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
1897, Thomas Bellamy, Herbert Bellamy, Joseph Lynch - Unfit For Publication
Text Size

 

 

Thomas Bellamy, Herbert Bellamy, Joseph Lynch, 1897 – Indecent assault

Below also see: Joseph Lynch, Ernest Knight, Percy Hestelow, Charles Waters, 1902
James Brennan, 1906,
Joseph Lynch, 1908
James Brennan, 1913 – Indecent exposure

 

The Maitland Daily Mercury, Mon 13 Dec 1897 1

MAITLAND QUARTER SESSIONS.
————

    The December sittings of the Quarter Sessions commenced at East Maitland this morning before his Honor Judge Backhouse. Mr Dawson was Crown Prosecutor. Mr GF Scott, PM, acted as Deputy Sheriff. Among the legal profession were:—Barristers: Messrs R Windeyer, A Tighe. Solicitors: Messrs RW Thompson, GF Sölling, JHF Waller, and JR Carlton.
    Albert Stack Bolton was sworn in as a justice of the peace.
    Mr Thompson asked that Mr William Edward Sparke, auctioneer, should be excused from attendance for the day, as he had a cattle sale to attend. His Honor expressed himself averse to excusing anyone owing to business, but ultimately he excused Mr Sparke till twelve o’clock.

INDECENT ASSAULT.

    Thomas Bellamy, jun, Herbert Bellamy, and Joseph Lynch, three youths, on bails, were charged with having on the 16th November, at West Maitland, indecent assaulted Ethel Sully, a girl under the age of 14 years, to wit 11 years and 10 months. Mr CF Sölling defended Lynch, and Mr R Windeyer, instructed by Mr JHF Waller, the Bellamys.

    As this was the last case taken the jurymen, except those in this case and those locked up, were discharged from further attendance.

    It was proposed to call the younger sister, eight years of age, but his Honor said he objected to having the child examined, no matter what were the consequences. By consent, however, the depositions of the child at the police court were read.

    Ethel Sully, a small girl for her age, gave evidence similar to that at the police court. She had been sent with her younger sister on a message she said, and passing Bellamy’s house, Tom Bellamy offered her a penny to go into the yard, and afterwards pulled her into a shed. Milton Lee and Joseph Lynch were also there. Tom Bellamy disarranged her clothes, and after acting in a certain manner he called Herbert Bellamy, who acted the same. He in turn called Lynch, but she refused to allow him to come hear her. Tom Bellamy gave her a penny, and gave her sister a penny and sixpence because they said they would tell her mother, which she did on returning home and being beaten.—

    The child was cross-examined at some length by Mr Windeyer and Mr Sölling. The statement concerning Lynch was not the same as that at the police court, but she corrected herself.

    Emily Phillips, mother of Ethel Sully, gave evidence of having sent the child on a message. As she delayed she beat her when she returned, and the child then made a complaint. She afterwards examined the child but found no marks upon her.—

    By Mr Windeyer: She beat the child because she knew it was an untruth she told as to why she was delayed. The child was often times untruthful.

    Milton Lee, 15 years of age, deposed that he was in Bellamy’s kitchen when he saw Tom Bellamy and the prosecutrix in the shed. Witness got into the shed by a window and saw Tom Bellamy do certain things. He ran out of the shed and heard Tom call his brother Herb. He in turn called Lynch. He saw the last-named kneeling by the child.—

    Mr Windeyer cross-examined at length. He admitted he had told a different story to his mother in front of the police, by saying he had not seen Tom Bellamy.—

    In answer to his Honor the witness said it was light enough for him to see what was going on.

    Sergeant [Joseph] Wirrell deposed to getting information from the girl’s father, and going to Bellamy’s place. Thomas Bellamy denied knowing Ethel Phillips (since called Sully), or that girls had been in the yard that night. Herbert denied that the girls Phillips had been in the yard. The shirts were produced for him at his request, but he found no stain on them. He went to Lynch’s residence, where Lynch said he saw the Bellamy’s that night, but he did not speak to them. He said the same about the girls. Lynch was arrested, and after leaving the house Lynch stopped and said he did not like to say anything before his father, but he would tell the truth. Witness did not caution him. Lynch said he was with the Bellamys in front of the latter’s house when the girls Phillips came along, and Tom Bellamy made overtures to the elder, ending in the two going into the yard. Tom Bellamy called Herbert, who subsequently called him (Lynch). When he went in Tom was in a certain position. Herbert did the same afterwards, but when witness attempted to do so the girl declined to let him. They then went away, the girls saying they would tell their mother.

    By Mr Windeyer: When he spoke to the girl she said they went in through the gate next the hotel, while Lynch said they went in through the gate between Mills’ and Edwards’s shop. In answer to Mr Sölling, the witness said he did not put Lynch’s statement in writing till he reached the police station, but he did not think he had made any mistakes.

    Constable [William Ebenezer] Couper also gave evidence, and was cross-examined.

    Dr Alex Pentland gave evidence of having examined the prosecutrix. He found no marks of violence, except such as much might be found on some children.

    By Mr Windeyer: He found no trace of discharge.

    This closed the case for the prosecution. For the defence, Thomas Bellamy, one of the accused, said he was a mail driver. On the 16th November he drove his aunt in from Mount Vincent, and arrived about 7.30. His aunt had asked him to have tea, and on taking the horse out of the trap he went down to his aunt’s. He met a man named Hartup, who went with him, towards the High-street station. He had tea at his aunt’s, and after remaining about an hour and a half he returned home. He met his cousin on the station, and also a man named Hilton and McClerkin. His brother came along after putting the horses in a paddock, and they returned home and went to bed. He never saw the girls that night. He denied that he was a companion of Lynch’s, or that he had spoken to him.—

    In answer to the Crown Prosecutor, the witness professed not to know where Ping War’s shop was, or who lived next door to his place. When asked about it by Mr Windeyer about the latter, he said he knew that Mills lived next door. In answer to Mr Sölling, the Crown Prosecutor, and his Honor, the witness gave an emphatic denial to any suggestion of having known or spoken to Lynch at any time.

(Case proceeding.)

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Maitland Daily Mercury, Tue 14 Dec 1897 2

MAITLAND QUARTER SESSIONS.
————
(Before His Honor Judge Backhouse.))

INDECENT ASSAULT.

    The sittings of the Quarter Sessions was continued yesterday after we went to press. The case against Thomas Bellamy, jun, Herbert Bellamy, and Joseph Lynch, of indecent assault on a little girl named Ethel Sully, was continued. The evidence for the defence had just been entered upon, and after one of the accused, Thomas Bellamy, had given evidence, Mrs James Bellamy was called. She corroborated her nephew’s evidence about his driving her home, coming down to tea afterwards, &c.

    Abraham Hartup, labourer, deposed that he came out of Mill’s place about half-past seven and saw Thomas Bellamy. The latter said he was going to his aunt’s place, and witness walked down there with him.

    Bertram Bellamy, son of James Bellamy, deposed on the night of the arrest, about eight o’clock, he saw his cousin Herbert in front of the house. A man named Con Ryan came up. On the way home he saw his cousin Thomas near the railway station.

    Cornelius Ryan said he was talking to Herbert Bellamy, Bertram Bellamy and others in front of Bellamy’s place between about eight and half-past. Similar evidence was given by James McClerkin, a saddler, who said he remained some time, and by Daniel Hilton, who said he was there from about half-past eight to ten o’clock.

    Thomas Bellamy, father of the two accused, said that when he left the yard about seven o’clock there was no horse in the stall where the offence was alleged to have taken place.

    Mrs Bellamy, his wife, deposed to seeing Thomas coming home, putting the horse and trap away, and going through with his brother to have his tea at his aunt’s. She was sitting in the dining-room sewing all the evening, and no one could go into the kitchen without her seeing and hearing them.

    James Bellamy, uncle, deposed to Thomas coming to tea on the night of the arrest.

    Mrs Sarah Towler, residing next door to Thomas Bellamy, said she heard a trap come in the yard about half-past seven. She was sewing in the kitchen, and remained there until half-past nine, but heard nothing until one of the boys came to put out the horses.

    Joseph Lynch, one of the accused, then gave evidence. He said that when he came down the street about seven o’clock he saw in front of Bellamy’s place Thomas and Herbert Bellamy and Milton Lee. The two girls came along about 7.15, from their own place and went up the street. Thomas Bellamy said “Ettie, come here, and I will give you 3d.” The girl refused. The children went up to Ping War’s, and Thomas followed them. The girls went down to Ward’s in Smith-street, but Thomas waited at the Chinaman’s. When the girls came back Thomas Bellamy was behind them. The girls went into the gateway between Mills and Edwards. Thomas gave one of them sixpence, and the girls and Thomas Bellamy went into the shed. Milton Lee and Herbert Bellamy went with witness into the kitchen. Thomas called Herbert, and he called witness, who could see nothing when he went in, but struck a match. He saw Thomas and the girl in a certain position. Herbert took Thomas’ place, and afterwards witness went towards her, but she kicked out at him. He never touched her. Witness knew Thomas Bellamy for about two years, and saw him about once a week. They were good friends up to the time of the arrest. What Sergeant Wirrell said was not wholly correct; at a certain point he did not do as imputed to him.

    By his Honor: He was going to do exactly as the Bellamys did, only he was prevented by the girl from doing so. Mr Windeyer cross-examined at some length. Witness said he did not know the girls Phillips.

    Mrs War Hing, called by Mr Windeyer, deposed that she had seen Lynch with the girls Phillips the day of the arrest.

    Sergeant [Joseph] Wirrell, re-called, deposed that he had seen the boys Bellamy and Lynch together constantly. Corroborative evidence was given by Constable Couper.

    Mr Windeyer and Mr Sölling addressed the jury, and Mr Dawson made a reply.
His Honor, in summing up, said something had been said about people being dealt with hardly. He thought the jury and himself had been hardly dealt with in taking the case last that day. Had the Crown Prosecutor known it would last so long he was sure he would not have put it last on such a troublesome and disagreeable day. It was quite possible for the jury at that stage to acquit one or more of the prisoners. The prisoners were entitled to any doubt there was. First, had they any doubt the girl was not under the age of 14 years. After seeing her and hearing the mother they could scarcely think that she was not. This, then, dismissed the question of consent. That question in cases of indecent assault was a very material question, but here it could be entirely dismissed from their minds. The next question arose: Was there an interference with the girl, accompanied by an act of indecency? If they were there together acting with a common design, and only one assaulted the girl, the others would be responsible. But the case for the Crown went very much further than that, and held that there was an indecent assault by each one of the accused—the one following the other. The story put forward by the Crown was a most gross one indeed. A very great deal of the proof towards convicting the accused depended upon how much credence they gave to the evidence of the girl. There was no doubt there were discrepancies in her statement there that day, and her evidence at the lower court, and even in her evidence that day there were discrepancies. It was indeed hard that day to get from her any exact sequence in the events which occurred. But the matter for them to consider was: Was those discrepancies of such a nature that they discredited the most of the story told by the child—that was as to the indecent assault committed upon her. It was admitted by one of the accused that an indecent assault was committed by two persons, and that he was going to commit one only he was not allowed. If they believed that the next question was: Who are those two. After hearing the evidence of Lynch it would seem than an indecent assault or something so near it that the dividing line cannot be determined, was committed. As regards Lynch the girl went further than she did at the police court, and said he did more than stated there. The question arises if the assault was committed why should the child mention the names of the two Bellamys? If they were not there what two other people were there? As to her untruthfulness, she would be something more than a child if she did not sometimes say something which was untrue. They must admit that some children were not quite as truthful as we would like. After seeing and hearing her, did they believe her? If so, there was little room for doubt. With regard to the evidence of the younger girl, as read, they could take any discrepancies they liked causing a doubt of prisoner’s guilt, but he would ask them not to use it against the accused. Milton Lee was in a sense implicated, for he frankly admitted he was there, but, as he said, he went there to watch. As regards the defence, he did not think the jury was to come to the conclusion that this was a concocted alibi. He did not think it would be safe for any jury to disbelieve it. He wanted them to consider whether the assault could not have taken place any other time than was sworn to. They had it that the mail was due about half-past seven, that Thomas Bellamy had come into town somewhere about that time, that he went home and put up his horse after leaving his aunt, and that he afterwards went down there to tea. That was perfectly consistent with the alibi. But people could not be exact as to time, and the Crown put it to them that there was time for the offence to take place, and that the witnesses called for the defence were in the main speaking the truth, as he (his Honor) inferred they were. Mrs Thomas Bellamy said no one could have gone into the kitchen; that was something for the jury to consider. Another matter for consideration was the absence of evidence on the clothing. Perhaps it was possible for no such evidence to appear, but one would ordinarily expect to find it on the girl’s clothing or on the under-garments of the accused. It seemed to him it was quite possible there would be no such evidence, but probably there should be some. As for Lynch, he admitted the intention to commit an offence, but says he stopped short. He tried to throw the whole blame upon the other two, and it may be said with equal good-will that they tried to throw it upon him. People charged jointly often did this, which brought out evidence that would not otherwise come out, and helped the juries considerably.

    The jury retired at seven o’clock to consider their verdict, and at a quarter to nine o’clock returned into court with a verdict of “guilty.”

    Mr Windeyer made an appeal for the Bellamys to be dealt with under the First Offenders’ Act , and produced certificates of character.

    His Honor said it was well-known what his views were with regard to the Act alluded to—it was one of the most beneficial, properly applied, which the Legislature had ever passed. But the case was of too aggravated a nature to deal with it under that Act. He would say no more at present, he said; but he afterwards added that he might give them a term, and after a certain portion of it had been served allow them to petition for a license under the 409th section of the Criminal Law Amendment Act .

    The accused were remanded till Wednesday for sentence.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Maitland Daily Mercury, Tue 14 Dec 1897 3

MAITLAND QUARTER SESSIONS.
————
PRISONERS SENTENCED.

    The prisoners convicted at the Quarter Sessions East Maitland on Monday were brought up for sentence before his Honor Judge Backhouse this morning.

INDECENT ASSAULT.

    Thomas Bellamy, jun, Herbert Bellamy, and Joseph Lynch, who were convicted of indecent assault on a little girl at West Maitland, were called up.

    The prisoners had nothing to say, but Mr Waller, on behalf of the Bellamy’s [sic], asked for permission to call evidence as to the state of health of one of them.

    Thomas Bellamy, father of the boys, was sworn, and said his sons were both mail boys.

    His Honor said he was told on Monday that the younger boy was practically unable to give evidence, and that was why he had not been put in the box. He and the court were led to believe he was physically incapable. Now, it was said he was a mail boy, and ay the time the statement was made he (Mr Waller) was taking instructions from him.

    Mr Waller: He might make any statement, even to his counsel.

    His Honor: Perhaps that was the reason he was not put in the box.

    Mr Waller: That is it, your Honor; but not in the way your Honor means.

    Thomas Bellamy deposed that Herbert Bellamy was soft and subject to hysteric fits, from his infancy. He had been overcome by them only lately. Especially was this the case at night, so that another boy had always to sleep with him.

    Mr John Gillies, MP, said he had known the boys for some years, and he knew them to have a good character. On one occasion he saw the elder boy interfere to prevent an old lady from being insulted. They were not given to association with the larrikin class.

    Mr M Murray, JP, also gave them a good character for sobriety, quietness, and industry. Mr James Watson, of East Maitland, supported these remarks.

    Mr Waller asked that the boys should be dealt with as leniently as possible, and that the provisions of the First Offenders’ Act should be extended to them. Substantial bail could be given.

    Mr Sölling appealed on behalf of Lynch, whose acts had not been so gross as the others.

    His Honor asked Mr Graham, governor of the gaol, if Herbert Bellamy was capable of understanding and showed any indications of anything wrong with him. Mr Graham said he had noticed nothing. He had been informed that he was subject to fits, and had caused a couple of young prisoners to sleep with him on the two nights he was in gaol, but he had no fits.

    His Honor, addressing the prisoners, said they had been found guilty of a most gross offence, and if it were not for their youth he would pass a heavy sentence. The serious offence had been aggravated by the manner in which it had been committed. A case of this kind, he thought, was not intended to be dealt with under the First Offenders’ Act , as the offence was committed with very great aggravation. He had very carefully considered the matter, and he did not think he could quite apply the provisions of the Act. He would sentence Thomas Bellamy to twelve months with hard labour in Maitland gaol; Herbert Bellamy, nine months with the same, in Darlinghurst gaol; and Lynch, twelve months, also with hard labour, in Parramatta gaol. Lynch’s actual part in the offence was not so great, but his character was not so good as that of the others. In addition to that each of the prisoners would have to find two sureties each of £25 to be of good behaviour for two years. In default of finding proper sureties, a further term of six months each would have to be served. As he said on Monday night, it was quite possible that after a certain amount of time had been served, be would allow the prisoners to petition to get out on license.

    Mr Waller: Will you take into consideration the state of the health of Herbert Bellamy, and allow his parents to see him frequently.

    His Honor: I will alter the gaols, and have Thomas sent to Darlinghurst, and Herbert to Maitland.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Sydney Morning Herald, Fri 17 Dec 1897 4

COUNTRY NEWS.
———◦———
MAITLAND QUARTER SESSIONS.
————

West Maitland, Thursday.

    The prisoners convicted at the Maitland Quarter Sessions on Monday were brought up for sentence yesterday, before Judge Backhouse. William Richard Leer, assault, received three months’ hard labour in Maitland Gaol; William Evans, assault, four years’ penal servitude; Harry Smith and Bertie Smith, illegally using a horse, the former five months in Maitland Gaol, the latter three months in Darlinghurst Gaol; Thomas Bellamy, 19, assault, 12 months in Darlinghurst Gaol; Joseph [aka James] Lynch, 16, 12 months in Parramatta Gaol; and Herbert Bellamy, nine months in Maitland Gaol.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Singleton Argus, Sat 18 Dec 1897 5

CURRENT NEWS.
———◦———


    The prisoners convicted at the Maitland Quarter Sessions on Monday were brought up for sentence on Wednesday before Judge Backhouse.

    Joseph Lynch, 16, 12 months in Parramatta Gaol;

~ ~ ~ ~ ~


Joseph Lynch, Gaol photo sheet 6

SRNSW: NRS2397, [3/6010], Parramatta photographic description book, 1880-1930, No. 607, p. 22, R5137.


Gaol Photo Sheet - 
Transcribed Details

No. 607
Parramatta

Date when Portrait was taken: 24-3-1898

Name: Joseph Lynch

Native place: BC Morpeth

Year of birth: 1882

Arrived       Ship:
in Colony }   Year:

Trade or occupation
previous to conviction  } Laborer

Religion: R. C.

Education, degree of: R & W

Height: 5' 6¾"

Weight     On committal: 134
in lbs    } On discharge:

Colour of hair: Black

Colour of eyes: Blue


Marks or special features: J back left hand. Scar right forehead

(No. of previous Portrait ... ) 

CONVICTIONS

Convicted with Thomas and Herbert Bellamy

Where and When Offence. Sentence

West Maitland PC

Maitland Q.S

11

13

  3

12

1896

1897

Larceny

Indecent assault on a girl under 14 years old

10/- or 21 Days C

12 months L & 2 sureties in £25 each in default 6 months additional

 


 

Joseph Lynch, Ernest Knight, Percy Hestelow, Charles Waters, 1902

Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Tue 28 Oct 1902 7

MAITLAND DISTRICT
———◦———
(From our Special Representative .)
————
WEST MAITLAND POLICE COURT.

    Messrs WGB Smith, PM, Henry Crothers, and E Bowden, JsP, occupied the bench att the West Maitland Police Court yesterday.

    Joseph Lynch was charged with having at West Maitland, on the 25th inst, in company, stolen a quantity of cigarettes valued at 9s, the property of Young Kwong.

    Sergeant Brown gave evidence of arrest, and Sub-Inspector Sykes asked for a remand for eight days, as accused was concerned in another matter of a more serious nature. He had received a telegram from Newcastle reporting the arrest of three others who would be charged with accused. Accused was remanded for eight days, bail being allowed self in £40, and two sureties of £20 each, or one in £40. Mr Enright appeared for defence.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Maitland Weekly Mercury, Sat 1 Nov 1902 8

THE WEEK’S POLICE NEWS.
————

    At the West Maitland Police Court on Monday,

    Joseph Lynch (21) was charged with having, at West Maitland, on the 25th instant, in company, stolen a quantity of cigarettes, valued at 9s, the property of Young Kwong.—
    Sergeant Brown and Senior-Constable Dunshea had arrested Lynch at his residence, on Sunday morning.—
    Sub-Inspector Sykes said he had received word from Newcastle of the arrest of three other men, believed to be concerned in the same matter, and he asked for the remand of Lynch for eight days, for the production of evidence. Mr WJ Enright, who appeared for accused, offered no objection, and the remand was granted. Bail was allowed—self in £40, and two sureties of £20, or one in £40.

    On Tuesday morning, Ernest Knight, alias James Thompson, Percy Hestelow, and Charles Waters, on remand from Newcastle, were charged with having, in company, at West Maitland, on the night of the 25th instant, or the morning of the 26th instant, broken and entered the store of War Lee, and stolen therein a purse containing six £1 notes, a half-sovereign, and 4s in silver; also 6lbs or 7 lbs of tobacco, two boxes containing forty or fifty packets of cigarettes, a quantity of tinned fruit, and two men’s woollen shirts, and one metal clock, the property of War Lee, valued at £10. They were further charged with stealing in company, one umbrella, the property of Ah Sam; with stealing one umbrella the property of Foo Lum; and with stealing, in company, a quantity of cigarettes, the property of Young Kwong, valued at 9s.—Accused were remanded till November 3. Bail was allowed, self in £40 each, two sureties of £20 each, or one in £40.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Maitland Daily Mercury, Mon 3 Nov 1902 9

WEST MAITLAND POLICE COURT.
————
Monday, November 3.
(Before Messrs WB Smith, PM, and
E Bowden, JP.)


    ALLEGED BREAKING, ENTERING, AND STEALING.—Ernest Knight, alias James Thompson, on remand, and Joseph Lynch, Percy Hestelow, and Charles Waters, on bail, were charged with having in company, at West Maitland, on the night of the 25th October, or the morning of October 26, broken and entered the store of War Lee, and stolen therein goods and money to the value of £10. Mr WJ Enright appeared for accused. On the application of Sub-Inspector Sykes, the accused were remanded till Wednesday. Bail was allowed each accused—self £100, and two sureties of £50 each, or one in £100.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Tue 4 Nov 1902 10

MAITLAND DISTRICT
———◦———
(From our Special Representative.)
————

WEST MAITLAND POLICE COURT.

    Messrs WGR Smith, PM, and E Bowden, JP, occupied the Bench at the West Maitland Police Court yesterday.

    The lads Ernest Knight, Joseph Lynch, Percy Hestelow, and Charles Waters, concerned in the charge of breaking and entering at War Lee’s store, were again remanded until Wednesday, bail being allowed, each in £100, with two sureties in £50 each, or one in £100. Mr WJ Enright appeared for the accused.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Maitland Daily Mercury, Wed 5 Nov 1902 11

WEST MAITLAND POLICE COURT.
————
Tuesday, November 4.
(Before Messrs WB Smith, PM and
E Bowden, JP.)

Wednesday, November 5.
(Before Mr WB Smith, PM.)


    ALLEGED BREAKING AND ENTERING AND STEALING.—Joseph Lynch (21), carter, Ernest Knight, alias James Thompson (26) blacksmith, Percy Hestelow (19), miner, and Charles Waters (19), saddler, were charged with having, in company, at West Maitland, on the 25th October, stolen a quantity of cigarettes, valued at 9s, the property of Young Yun, and two umbrellas, the property of Ah Sam and Foo Lum. Sub-Inspector Sykes conducted the prosecution. Mr WJ Enright appeared for accused.—

    Young Yun (who gave his evidence through an interpreter) was sworn by the blowing out of a match. He said he was a storekeeper, residing in Park-street, West Maitland. The front door was locked every knight at six o’clock. He could not identify any of the accused as having been in his shop on the night of Saturday, Oct 25. Between 10.30 and 11 pm, a tall young man, of fair complexion, wearing a white straw hat, entered the shop. Lynch resembled that man. Two or three other young men were ast the side door at that time. The tall man asked for some cigarettes, but Young refused to serve him, as it was after ten o’clock. The man took some Cameo cigarettes out of Young’s hand, then threw them on the floor, and swore. The Chinaman told him to go out; and he went. Young went into the domino room (where several Chinamen were playing dominoes) for about five minutes. On returning, he saw they were near a small table in the outer room. Another man was standing near the door and two were outside. Thirty-six packets of Vanity Fair cigarettes were missing from behind the counter. Two umbrellas were also missing from the outer room. A woman named Winnie Allen was in the shop when the man came to buy the cigarettes.—

    Foo Lum, market gardener had gone to Young Yun’s place that night. He had an umbrella—one of those produced—and left it in the outer room. It was worth 5s 6d. He saw three men at the place that night—he could not identify them again—and afterwards missed his umbrella. He heard Young Yun complaining of losing some cigarettes.—

    To Mr Enright: He saw no woman in the dining-room.—

    Ah Sam, a hawker, had also lost an umbrella from the same room; he did think the second one produced was his. He had seen an Englishman enter the shop, and had heard others speaking outside. He was lying on a bed in the outer room; but was very tired, and was asleep most of the time.—

    Kwong Duk, market gardener, who was at the shop on the same night,, had seen Lynch (whom he identified) at the door of the shop, and told accused to go out.—

Vanity Fair cigarettes advertisement. Source: The Arrow, (Sydney, NSW), Sat 12 Apr 1902, p. 8. Reproduction: Peter de Waal
Vanity Fair cigarettes advertisement. Source: The Arrow,
(Sydney, NSW), Sat 12 Apr 1902, p. 8.
Reproduction: Peter de Waal

    Sergeant Hickey, of Newcastle, had seen the accused Knight, Hestelow, and Waters, at a boarding-house in Scott-street, early on the morning of October 27. Knight gave the name of Thompson, and Waters that of Dawson. When told that they were to be arrested for stealing goods and money, Knight said, “I wish we had the money; we would not be here now.” Asked who owned the two umbrellas, found between the wall and Knight’s bed, the latter said, “We do.” The other two did not deny this. (Mr Enright said this would not be evidence against Waters and Hestelow). There were two tin trunks in the room, and they were claimed by the party. The larger box (on which was the name “C Dawson”) contained 17 packets of Vanity Fair cigarettes.—

    Sergeant Brown and Senior-Constable Dunshea went to the Currency Lass Hotel, West Maitland, about 10.20 on the morning of October 26. They saw Lynch in the back parlour. The sergeant called him out, and asked him where he had been the previous night, Lynch said, “I was here all night, I can get plenty to prove it.” He denied being at Louth Park. The police entered Lynch’s residence, and in a tea-tin in a back-room found 17 packets of Vanity Fair cigarettes. Lynch said he had bought them, “up the road—about a week ago.” in a front room, behind a fire screen, the sergeant found a quantity of pieces of Vanity Fair cigarette packets. At the lock up, Lynch made no reply to the charge. On the evening of October 27, Sergeant Brown saw Waters in the West Maitland lock up. After being cautioned, Waters admitted owning the large trunk, but said that all the contents did not belong to him. Accused declined to say if he had been at Louth Park on the Saturday night, or if he had entered a Chinese store there. Hestelow was equally reticent. Sergeant Brown proddced [sic] a plan of Young Yun’s store. There was an opening as large as a doorway opposite Park-street but no door. The place was about 200 yards from War Lee’s shop—both were in Park-street. In answer to Mr Enright, the Sergeant said Young Yun kept open till ten o’clock on Saturday nights. The shop was lighted by a large kerosene lamp. The shop had to be entered, after dark, through a sleeping room, which was lighted by candles. Prior to this matter the Sergeant had nothing against Waters and Hestelow.

    War Lee, a storekeeper carrying on business at Louth Park, saw Lynch and Waters go into Young Yun’s house on Saturday night week, while two other remained outside. That was half-past ten or eleven. Lynch went into the domino room and sat down beside witness some time. He only spoke to witness while he was there. Waters went into the shop, and came in and out a good many times. Lynch was in the domino room when Young Yun came in on one occasion. Witness had identified Lynch on Sunday and Waters on Monday.—

    To Mr Enright: He identified the man in the police yard himself. The constable did not tell him the man he wanted picked out. He had been in gaol for stealing at Granville, and was in East Maitland Gaol for three months for being connected with a gambling house at Newcastle. He had been before the court for passing a valueless cheque at Parramatta, and received a sentence of nine months, but was released under the First Offenders’ Act . Waters came in when witness was talking to Lynch.

    To Sub-Inspector Sykes: Since being released from gaol he had never been before the court before. He did a business of between £30 and £40 a week.—

    Winifred Allen lived with Ah Cud at Louth Park. Witness was twenty-four years of age. She was in Young Yun’s house on Saturday night week. Lynch and Waters came into the house while she was there. Both accused came into the shop. Young Yun was behind the counter, and served Lynch with a packet of Vanity Fair cigarettes, but he refused them, and threw them back on the counter. Lynch then left the shop. Waters subsequently came in and asked for a packet of Cameos. Waters also threw the packet back on to the counter. Both men then went into the domino room. Young Yun followed them out, and witness accompanied him. Witness saw Waters standing near an umbrella in the next room. Another man was also present. Neither of the other accused were in the room. Witness heard another person outside whistling and the others then joined him. After Young Yun left the domino room he went back into the shop. Witness did not see them again that night. She afterwards identified the men at the Courthouse. Prior to seeing Lynch and Waters at Louth Park she saw them at the Currency Lass Hotel.

    To the PM: Lynch was not very sober.

    To Mr Enright: Accused went out of the shop before witness did. She did not see them taking anything. She also left the domino room before accused. From the time she left the domino room, and when she returned to the room behind the shop she did not hear anybody go into the shop afterwards except Young Yun.—

    Thomas Randall was in company with the accused on the night of the 25th in Devonshire-street. Witness left the accused at the gate on the park; one of them said they were going to the gardens. He saw Knight about a quarter to twelve o’clock that night at the Park gates who said he had bought two ginghams. Witness identified the property produced. Knight gave them to him to take home and said he would call for them next morning. Witness took them. On the following morning he saw Hestelow and Waters at Mr Waters’ residence. They went to the Currency Lass Hotel where he saw Knight and Lynch. The latter was arrested by Sergeant Brown. The other accused admitted being with Lynch on the night in question at the Chinese gardens. They did not tell him they were at any particular house. (The PM allowed witness to be dealt with as a hostile witness.) One of them told witness that they had been at the Chinaman’s and had taken some cigarettes, sardines, and other articles, and as Lynch had been taken, that they would clear out. He remembered making a written statement to the constable to that effect. Hestelow joined the train at High-street, and the others got in at Victoria-street, intending to go to Newcastle.—

    To the PM: He put the umbrellas with the other luggage at Knight’s request.—

    To the Sub-Inspector: The accused told witness that they had about a dozen packets of cigarettes. Witness heard one of the accused say that Lynch had been pinched for taking goods, and that they were with him. He had heard Lynch’s sister say that the police had found some cigarettes under the bed.

    To Mr Enright: He was aware that Hestelow and Waters contemplated leaving the town for the purpose of looking for work.—

    This was the case for the prosecution.—

    Each of the accused, who elected to be summarily dealt with, pleaded not guilty.—

    Knight admitted being down near the gardens. But knew nothing about the umbrellas and knew nothing of what took [text missing here in original]. Hestelow was fined £4, together with £1 7s 6d interpreter’s and witness’ expenses, in default two months’ hard labour. Waters was similarly dealt with. A fortnight was allowed in which to pay the fine.—

    The charge against the same accused of breaking and entering the store of War Lee and stealing therein six £1 notes, a half-a-sovereign, and 4s in silver, together with a quantity of tobacco, cigarettes, tinned fruit, and wearing apparel, valued all at £10, was withdrawn.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Thu 6 Nov 1902 12

MAITLAND DISTRICT
———◦———
(From our Special Representative.)
————

WEST MAITLAND POLICE COURT.

    At the West Maitland Police Court yesterday, before Mr WGB Smith, PM, four young men, Ernest Knight, 26, Joseph Lynch, 21, Percy Hestelow, 19, and Charles Waters, 19, were charged—(1) with the larceny of one umbrella, the property of Ah Sam; (2) with the larceny of one umbrella, the property of Foo Lum; (3) with the larceny of a quantity cigarettes the property of Young Yun; and also that the did, at West Maitland on the 25th or 26th October, break and enter the store of War Lee, and steal therein one purse, six one-pond notes , 1 half-sovereign, 6 or 7 lbs of tobacco, 40 or 50 packets of cigarettes, a quantity of tinned fruit, two shirts, and one metal clock, the property of War Lee, and valued at £10. Sub-Inspector Sykes appeared for the prosecution, and Mr WJ Enright for the defence. The first three cases were tried together. The evidence showed that the four accused were seen in the store of Young Yun on the night of the 25th October. Lynch and Watters [sic] were in the shop, and after their departure Young Yun missed the cigarettes and two umbrellas, owned by Ah Sam and Foo Lun. The umbrellas were found in possession of the three accused, Knight, Watters, and Hestelow,, and quantities of cigarettes were found in possession of the four accused. At the close of the case for the prosecution, the four accused elected to be summarily dealt with, and made statements from the dock denying their guilt. The PM found the four accused guilty. Knight had a long record and a bad one, and Lynch also had a record. He could not dealt with them by fines. Knight was sentenced to six months’ hard labour, and Lynch to four months’ hard labour. Hestelow and Watters were each fined £4, with £1 10s costs, in default two months’ hard labour. Sub-Inspector Sykes then announced that in the case of alleged breaking and entering the police had no evidence to offer, and he would, with the permission of the bench, withdraw the case. The PM consented, and the case was withdrawn.

 


 

James Brennan, 1906

The Dubbo Liberal and Macquarie Advocate, Wed 25 Jul 1906 13

DUBBO QUARTER SESSIONS.
————
Tuesday, July 24.
(Before Judge Docker.)

    Mr GH Taylor, Deputy Sheriff; Mr LA McDougal, Clerk of Arraigns.
    Mr Dawson was Crown Prosecutor.

ALLEGED BREAKING AND ENTERING.

    James Brennan pleaded not guilty to the charge of breaking and entering the dwelling of Charles Wynn, at Quambone, on the 2nd of June last.

    The prisoner freely exercised his right of challenge.

    Samuel Wynn, a labourer, living with his father at Quambone, said that he knew the prisoner whom he saw on the 2nd of June in the billiard room connected with his father’s hotel. This would be about six in the evening. Witness went to a ball, and on his return about midnight he saw the accused in a bedroom off the kitchen. He recognised the accused whom he saw strike a match. Witness called a man named Jimmy Lovell, who came to the room, and accused then came out and said “is that you Jimmy Lovell?” Lovell said “yes.” Witness then went to his own bedroom. He did not see Brennan any more that night. He next saw him at the police court.

    To prisoner: He did not remember seeing accused on the Sunday morning, and did not give different evidence at Quambone Court.

    To His Honor: He did not see accused in the kitchen.

    James Lovett deposed that he was stopping at the Quambone Hotel. On the night of the 2nd June he saw some one in the kitchen with a light. This was at the back of the hotel. Prisoner was walking about, and went to the back door and spoke to witness. He said that he had been in the kitchen having a feed. He asked witness to have a drink, and witness told him to go away, which he appeared to do. He saw accused afterwards at the Police Court. At the Police Court he told prisoner that when he saw him at the hotel he appeared to be drunk.

    Charles Wynn stated that he was the licensee of the Quambone Hotel. He knew Brennan, who had stayed at the hotel on the night of the 1st June. He paid him. He did not see the accused at his hotel on the night of the 2nd. His place was shut up, and all lights out at half-past 10. There were three doors leading from the kitchen, and all were secure. Next morning he found the catch of the window had been unfastened. It could be done through a broken pane of glass. There was a form outside the window and footprints in the sand under the window. Brennan had no authority to be in the room. He could not say that he missed anything.

    To prisoner:—Accused had had meals at the hotel several times previously.

    Senior-Constable Gannon deposed to the arrest of the accused.

    His Honor having summed up, the jury retired. On their return into court they gave a verdict of guilty, and the prisoner was remanded for sentence.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Dubbo Liberal and Macquarie Advocate, Sat 28 Jul 1906 14

DUBBO QUARTER SESSIONS.
————
Tuesday, July 24.
(Before his Honor Judge Docker).

    The following cases were dealt with after we went to press with last issue:—

Wednesday, July 25.

————
CONGRATULATIONS.

    Before proceeding with the next case His Honor said that as he understood that it was the last one on the list he had pleasure in discharging the rest of the jurymen from further attendance. He said in doing so he had to congratulate the district that out of the long list of ten accused persons not one of them had come from the Dubbo district. Nearly all the cases had come from other Courts, and had been merely brought for trial to Dubbo for convenience, and that they should not be kept waiting. In the ordinary way they would have gone to Coonamble and Cobar, and had no connection with Dubbo, and he had, therefore, to congratulate the Dubbo district upon its freedom from crime.

————

    (The continuation of Quarter Sessions and sentences appears on next page.)

QUARTER SESSIONS.
————
(Continued from previous page.)
Wednesday, July 25.

————
Thursday, July 26.
SENTENCES.

    His Honor passed sentences as under:—

    James Brennan, breaking and entering. Several convictions were put in. He was awarded two years’ imprisonment in Bathurst gaol.

 


 

Joseph Lynch, 1908

The Maitland Daily Mercury, Mon 15 Jun 1908 15

WEST MAITLAND POLICE COURT.
———◦———
Monday, June 15.
————

    The bench at the West Maitland Police Sourt [sic] this morning was occupied by Mr TH Wilkinson, PM.

ILLEGALLY ON PREMISES.

    Joseph Lynch on remand was charged with having been found on the Bank of Australasia premises for an unlawful purpose on the 6th instant.—

    Sergeant Wensor conducted the prosecution, and Mr Jas HF Waller appeared for the defence.

    Senior-constable Hickey deposed that at about 11.55 pm on the 6th instant he was on duty in High-street near Elgin-street, when he saw two men standing near the side entrance of the Bank of Australasia premises. Constable Langsford then immediately came on the scene. Witness went in a small gate leading into the yard of the Bank of Australasia and saw about 30 yards ahead a moving light in the coach-house. Witness and Constable Langsford approached the light, and saw accused there. A coat was lying on the ground. When asked what he was doing there, accused replied, “I am looking for a groom named Dawson.” The two men then came up and said, “What is the charge; what are you locking him up for?” When they took him out in the street accused resisted, and said, “Now, draw your l – — squirts.” They then knocked him down and handcuffed him.—

    To Mr Waller: Constable Woodlands had told witness that he had seen accused and another man come out from the back of Kerr’s the same night, and that he had also seen him at the back of Baker’s, but said nothing about him being drunk.—

    To the Police Magistrate: Accused evidently heard them coming, as when they got up within two or three yards of accused the light went out. There was a quantity of harness and lamps in the coach-house.

    Joseph Augustus Moylan, a messenger employed at the Bank of Australasia, stated that there was nobody of the name of Dawson at the bank. The small gate was usually locked, but he could not say whether it was locked, that night. Accused had no right on the premises. The manager of the bank was away in Sydney at the time. He left the coat hanging upon the door of the coach-house.

    Constable [William Henry] Langsford who corroborated the evidence given by Senior-constable Hickey, stated that accused struggled violently, and had to be knocked down, and handcuffed. He also called on the other men to help him.

    Constable [Thomas] Woodlands deposed to having seen accused last Saturday night near the Town Hall, in the presence of two other men. One of them was making use of bad language. Witness told them too move on. That was about 10.30 o’clock. Later, at 11 o’clock, he saw them around Baker’s corner standing, talking. He afterwards saw them come up High-street, as far as the Post Office.—

    To the Police Magistrate: Accused seemed to be sober.

    This was the case for the prosecution.

    Robert Quine, a member of the re-laying gang, employed on the Great Northern railway near Farley, deposed that accused was also engaged there. Witness, accused and a man named Waldron, also one of the gang, were in town on the Saturday night in question. They were at the Exchange Hotel about closing time, and Mrs Nowland refused to serve accused because he had had too much. On the way to the railway, when they were going down Elgin-street, accused went into the yard where he was found to relieve himself. Witness was almost going in, too, thinking it was an hotel.—

    To Sergeant Wensor: Accused was in the yard about two minutes when the police arrived. Witness and Waldron were not watching while accused went into the yard.

    William Waldron, a companion of the accused, Edward Paul Nowland, licensee of the Exchange Hotel, and Michael Doherty also gave evidence regarding accused’s condition. Each described him as being drunk.

    Sergeant [William Edwin] Wensor, called by the Police Magistrate, stated that he was in the lockup when accused was brought in. He regarded accused as being sober. He was able to speak rationally. He could see that he had had some drink, and told him that he would get into trouble if he did not keep away from drink. Accused, who had been previously convicted, was trying to pull himself together.

    Accused [Joseph Lynch] stated that he was drunk at the time, and did not know what he was doing.

    Mr Walker asked the bench to take into consideration the fact that accused was trying to pull himself together, but the Police Magistrate said he could not find any extenuating circumstances, unfortunately, and sentenced accused to six months’ imprisonment, with hard labour, in Maitland Gaol.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~


James Brennan, Gaol photo sheet 16

16 SRNSW: NRS1998, [3/13076], Bathurst Photograph description books, 1874-1930, No. 1633, p. 354, R5091.


Gaol Photo Sheet - 
Transcribed Details

No. 1633
Bathurst

Date when Portrait was taken: 7-11-1906

Name: James Brennan
(aka Joseph Lynch)

Native place: Maitland

Year of birth: 28/2/1882

Arrived       Ship:
in Colony }   Year:

Trade or occupation
previous to conviction  } Labourer

Religion: RC

Education, degree of: R & W

Height: 5' 11"

Weight     On committal: 193 lbs
in lbs     } On discharge:

Colour of hair: Brown

Colour of eyes: Blue


Marks or special features: ½ arm & hand – scroll. Left arm: inside roll Jou back of left hand, Anchor on left arm. Several moles on back (II). Scar on back of head, scar on right side of head Eye tooth top right jaw missing. Scar on left side left calf.

(No. of previous Portrait .. 607 Parramatta)

CONVICTIONS

Where and When Offence. Sentence

Maitland Q.S


West Maitland PC

Dubbo Q.S






Maitland PC

Glen Innes PC
ditto

Coonabarabran PC

13


5

24






15

13
13

5

12


11

7






6

4
4

10

1897


1902

1906






1908

1909
1909

1909

Indecent assault on a girl under 14

Discharged by license 25/6/1898

Steal in company

Breaking and entering a dwelling house with intent to steal

Judge Docker Bathurst 06.225
31-7-1906 to 18-4-1808
Conduct – Good with exceptions.
Discharged from Bathurst Gaol 16-4-1908 By remission

Found on enclosed premises

Resist police
Indecent language

Wilfully + obscenely expose his person

All papers sent N Maulan 18/6/1908 please fill in Glen Innes offences and Tamworth (crimes ?) before returning [initial illegible]

12 months HL – two sureties in p25
to be of good behaviour for 2 years
or serve further 6 months

4 months HL

2 years HL






6 months HL

£10 or 4 months HL
£3 or 2 months HL     |  Concurrent

3 months H.L.

 


 

James Brennan, 1913


Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Wed 21 May 1913
17

NEWCASTLE POLICE COURT.
———◦———
(Before Mr TCK McKell, SM.)
————
Tuesday, May 20.
————

A BAD RECORD.

    James Brennan (30), a miner, was charged with having behaved in an improper manner in Hunter-street, Newcastle, on May 19. Evidence as to his conduct was given by Constable J Shaw, and by two civilians. Accused, from the witness box, said the statement as to his misbehaving himself was “a lie.” Cross-examined by Sub-inspector [Charles Forbes] McHardy, he admitted that there were previous convictions against him. He did not remember whether he had been once convicted at the Maitland Quarter Sessions, and sentenced to twelve months’ hard labour for an offence against a girl.

    Mr McKell: But did you serve the sentence? You would remember that, surely. The accused did not reply. Further cross-examined by Sub-inspector McHardy, he admitted that there were convictions against him for stealing. He was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment, with hard labour.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~


James Brennan, Gaol photo sheet 18

RNSW: NRS2397, [3/6012], Parramatta photographic description book, 1909-1914, No. 1235, p. 165, R5138.


Gaol Photo Sheet - 
Transcribed Details

No. 1235
Parramatta

Date when Portrait was taken: 10-10-1912

Name: James Lynch
(aka Joseph Brennan, Joseph Lynch,
Joseph James Barton, James Smith, Robert Brett)

Native place: Maitland NSW

Year of birth: 20th February 1884

Arrived       Ship:
in Colony }   Year:

Trade or occupation
previous to conviction  } Miner

Religion: R. C.

Education, degree of: R & W

Height: 5' 11"

Weight     On committal: 13st 11lb
in lbs     } On discharge:

Colour of hair: Brown

Colour of eyes: Blue


Marks or special features: Small mole on right arm. J back left hand anchor left arm. Moles on back of back of head & right side one tooth right jaw missing scar left side left calf

(No. of previous Portrait .. 607 Parramatta, 1633 Bathurst)

CONVICTIONS

Where and When Offence. Sentence

Maitland PC

Maitland Q.S

Maitland PC

Stanthorpe PC Qld
ditto

Dubbo Q.S


Glen Innes PC

Narromine PC

W Maitland PC

Glen Innes PC
ditto

Coonabarabran PC

Warwick PC Qld
ditto

Lindley PC Qld 

Warwick PC Qld

Boggabri PC

Central PC

Bulli PC
ditto

Central PC

Newcastle PC

13

13

  5

29
29

24

23

  7

15

13
13

  5

  3
  3

  9

16

13

29

  5
  5

14

20

  3

12

11

10
10

  7

  5

  4

  6

  4
  4

10

  5
  5

  1

  3

  9

  4

  7
  7

12

  5

1896

1897

1902

1904
1904

1906

1905

1906

1908

1909
1909

1909

1910
1910

1911

1911

1911

1912

1912
1912

1912

1913

Larceny

Indecent assault on a girl
 

Stealing in Company

Obscene language
Stealing

Break & enter a dwelling house with intent to steal

Stealing

Trespass on Railway premises

Found on enclosed premises

Expose person
Indecent language

Wilful & Indecent exposure

Obscene exposure
Hinder Police in execution of duty

Obscene language 3 charges

Obscene exposure

Stealing

ditto

Indecent language
Indecent exposure

Indecent exposure

Expose person

10/- or 21 days

12 months HL & sureties in default
further 6 months HL

£2 or 4 months HL

£2 or 1 month HL
£1 or 14 days HL  | Concurrent

2 years HL

40/- or 21 days HL

3 days HL

6 months HL

£10 or 4 months HL
£5 or 2 months HL   | Concurrent

3 months HL

4 months HL
1 month HL

£2-10-0 on each charge. Concurrent

6 months HL

2 months HL

£3 or 1 month HL

£3 or 1 month HL
6 months HL         | Concurrent

6 months HL

6 months HL

 


1     The Maitland Daily Mercury, Mon 13 Dec 1897, p. 2. Emphasis added.

2     The Maitland Daily Mercury, Tue 14 Dec 1897, p. 2. Emphasis added.

3     The Maitland Daily Mercury, Tue 14 Dec 1897, p. 2. Emphasis added.

4     The Sydney Morning Herald, Fri 17 Dec 1897, p. 8. Emphasis added.

5     Singleton Argus, Sat 18 Dec 1897, p. 6.

6     SRNSW: NRS2397, [3/6010], Parramatta photographic description book, 1880-1930, No. 607, p. 22, R5137.

7     Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Tue 28 Oct 1902, p. 6. Emphasis added.

8     The Maitland Weekly Mercury, Sat 1 Nov 1902, p. 8.

9     The Maitland Daily Mercury, Mon 3 Nov 1902, p. 2.

10   Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Tue 4 Nov 1902, p. 6. Emphasis added.

11   The Maitland Daily Mercury, Wed 5 Nov 1902, p. 2. Emphasis added.

12   Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Thu 6 Nov 1902, p. 6.

13   The Dubbo Liberal and Macquarie Advocate, Wed 25 Jul 1906, p. 2. Emphasis added.

14   The Dubbo Liberal and Macquarie Advocate, Sat 28 Jul 1906, pp. 3, 4.

15   The Maitland Daily Mercury, Mon 15 Jun 1908 p. 2. Emphasis added.

16   SRNSW: NRS1998, [3/13076], Bathurst Photograph description books, 1874-1930, No. 1633, p. 354, R5091.

17   Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Wed 21 May 1913, p. 11. Emphasis added.

18   SRNSW: NRS2397, [3/6012], Parramatta photographic description book, 1909-1914, No. 1235, p. 165, R5138.