not tell him that that was the reason I left him; when I went to Sydney I made up my mind not to come back; if I had told him why I was going away he would not let me go; he never slept in my room all night; Gaskell’s live in Howick-street; they have been in Bathurst several months; they used to visit me there; have seen a glass of beer d4runk with Whitton and Mrs Gaskell; Mrs Gaskell was quite sober; Whitton is not in the habit of drinking.

    To Mr Webb: It was only twice that he tried to get into my room; it was about a month or six weeks before I went away; I then made up my mind to go, and before I went I begged him not to send me away, because I thought he would not let me go if he knew my reasons; told the Gaskell’s and two young men I did not want to go, but this was only pretence; I wrote several letters to friends in Sydney and said I was comfortable and happy, but I wrote like this because he read all my letters before I sent them away; I was comfortable and happy; he used to follow me about and complained of the company I kept; I did not like this; when I was in the Industrial School he asked me to go with him and I said I would like to; while at Shanahan’s I wrote secretly to Whitton requesting him to write to the Department and get the transfer; I was assigned to him at her own and by mother’s request.

    Mr Webb said that Mr Steele could not make any order in this case, the prosecution having been abandoned by Whitton having declined to proceed. It was now for the police to take action to have the girl sent to the Industrial School again.

    Mr Steele said that it was necessary to enquire into the case because of the misrepresentations made to the department by Whitton.

    To the police: When I wrote to Whitton I thought he was married; Whitton should have given me 3s a week, but had not done so; he bought me clothes and paid 10s for music.

    Mr Webb produced letters and documents held by Whitton, showing the transfer was properly made. It was not necessary for the production of certificate of character, although it should be done, but this was the fault of the department.

    The girl asked the Bench to give her another chance and not send her back to the school, but have her transferred to someone else.

    Mr Steele said that he had decided to send the girl back to the Industrial School where the matter would be fully dealt with. The evidence had disclosed some disgraceful proceedings. A young girl had been handed over to an unmarried man without due enquiry being made as to whether he was a fit person. He would forward the depositions to the authorities.

    The girl appeared to dread her return to the school and cried bitterly. She is an attractive looking girl and appears to have a largg [sic] amount of common sense.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Bathurst Free Press and Mining Journal, Mon 23 Jun 1890 17

A CASE FOR INQUIRY.

The case of the Industrial School girl, ELIZABETH WHITE, which occupied the attention of the Bench on Saturday morning, should not be allowed to rest until a full and searching inquisition has been made into the whole of the circumstances surrounding it. The revelations made were simply astounding, and such as justified the strong term “outrageous” which the Police Magistrate applied to the proceedings disclosed. That a girl bordering on full womanhood could be under official sanction transferred as an apprentice from the person who first received her from the State institution to an unmarried man, living in a two-roomed house, ostensibly as his servant or housekeeper, but really in a position bordering upon the illegal, is something almost past belief; and yet those who read the evidence published in our Saturday’s issue must be convinced that such a thing has been done. Common decency, apart from every other consideration, should render anything of this kind impossible, and knowing that in the past the authorities at the Industrial School have manifested great anxiety and taken every precaution to secure proper places for the girls who have been apprenticed from the institution, we are very much disposed to think that misrepresentations must have been made to them when their consent was being sought to the transference of the girl White from SHANNON to WHITTON, alias BRIGHTON. The Police Magistrate very wisely ordered the return of the girl to the institution, after hearing her evidence, and although that evidence was not really necessary in connection with the case as then before the court, he would have failed in his duty as one of the custodians of public morals if he had not endeavoured to make himself acquainted with the whole of the circumstances surrounding the case. But, as we have said, the inquiry must not stop here, and we are glad to know that it is not likely to do so. Mr PAUL, MLA, was in court during the hearing, and after the case had concluded he informed us that he intends to bring the matter before Parliament, which will, perhaps, be the most effective means of getting to the bottom of this extraordinary case of official laxity or deception.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Bathurst Free Press and Mining Journal, Thu 24 Jul 1890 18

IN PARLIAMENT.
(By Electric Telegraph.)
(FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.)
————

Thursday Morning.

THE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL GIRL,
WHITE.

    In the Assembly yesternight Mr Carruthers, Minister for Public Instructions, in answer to Mr Paul, said he had investigated the case Whitton v. White, tried at Bathurst, and that the investigation shewed that the girl White had been improperly transferred from the service of Shannon to the service of Whitton.

    The Minister further said he had taken the necessary steps to prevent any similar irregularity again occurring.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Bathurst Free Press and Mining Journal, Fri 25 Jul 1890 19

THE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL
GIRL.
———◦———
INQUIRY INTO THE CASE BY THE
MINISTER.
———
CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS.
———
IS WHITTON HER UNCLE OR HER
FATHER?
———

    In the [NSW Legislative] Assembly on Tuesday night Mr Carruthers, Minister for Public Instruction, in answer to Mr Paul, said he had investigated the case Whitton v. White, tried at Bathurst, and that the investigation shewed that the girl White had been improperly transferred from the service of Shannon to the service of Whitton. He further said that he had taken the necessary steps to prevent any similar irregularity again occurred.

    The papers in connection with the case were laid upon the table of the House, 20 and as they disclose a rather peculiar condition of affairs we place our readers in possession of a few extracts from them.

    The first document in the batch is the newspaper report of the case. Then came Mr [William Patrick] Crick’s question in the House—which question, by-the-way, in his anxiety to forestall the member for Bathurst, had been put to the wrong Minister. This was followed by a letter from Mr Paul to the Minister for Public Instruction, and that gentleman’s reply that he had the matter under consideration.

    Then came a letter from Mr C[harles] H[ill] Spier, Superintendent of the Industrial School, to the Under-Secretary of the Department, enclosing the following report:—

    “I do myself the honour to state that the girl Elizabeth White was apprenticed on 25th September, 1889, to Mr James Shannon, of Coolaman [sic–Coolamon], who, for some reason unrecorded, transferred her to Mr Evan Jones Whitton, of Bathurst, on 13th February, 1890.

    “Whitton visited this institution in the early part of this month, and informed me that his apprentice, Elizabeth White, had absconded. He asked me to take out a warrant for her arrest. This I refused to do, pointing out to him that he was her legal custodian, and must take out the warrant himself. He seemed unwilling to adopt this course, stating as his reason that he did not wish to bring the girl before the court, believing that if he procured a certificate from me to the effect that she was legally bound to him, he could induce those who were harbouring her to hand her over to him at once. I gave him the document he required on the condition t5hat he would bring the girl here, that I might see her and question her. About a week later, on the 9th and 10th inst, he came again and informed me that though he had seen and spoken to the girl he was unsuccessful in inducing her to go back with him; he had therefore brought her under warrant before the Sydney Bench, by whom she was remanded until the following Friday, the 13th inst.

    “The man’s whole demeanour was so unsatisfactory that I determined to attend the court that day, but unfortunately I was compelled to attend the police court on the same day.

    “The girl was finally remanded to Bathurst, and the Superintendent of Police wrote to me on the subject. The police report of the character of the man Whitton was such as to lead me to request the Superintendent of Police to have the indentures cancelled, and have the girl sent back to the Industrial School, unless there could be found a suitable person in Bathurst to whom she could be transferred.

    “No further communication from the police has been received by me.

    “The question arises—why did not the man Whitton produce a certificate as to fitness, signed by a magistrate and a clergyman on the transfer from Shannon to himself? I can find no record of such documents.

“I have, &c,
“CH SPIER.”

    The next letter was one from Mrs Selina Walker, late Superintendent of the School, in reply to one from the Under-Secretary. That letter read as follows:—

    “Sir,—In reply to your enquiries respecting the girl Elizabeth White, I beg to state that I am unable to record all the circumstances of this case, having been in bad health at the time, but I believe there were certificates of character produced when I consented to the earnest request of Mr Shannon and of the girl for her transfer to her uncle, Mr Whitton. Elizabeth White refused to work for Mr Shannon, who was, I believe, legally entitled to transfer her; otherwise, she would have been returned to the Institution, when her violent temper and untruthfulness would have caused much trouble to my successor.

    “Mr Whitton, a married man, had often visited Elizabeth White on order from the Department, and appeared to be well-to-do.

    “I may state that I and my daughter have had letters from the girl since her transfer when she spoke in high terms of her uncle and said she was very happy with him and was taking music lessons.

“I have, &c,
“SELINA E WALKER.”

    The next document was a letter to the under-secretary from Mr SW Webb, dated July 9th, 1890, as follows:—

    “Dear Sir,—I find that a wire, which I only received this morning, was sent by you on July 1st. The reason for my not receiving it is that it must have arrived after my office hours, and the lad took it to my private residence, but this he found locked up, the whole family being away, and I only discovered it under the door when I opened the house this morning.

    “I, of course, can have no possible objection to giving the the [sic] Minister the information he desires.

    “Whitton in the first place instructed me. I then wrote to Mr Spier and told him that Whitton desired the indenture cancelled, and he replied that he desired the same. This I accepted as instruction from him to have the desired object effected.

    “There is one feature of this case which Whitton was averse to having stated in court, which may have been known to Mrs Walker, and which I think puts the case in a very different category from what appears in the papers. This fact I have at last persuaded Whitton to allow me to state for the Minister’s information. It is that Whitton is the girl’s real father; hence the interest he has always taken in her. I did not know this at the hearing here, but ascertained it shortly after.

“Yours, faithfully,
“SYDNEY W WEBB.”

    Then came to following memo to the Under-secretary from Mr Spier:—

    “I understood from Mr Webb’s letter to me that Mr Whitton had retained him, and as I considered that the indenture ought to be cancelled, I answered to that effect as a necessary preliminary to the girl’s reception here. I also wrote to the Superintendent of Police asking him to have the indentures cancelled, and I asked him to put the question as to whether Mr Whitton had provided a certificate of fitness with regard to character.

    “I am now of opinion that Mr Whitton’s desire to retain possession of Elizabeth White arose from a wish to handle property which it is said she is heir to. She states that her father was a stevedore acting agent for his father, who was a shipowner in London, and she believes that her father left property in Whitechapel, London, which she will inherit.

“CH SPIER, Superintendent.”

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Bathurst Free Press and Mining Journal, Thu 16 Oct 1890 21

POLICE COURT.
———◦———
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 16th, 1890.
(Before Messrs ET Webb and WC Kelk, JsP.)

INDECENCY.

    Evan Jones Whitton, alias Bridger, carpenter, 65, was charged with wilfully and obscenely exposing himself within view of a public street.

    Senior-constable Morris deposed: About 6.15 yesterday evening I saw prisoner in Keppel-street; walked up to him and said, “I arrest you no a charge of indecent exposure;” he asked, “Who said so?”; I said “A woman; I will tell you all about it later on”; took him to the lock-up, and read the charge to him; in reply he said “It is false”; I laid this information myself in consequence of a complaint that was made to me yesterday afternoon; this morning I repeated the charge to the prisoner in the lock-up; I gave him the usual caution; in reply to a question put bu me he said, “I will admit I was in Bentinck-street yesterday; I got behind a gate as I wanted to sew a button on my trousers; I will be more circumspect in future, and I will dress better”; I have known prisoner for over twelve months, and during that time several complaints have been made to me.

    Rose Traynor, wife of John Traynor, railway employee, deposed: I have two children going to school—a boy of 7 and a girl of 5; in consequence of what the children told me I, in company with Mrs Cashman and Mrs Doherty, went into Keppel-street, and when standing near Mrs McDonald’s shop we saw prisoner in the street; shortly after this the children came out of school; prisoner was about ten yards in front of the children; he beckoned to them with his hand, and went towards Bentinck-street;  he turned into Bentinck-street, and near the Temperance Hall, he opened a door and went into a lane adjoining the Hall; I ran across the street, and found him in the door way; the door was partly open, and he was behaving in an indecent manner; when he saw me he ran behind the door; I caught the door and pushed it against him calling him a dirty old beast; the children were on the footpath, and looking towards prisoner; I then reported the matter to the police.

    Theresa Cashman, wife of William Cashman, deposed to being present with last witness in Keppel-street; two of her children were there. She corroborated the evidence given by the previous witness; she had accompanied Mrs Traynor in consequence of complaints which had been made about prisoner.

    Mrs Traynor, re-called, said that she had gone to Keppel-street because of the complaints made of prisoner by the girls.

    For the defence—

    Evan Jones Whitton (prisoner) pleaded not guilty to the charge; while at work he tore his trousers; and on his way home, having a needle and cotton in his pocket, he went into the yard to mend them; he had closed the door leading into the lane.

    To the police: My wife’s maiden name was Bridger: I might have been known as Bridger; I might have been in Newcastle in 1884; decline to say whether I was charged with a similar offence to this in Newcastle in that year, and was flogged for it; I am not in the habit of annoying children as they go home.

    In reply to the Bench the police said that some time ago he appeared at the court in connection with a girl from the Industrial School.

    The Bench said they had power to inflict the punishment of flogging, but the sentence following that was short that they preferred sentencing him to a term of imprisonment. They, therefore, sent him to gaol for six months’ hard labor.

    The Bench also said that it was always difficult to obtain evidence in such cases as this. Mrs Traynor deserved the thanks of the whole community for having taken the action she did yesterday.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Bathurst Times, Thu 16 Oct 1890 22

POLICE COURT.
———
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 16th, 1890.
(Before Messrs ET Webb, WC Kelk, and J Simmons, JsP.)

    OBSCENE EXPOSURE.— Evan Jones Whitton, alias Brighton, alias Bridger, a filthy-attired and haggard-looking elderly man, was charged with wilfully and obscenely exposing himself within view of Bentinck-street, a public street in the city of Bathurst.—

    Senior-constable Morris deposed: About 6.15 yesterday evening I saw the prisoner in Keppel-street; I caught him by the arm and said, “I arrest you on a charge of obscene exposure;” he replied, “Who said so?” I said, “A woman; I’ll tell you all about it later on;” I took him to the lockup, showed him the warrant produced, and charged him in the usual form; re replied, “It’s false;” I laid the information in consequence of a complaint made to me yesterday afternoon; this morning I repeated the charge to the prisoner and duly cautioned him; in reply he said, “I will admit I was in Bentinck-street yesterday; I got behind a gate, as I wanted to saw a button on my trousers; but I will be more circumspect in future; I will dress better;” I have known the prisoner for over twelve months; during that time several complaints have been made against him; I propose to call evidence to prove the charge.—

    Rose Traynor, wife of John Traynor, railway employé, living in Seymour-street, deposed: I have two children going to school, one a girl of five and the other a boy of seven; in consequence of complaints made to me by them I communicated with the police; about half-past 12 yesterday Mrs Cashman, Mrs Doherty, and I went to Keppel-street; we saw the prisoner in Keppel-street; he was 10 yards in front of the children, who were coming out of school; he was beckoning to the children with his right hand; he turned off Keppel-street into Bentinck-street; he opened a gate and went down a lane between Mr Pittendrigh’s house and the Temperance Hall; I ran across the street and went to the door, and saw the prisoner exposed; he was standing at the door, which was partially open; I caught hold of him, shoved him, and called him a dirty old beast; I could see him from the street; he could have been seen from the opposite side of the street; I then laid an information against him.—

    Theresa Cashman, wife of William Cashman, gave corroborative evidence, and said she saw what occurred from the middle of Bentinck-street.—

    For the defence, the prisoner [Evan Jones Whitton] deposed that he was sewing on a button and mending a tear, and that he had gone into the lane to do this; the children and women came up just then.

    To Senior-constable Morris: I may have been known by the name of Bridger; I have been in Newcastle, but I can’t say in what year; I decline to say whether I was flogged there for a similar offence.—Prisoner was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment in Bathurst gaol with hard labour, Mr Webb saying that the only other sentence that could be passed was a flogging and 96 hours’ imprisonment. Mr Webb also said it was often hard to get a conviction against offenders of this class owing to persons feeling reluctant to give evidence, and Mrs Traynor, Mrs Cashman, and Mrs Doherty deserved the thanks of the community for the action they had taken.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The National Advocate, Fri 17 Oct 1890 23

BATHURST POLICE COURT.
————◦————
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1890.
———
(Before ET Webb, Esq, JP.)

INDECENT EXPOSURE.

    Evan Jones Whitton was charged by Senior-constable Morris with having wilfully and obscenely exposed his person within view of people in Bentinck-street on Wednesday.

    Senior-constable Morris, on oath, deposed: About a quarter past 6 yesterday I saw the prisoner in Keppel-street; walking up to him and catching him by the arm I said I arrest you on a charge of indecent exposure; re plied, “Who said so?”; I said “a woman, I’ll tell you all about it later on”; took him to the lock-up and showed him the warrant which I now produce, and in which is set out the charge; prisoner said, “It is false”; I laid this information in consequence of a complaint made to me yesterday afternoon; this morning I repeated the charge to prisoner at the lock-up; in reply to a question he said, “I will admit I was in Bentinck-street yesterday; got behind a gate as I Wanted to sew a button on my trousers, but I will be more circumspect in future; will dress better”; have known the prisoner for sometime over 12 months.

    (Mr Kelk, JP, here took his seat on the Bench.)

    Rose Traynor, wife of John Traynor, a railway employee residing in Seymour-street, deposed: Have two children, a little girl and boy, aged five and seven, going to school; in consequence of a complaint made to me by my little girl, I saw Senior-Constable Morris yesterday morning; late in the day, about 12.30, Mrs Cashman, Mrs Doherty, and I went into Keppel-street; there saw prisoner, and afterwards saw the children coming out from school; prisoner was about ten yards in front of the children, to whom he beckoned with his hand; he turned off Keppel-street into Bentinck-street, and opening a side gate between Pittendrigh’s factory and the Temperance Hall, entered a side lane leading into a dwelling; I went after him, and found the whole of his person exposed to the children; the door of the side way was partly opened; when I went in he ran behind the door; I caught hold of him and, shoving him away, called him a dirty old beast; could see him from the street; the children were along side prisoner when his person was exposed; people from the opposite side of the street could have seen him if they had looked; prisoner’s trousers were all down, and when he came outside he commenced to button them up.

    Mr Simmons, JP, here took a seat on the Bench.

    Theresa Cashman, wife of William Cashman, corroborated the evidence of the last witness in all material points; She followed Mrs Traynor in Bentinck-street, and when she got down to the gate prisoner was coming out of the side way, buttoning up his trousers.

    This was the case for the prosecution.

    Prisoner [Evan Jones Whitton] then entered the box and, on oath, said he was not guilty of exposing his person. He was sewing a button on his trousers when he was confronted in Bentinck-street by a woman.

    To Senior-constable Morris: Might have been known by the name of Bridge[r]. I decline to say whether I was tried at Newcastle in 1884 for a similar offence and flogged; am not in the habit of decoying children coming from school.

    Prisoner was then ordered to be imprisoned with hard labor for the term of six months.

    The Chairman of the Bench (Mr Webb), in announcing this verdict, said it was generally hard for the police to get a conviction in cases of the kind which had just been heard, because of the difficulty that was experienced in inducing witnesses to come forward and give evidence. Mrs Traynor was, in opinion of his colleagues and himself, entitled to the sincere thanks of the whole community for her action on Wednesday in taking the steps she did to run the offender to justice.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Evan Jones Whitton, Gaol photo sheet 24

SRNSW: NRS1998, [3/5957], Bathurst Gaol photographic description book, 1874-1930, No. 653, p. 160, R5084.

 


Gaol Photo Sheet - Transcribed Details 

No. 653
Bathurst

Date when Portrait was taken: 3rd December 1890

Prisoner's Name: Evan Jones Whitton

Native place: England

Year of birth: 1825

Arrived        Ship: Christian
in Colony }   Year: 1870

Trade or occupation
previous to conviction  } Carpenter

Religion: CE

Education, degree of: R & W

Colour of hair: Black to grey

Colour of eyes: Brown

Height: 5' 9"

Weight     On committal: 
in lbs     }  On discharge: 

Marks or Special Features: Says he does not know his age but believes he is between 60 & 70 years old, looks younger - very deaf

Where and when tried: Bathurst PC
16th October 1890

Offence: Wilful & obscene exposure

Sentence: 6 months HL

Remarks:  

 (Previous Portrait ...  ) 

PRISON HISTORY

Where and When Offence. Sentence

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Alfred Bridger, 1893 

 

Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Mon 6 Feb 1893 25

TELEGRAMS.
———◦———
(From Our Correspondents.)
————
NEW SOUTH WALES.
————

Sydney, Sunday.

A HARDENED CRIMINAL.

    Alfred Bridger, who has a criminal record dating back to 1873, which includes 20 years’ penal servitude and 48 hours’ cells and 12 lashes, and who is now undergoing a sentence of six months for obscene conduct was found guilty at the Parramatta Quarter Sessions of stealing a bath and other articles out of an unoccupied house. His defence was that he was the victim of circumstances. He held the Victoria Cross for valour, but he had a twin brother who had done all these bad things, and he had to suffer for them. He was sentenced to three years’ penal servitude.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Cumberland Argus and Fruitgrowers’ Advocate, Sat 11 Feb 1893 26

CURRENT NEWS.
————


    AT the Parramatta Quarter Sessions, on Friday, Alfred Bridger was found guilty of stealing a bath and other articles, the property of Malcolm Brothers, from an unoccupied house in Station-street, Harris Park. He told a long tale to his Honor Judge Backhouse of how he was the victim to circumstances, said circumstances being that he had a twin brother who did all these bad things, which he had to suffer for. Bridger is at present undergoing a six months’ sentence for indecency, a crime for which he seems to have a mania, as for committed it he has been flogged and convicted seven times. He also served four years for stealing in a dwelling, having been convicted on five different charges, and sentenced to four years on each indictment, the sentences to be concurrent. He was sentenced to three years’ penal servitude, but his Honor said that he would recommend, on account of prisoner’s age (59), that the solitary confinement be remitted.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

 

Alfred Bridger, Gaol photo sheet 27

SRNSW: NRS2397, [3/6009a], Parramatta photographic description book, 1891-1897, No. 447, p. 38, R5136. Emphasis added.

 


Gaol Photo Sheet - Transcribed Details

No. 447
Parramatta

Date when Portrait was taken: 2-2-1893

Prisoner's Name: Alfred Bridger
(aka Evan Joneshill, George Bridger, Alfred Bright)
[aka Evan Jones Whitton]

Native place: London

Year of birth: 1834

Arrived        Ship: Clara
in Colony }   Year: 1872 

Trade or occupation
previous to conviction  } French polisher or builder

Religion: C of E

Education, degree of: R & W

Colour of hair: Black to grey

Colour of eyes: Brown

Height: 5' 8¾"

Weight     On committal: 
in lbs     }  On discharge: 

Marks or Special Features: Right eye Brown left eye blue. Very Deaf

Where and when tried: Parramatta Q.S.
3rd February 1893

Offence: Stealing

Sentence: 3 years PS

Remarks: His Honor recommended prisoner not to be kept in separate treatment." Prisoner asked permission to petition. His Honor said 'if any fresh evidence comes forth at any time, I will allow you to petition' 

 (Previous Portrait ...  3543) 

PRISON HISTORY

Where and When Offence. Sentence

Central PO

ditto

Sydney Q.S

Water PO

Goulburn PO

Newcastle PO

Water PO
St Leonards PC
Central PO
Water PO

Sydney Q.S

Water PO

Bathurst PO

Liverpool PO

* Parramatta PO

 28

   6

 29

  1

 24

 18

  1
  2
  5
19

22

23

  9

  9

25

12

  4

  5

11

  2

  8

2
2
2
2

2

10

10

6

1

1875

1876

1876

1877

1883

1884

1886
1886
1886
1886

1886

1889

1890

1892

1893

Indecency 2 charges

Expose person

Receiving stolen watch

Expose person

Expose person

Indecent Exposure

Stealing
ditto
ditto
ditto

Stealing from a dwelling 5 charges

False pretences

Indecent Exposure

Stealing

Indecent Exposure

4 months HL

3 months HL

6 months HL

6 months HL

6 months HL

£10 or 2 months C flogged at
Newcastle Lockup

3 months HL  |
4 months HL  | 
4 months HL  |  
3 months HL  |  Concurrent

4 years P.S. on each. Concurrent

6 months HL

6 months HL

6 months HL

6 months HL

* Serving this sentence when sentences as above 

 


1    The Evening News, Mon 1 Jan 1877, p. 2.

2    The Maitland Mercury and Hunter River General Advertiser, Thu 4 Jan 1877, p. 5.

3    The Evening News, Thu 15 Feb 1877, p. 3.

4    The Evening News, Fri 16 Feb 1877, p. 3.

5    The Sydney Morning Herald, Fri 16 Feb 1877, p. 2.

6    SRNSW: NRS2138, [3/6041], Darlinghurst Gaol photographic description book, 1876-1877, No. 1650, pp. 204a, 204b, R5099.

7    Goulburn Evening Penny Post, Tue 27 Feb 1883, p. 4. Emphasis added.

8    Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Tue 19 Aug 1884, p. 2. Emphasis added.

9    The Sydney Morning Herald, Tue 19 Aug 1884, p. 8.

10  Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Thu 21 Aug 1884, p. 2.

11  The Sydney Morning Herald, Sat 20 Feb 1896, p. 11.

12  The Sydney Morning Herald, Mon 22 Feb 1896, p. 4.

13  The Sydney Morning Herald, Wed 24 Feb 1896, p. 7.

14  SRNSW: NRS2138, [19/9835], Darlinghurst Gaol photographic description book, 1886 No.3543, p. 27, R5102.

15  The Bathurst Free Press and Mining Journal, Sat 14 Jun 1890, p. 2.

16  The Bathurst Free Press and Mining Journal, Sat 21 Jun 1890, p. 2. Emphasis added.

17  The Bathurst Free Press and Mining Journal, Mon 23 Jun 1890, p. 2.

18  The Bathurst Free Press and Mining Journal, Thu 24 Jul 1890, p. 2.

19  The Bathurst Free Press and Mining Journal, Fri 25 Jul 1890, pp. 2, 3.

20  The author searched the 1890 indexes of the NSW Parliamentary Hansard and Votes and Proceedings to ascertain if all the documents ‘tabled’ had been incorporated and printed — alas nothing was found.

21  The Bathurst Free Press and Mining Journal, Thu 16 Oct 1890, p. 2. Emphasis added.

22  The Bathurst Times, Thu 16 Oct 1890, p. 2. Emphasis added.

23  The National Advocate, Fri 17 Oct 1890, p. 2. Emphasis added.

24  SRNSW: NRS1998, [3/5957], Bathurst Gaol photographic description book, 1874-1930, No. 653, p. 160, R5084.

25  Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Mon 6 Feb 1893, p. 5.

26  The Cumberland Argus and Fruitgrowers’ Advocate (Parramatta), Sat 11 Feb 1893, p. 4.

27  SRNSW: NRS2397, [3/6009a], Parramatta photographic description book, 1891-1897, No. 447, p. 38, R5136. Emphasis added.