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
1900, Charles Werner - Unfit For Publication
Text Size

 

 

Charles Werner, 1882

Below also see: Charles Werner, 1891,
Charles Werner, 1900,
Charles Borromee Werner, 1901 – Indecent assault
Louis Joseph Maurice Charles de Viernietz, 1904 – Indecent assault
Charles Werner, 1915,
Charles Borolee, 1915

 

South Australian Weekly Chronicle, Sat 25 Mar 1882 1

GLADSTONE CIRCUIT COURT.
————
(By Telegraph.)
(From our own Correspondent.)

Gladstone, March 24.

    The Circuit Court was opened this Morning, Mr Justice Boucaut presiding. There were seventeen cases on the calendar.

    Charles Werner, who pleaded not guilty to forgery at Petersburg, was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. In passing sentence the judge spoke in severe terms of prisoner’s conduct while in gaol, and also said he was a dangerous fellow.

 


 
Charles Werner, 1891

South Australian Register, Wed 21 Jan 1891 2

POLICE COURTS.


    PORT ADELAIDE:—Tuesday, January 20.

(Before Mr J Formby, SM.)

    Charles Werner was charged on the information of James Hood, proprietor of the Commercial Hotel, with stealing various articles of jewellery and clothing to the value of £4 of January 7. Adjourned hearing from January 13. The property had been traced to the prisoner, who had disposed of a portion to a pawnbroker. Connie Burgoyne, in the employ of the informant, gave evidence as to finding some of the stolen coins in her room. The coins were found under the carpet. Committed for trial, bail being refused.

    Charles Werner was then charged on the information of Sub-Inspector Doyle with stealing articles to the value of £3 and money to the amount of £1 10s on or about January 8. One of the missing articles, a watch, was found in prisoner’s possession. Remanded for fifteen days.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

South Australian Chronicle, Sat 24 Jan 1891 3

Tuesday, January 20.
Before Mr J Formby, SM.)

    Charles Werner was charged with stealing articles of jewellery of the value of £4, the property of Jas T Hood, landlord of the Commercial Hotel, Port Adelaide, on January 7. Adjourned hearing from January 13. Connie Burgoyne stated that the defendant called at her house on January 9. He stopped there all night, and two days after his departure she found two coins secreted under the carpet in the bedroom that he had occupied. The coins were similar to those described by Mr Hood. Remanded till February 3.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

South Australian Register, Thu 5 Feb 1891 4

POLICE COURTS.


    PORT ADELAIDE:—Wednesday, February 4.

(Before Mr J Formby, SM.)

    Charles Werner was charged, on information of Edward Turner, with assaulting him at Port Adelaide on February 3. Mr R Cruickshank appeared for the defendant. A dismissal was granted on the non-appearance of the informant. Charles Werner appeared on remand, charged with stealing a watch belonging to Mrs Fox, and other articles, together with money to the amount of £1 10s, on or about January 8. Thomas Mason identified the watch as the property of Mrs Fox. Werner, who conducted his own case, was committed for trial.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

South Australian Chronicle, Sat 14 Feb 1891 5

POLICE COURT—PORT ADELAIDE
Wednesday, February 4.
(Before Mr J Formby, SM.)

    Charles Werner was charged on remand with being in unlawful possession of a watch. Thomas Mason, watchmaker, identified the watch found in the possession of the defendant as being the property of Mrs Fox. Mr William Crooks stated that the watch was similar to one lost by Mrs Fox, but he could not positively swear to it. Committed for trial.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

South Australian Register, Wed 18 Feb 1891 6

SUPREME COURT—CRIMINAL
SITTINGS.
Tuesday, February 17.
(Before His Honor Mr Justice Bundey.)

STEALING.

    Charles Werner (38) was charged with stealing a silver brooch, bracelet, watch, and other jewellery, value about £4, property of JT Hood, at Port Adelaide, on January 7. Mr Melrose for the defence. The accused went to prosecutor’s hotel, the Commercial, and secured a room. The articles were missed afterwards from a room almost adjoining. Amongst the trinkets were some peculiar coins; and these were amongst some jewellery prisoner disposed of to a pawnbroker. Evidence was called for the defence to show that the prisoner did not take the things, but obtained them secondhand. Mr Melrose made an earnest appeal on behalf of the prisoner, pointing out the weak points in the evidence against him, and examined the man on oats. He said he was a carpenter and joiner, and had been at Broken Hill, previous to which he was at Balaklava. He admitted that he was intoxicated when he went to the hotel, where he had more drinks—according to his purse. He found afterwards that he had some things that he did not have before, and which he got for £2 10s from fair haired man whose name he could not give. A man sold him a watch (and other articles) which he wore, but some of the things he gave away. Under cross-examination he was asked whether he had been in the stockade, but Mr Melrose objected. His Honor, however, on English authorities ruled that as the prisoner had been practically put in the box on his character it was competent for the Crown prosecutor to question in the way he was doing. He ruled thus with some sympathy for Mr Melrose’s objection, because he felt that it was rather hard to press the accused to admit delinquencies of an old date. Prisoner admitted a conviction for forging, upon a cheque, the name of a man who owed him money, and also to another cheque. He sold the jewellery to a pawnbroker, and did not pawn them, and he gave some to a girl as a present. The Jury retired at 3.30 and found the prisoner guilty, and His Honor, in passing sentence, remarked that prisoner was a man whop had not profited by past experience. He had been convicted of larceny and sentenced to seven months’ imprisonment, and he had also served seven years for forgery. He was a young man yet, with time to amend his ways, and he would give him another opportunity for amendment by passing upon him a comparatively lenient sentence. Four years’ hard labour. Another case against the prisoner was not proceeded with.

 


 
Charles Werner, 1900


Barrier Miner, Wed 15 Aug 1900
7

THE QUARTER SESSIONS.
————

Broken Hill gaol, n.d. Photo ID: SRNSW 4346_a020_a020000029.jpg
Broken Hill gaol, n.d. Photo ID: SRNSW 4346_a020_a020000029.jpg

A DOUBLE-BARRELLED “BARBER.”

    Horace Ritchie, who follows the occupation of a barber in a double sense, was brought up for sentence. The particular bit of “barbering” that got him into trouble was the dexterous removal from under the owner’s nose, as it were, of a portmanteau from the passage of the Freemason’s Hotel. Ritchie admitted that he had “received” the portmanteau, and spoke of a hawker who had sold it to him cheap. Four previous convictions were proved against him. His Honor sentenced him to two years’ imprisonment with hard labor in the Broken Hill gaol.

CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE. 

    Charles Werner, a foreigner, was charged with maliciously wounding Joseph Hobby. The case for the Crown was that on the night of Saturday, June 2, Hobby had a quarrel with a man named Kane, and the two went on to the Proprietary lease to fight. Several men were gathered round, and one of these, while the two contestants were “in holts,” stepped up and stabbed Hobby in the back. Hobby swore that he saw Werner strike the blow, and his testimony was partially borne out by some of the spectators of the fight. On the other hand, three of the spectators swore that they had witnessed the fight from start to finish and never saw Werner interfere in any way. His Honor summed up rather in favor of the accused, and the jury brought in a verdict of not guilty.

MISAPPROPRIATING BICYCLES.

    Two well-dressed youths, Frank Copley and Percy Clark, were charged with stealing two bicycles, the property of Oswald Emil Thomas. They at first pleaded not guilty, but subsequently, on the advice of Mr JR Edwards, and with the concurrence of his Honor, they pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of fraudulently retaining the bicycles. They were each sentenced to two months’ imprisonment, his Honor ordering that they were to be immediately released on paying £4 5s each as compensation to Thomas.

 

A FOOLISH JOKE.

    Frank Copley, one of the accused in the previous case, was charged with stealing a gold ring, the property of Sophia Blows. The case for the Crown was simply that accused asked to see the ring, and when Miss Blows took it off her finger and handed it to him he put it on his own finger and walked away. These facts were admitted, and Mr JR Edwards, who appeared for the accused, told the jury that the whole affair was only a boyish “lark.” the jury accepted this view and acquitted the accused.

 


 
Charles Borromee Werner, 1901


Depositions for Charles Borromee Werner 1 Apr 1901 Broken Hill trial
8


(a) Town.

Letter from Bench of Magistrates at (a) Broken Hill

 

transmitting Depositions

(b) Name in full of accused.

in the case Regina v(b) Charles Borromee Werner

(c) Offence.

(c) Indecent Assault

(d) Town.

Police Office(d) Broken Hill

 

10th December 1900 

 

Sir,
I have the honor, by direction of the Bench of Magistrates,
to transmit herewith the Depositions, and other documents in the

(e) Name of accused

case of (e) Charles Borromee Werner

(f) “His” or “her”

who has been committed to take (f) his

(g) “Circuit Court,” or 
“Quarter Sessions.”

trial at the (g) Quarter Sessions

to be held at (h) Broken Hill

on Monday

(h) Town where Court 
to be held.

the 10th day of December 189 1900

The accused is (i) Confined in the Gaol at Broken Hill

(i) “Is confined in the 
Gaol at …,” or “has been admitted to bail” (with full particulars as to sureties, addresses, occupations, and amounts, as set out in Recognizance.)

(k) As in Recognizance, both for Crown and defence, specifying also what witnesses gave evidence but were not bound over, with reason for omission.

The Witnesses bound over are (k) Morton Gibson of Broken Hill, Police Constable; William Russell of Broken Hill, dairyman; Sydney Charles Day, Broken Hill, furniture remover was bound over for the appearance of his Son Sydney Lyndhurst Day; George Pike of Broken Hill, schoolboy was not bound over, the being no surety available. All for prosecution.

 

(l) Short description to enable identification.

The Exhibits enclosed are (l) Nil

 

I have the honor to be,
Sir,
Your obedient Servant,

 

[Signed] James Watt

 

Clerk of Petty Sessions

The Secretary,
Attorney General’s Department.

N.B.– When a Police Constable acts as Clerk of Petty Sessions, this letter should be signed by one of the Committing Magistrates

4g 201-90

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

NEW SOUTH WALES POLICE.

South Western District,

Broken Hill Station.
10th December 1900.

Report relative to antecedents of:–

Name: Charles Borromee Werner
Offence: Indecent assault on a male person
Committed for Trial at: Broken Hill Quarter Sessions
Date: 10th December 1900

    Senior Constable Saunby reports:– That this offender has been convicted as follows:– Broken Hill, Police Court, 15.12.97. Vagrancy, 2 months hard labour. Broken Hill, Police Court 29.6.98. Drunk, 5/- or 24 hours. Broken Hill, Police Court 8.9.98, False Pretences, 6 months hard labour. Broken Hill Police Court, 9.9.99, Drunk, 10/- or 3 days.

    He is identical with South Australian criminal Charles Werner and has been convicted in that Colony as follows:–

    Port Pirie, 3rd June 1881, larceny, 6 months. Gladstone S. Court, 24th march 1882, forgery and uttering, 7 years hard labour. Adelaide S Court, February 1891, larceny, 4 years hard labour.

    A boy named Macklin, 8 years of age, was about from home on the night of the 5th instant. The boy stated to his father that offender Werner had kept him at his shop all the night, had slept with him and also assaulted him. The father went with the boy to Werner and Werner admitted having had the boy there all the night, but denied any criminal intent.

[Signed] John Saunby, Senior Constable.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

1

Police Charge No. 1942.

Court of Petty Sessions, Broken Hill.
10th December 1900.

CHARLES BORROMEE WERNER

Indecently assaulting Sydney Lyndhurst Day at Broken Hill on the 3rd instant.

2

(M., 11 and 12 Vict., Cap. 42.)

Depositions of Witnesses.

Broken Hill
TO WIT.             }

The examination of Morton Gibson of Broken Hill in the Colony of New South Wales, Police Constable, Sydney Lyndhurst Day of Broken Hill, scholar; George Pike of Broken Hill in the said Colony, scholar; and William Russell of Broken Hill in the said Colony, dairy man taken on oath this 10th day of December in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred at Broken Hill in the Colony aforesaid, before the undersigned, one of Her Majesty’s Justices of the Peace for the said Colony, in the presence and hearing of Charles Borromee Werner who is charged this day before me for that he the said Charles Borromee Werner on the 3rd day of December 1900 at Broken Hill in the said Colony, did indecently assault one Sydney Lyndhurst Day.

3

This deponent Morton Gibson on his oath saith as follows:– I am a Police Constable stationed at Broken Hill.

    I arrested the accused on Saturday night morning in Argent Street, North at about 10 am. I said to him when I arrested him, I said “I want you at the Police Station.” He replied “I know what it is for. I heard the boys and the man making a charge against me last night.” I brought him to the Police Station and charged him with indecently assaulting Sydney Lyndhurst Day at Broken Hill on the 3rd instant. In reply to the charge he said “I can prove an alibi, I was not at the shop from 5 in the morning till 8 at night.” I afterwards accompanied the boy named Sydney Lyndhurst Day and a boy named Pike to accused’s residence and they pointed out a room and said that is where the defendant committed it.

    The room is situated at the rear of the shop. It is a galvanised iron building and the door has no key to it.

    You had made a complaint to me previously about some boys. You came freely with me when I arrested you. The room is detached from the main building. I believe the room is occupied at present. I don’t know who occupies it at present. I do not know who occupied it before the present tenant went in.

[Signed] Morton Gibson.

Taken and sworn at Broken Hill this 10th day of December 1900 before.
[Signed] E[rnest] L[eslie] Maitland, PM.

4

    This deponent Sydney Lyndhurst Day on his oath, saith as follows:– I am 14 years of age. I live with my parents in Chloride Street. I know the accused before the court. He keeps a shop in Argent Street. I remember going there between 9 and 10 in the morning of last Monday the 3rd, instant. I saw the a accused in the shop. There was a boy named Pike there also. An old gentleman came in afterwards. (William Russell is called in for identification.) This man is the man I saw in the shop. When I went into the shop the accused beckoned with his hand for me to come into a room. I did not go at first and then he beckoned again. I followed him then. The room is at the back of the shop. I went through the hop to a room at the back, about 2 or 3 feet away from the shop. After I went into the room he said the door was locked. He closed the door. In the room he undid his trousers and took out his Tommy and made me rub it and then get on top of me. He then told me to lay down. He asked me to undo my belt and I did so and the accused pulled down my trousers. I laid down on my belly on a mat then. The accused then got on top of me and then de [sic] bumped. I felt his Tommy between my legs and he went up and down. He stopped on the top of me about 10 minutes until the boy Pile came in. Pile told him that the milkman had come. The accused then got up off the top of me and told me

5

to stop in there and I got up and cleared out. He went away to the court then. He told me he was going to the court. When I came out of the room I, saw the boy Pile there and the old man was also still there. I did not say anything about it till the Friday night. He took me right in the corner of the room. I could be seen from the door. When Pile opened the door he could see us. I went with Pike and Constable Gibson and pointed out the place on Saturday morning.

[Signed] SL Day.

Taken and sworn at Broken Hill this 10th day of December 1900 before.
[Signed] EL Maitland, PM.

    Accused has no questions to ask the witness.

6

    This deponent George Pike on his oath, saith as follows:– I am a 13 years of age and I reside with my parents in Crystal Street. I know the accused before the court. I remember last Monday this day week. I was employed by the accused at the shop. I know the boy Day. I remember him coming to the shop last Monday morning at about half past nine. Werner was not in the shop when they came there. I do not know whether he was in the shop or not. Shortly after they went into the shop, the milkman came. The old man I saw outside the court was in the shop there also at the time. When the milkman came with the milk I went into the shop. The accused was not there then, nor was the boy Day. I did not see either of them. I saw the old man go out to look for Werner. He said something to me and I went out to look for Werner. I found him in the room at the back of the shop. It is a galvanised iron room at the back of the shop. The door was shut when I went to the room. I opened the door. When I opened the door I saw the accused standing up with all his pants undone and I saw his thing, his person. I also saw the boy Day. He was lying down on a mat. He had the back of his pants undone. I said to Werner “The milkman has come,” and asked him if he wanted any milk. He said “Yes,” and then came out into the shop. I saw the boy Day afterwards buttoning up his pants. Day was lying on

7

a mat with his face to the ground and his belly on the mat when I went into the room at the back. I saw Werner leave the shop after that. He said he was going up to the court. Day was lying right in the corner of the room when I went in. He was lying in the corner near the door. I had no difficulty in seeing Werner and the boy Day.

[Signed] George Pike.

Taken and sworn at Broken Hill this 10th day of December 1900, before.
[Signed] EL Maitland, PM.

    Accused has no questions to ask the witness.

8

    This deponent William Russell on his oath, saith as follows:– I am a dairy man and reside at Argent Street Broken Hill. I have seen the accused before the court, before. I remember last Monday. I was in his employ last Monday. I went to his place at about half past nine in the morning. He was in the shop at the time. I saw the two boys now shown me, Day and Pike. I saw them in the shop that morning at about half past nine. The accused was not in the shop when the milkman came. I went to look for Werner (accused) and I could not find him. The boy Pike was in the shop then. I could not say whether the boy Day was in the shop. I spoke to the boy Pike and shortly afterwards the accused came into the shop. Th boy I could not say whether the boy Day came into the shop shortly afterwards. The accused came into the shop about 5 minutes after the boy Pike went to look for him.

[Signed] William Russell.

Taken and sworn at Broken Hill this 10th day of December 1900, before.
[Signed] EL Maitland, PM.

    Accused has no questions to ask.

Case for Prosecution.

9

(N., 11 & 12 Vic., Cap. 42.)

Statement of the Accused.

New South Wales, Broken Hill
TO WIT.                                  }

Charles Borromee Werner stands charged before the undersigned, one of Her Majesty’s Justices of the Peace in and for the Colony aforesaid, this 10th day of December in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred for that he, the said Charles Borromee Werner on the 3rd day of December at Broken Hill, in the said Colony, did indecently assault Sydney Lyndhurst Day and the examinations of all the witnesses on the part of the prosecution having been completed, and the depositions taken against the accused having been caused to be read to him by me, the said Justice, (by/or) before whom such examination has been so complete; and I, the said Justice, having also stated to the accused and given him clearly to understand that he has nothing to hope from any promise of favour, and nothing to fear from any threat which may have been holden out to him to induce him to make any admission or confession of his guilt, but that whatever he shall say may be given in evidence against him upon his trial, notwithstanding such promise or threat; and the said charge being read to the said Charles Borromee Werner, and the witnesses for the prosecution Morton Gibson, Sydney Lyndhurst Day, George Pike and William Russell being severally examined in his presence, the said Charles Borromee Werner is now addressed by me as follows:– “Having heard the evidence, do you wish to say anything in answer to the charge? You are not obliged to say anything unless you desire to do so; but whatever you say will be taken down in writing and may be given in evidence against you upon your trial;” whereupon the said Charles Borromee Werner saith as follows:– “I reserve my defence.”

[Signed] CB Werner.

Taken before me, at Broken Hill, in the said Colony, the day and year first above mentioned.
[Signed] EL Maitland, PM.

10

G. 190.

REGINA.
versus
[Charles Borromee] Werner

Offence,— Indecent assault

    The accused stands committed to take his trial at the next Court of Quarter Sessions to be holden at Broken Hill, on the tenth day of December 1900. Bail allowed the accused in £ and two sureties in £ each, or one in £

[Signed] EL Maitland PM

JP.

Dated at Broken Hill Police
Office, Broken Hill
this 10th day of December
AD 1900
4g 416 - 88

11

(O. 1, 11& 12 Vic., Cap. 42.)

Recognizance to give Evidence.

New South Wales,
TO WIT.                     }

Be it remembered, that on the 10th day of December in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred Morton Gibson a Constable of the Police Force, William Russell of Broken Hill in the Colony of New South Wales, labourer personally came before the undersigned, one of Her Majesty’s Justices of the Peace for the Colony of New South Wales, and acknowledged themselves to owe Our Sovereign Lady the Queen the sum of

FORTY POUNDS EACH,

of good and lawful money of Great Britain, to be made and levied on their Goods and Chattels, Lands and Tenements, to the use of our said Lady the Queen, her Heirs and Successors, if they the said before mentioned persons shall fail in the condition indorsed.

[Signed] Morton Gibson, William Russell.

Taken and acknowledged, the day and year first above mentioned, at Broken Hill, in the said Colony, before me.
[Signed] EL Maitland, PM.

The condition of the within written Recognizance is such, that whereas Charles Borromee Werner was this day charged before Ernest Leslie Maitland Esquire one of Her Majesty’s Justices of the Peace for the said Colony, with indecent assault.

If therefore, they the before mentioned persons shall appear at the next Court of Quarter Sessions to be holden at Broken Hill in and for the Colony of New South Wales, on the 10th day of December at nine of the clock in the forenoon, and then and there give such evidence as they know, upon an information to be then and there preferred against the said Charles Borromee Werner for the offence aforesaid, to the jurors who shall pass upon the trial of the said Charles Borromee Werner.

Then the said Recognizance to be void, or else to stand in full force and virtue.
[Signed] EL Maitland, PM.

12

(O. 1, 11 & 12 Vic., Cap. 42.)

Recognizance to give Evidence.

New South Wales, Broken Hill
TO WIT.                                 }

Be it remembered, that on the 10th day of December in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred Sydney Charles Day of Broken Hill in the Colony of New South Wales, furniture remover, personally came before the undersigned, one of Her Majesty’s Justices of the Peace for the Colony of New South Wales, and acknowledged himself to owe Our Sovereign Lady the Queen Lord King the sum of

FORTY POUNDS,

of good and lawful money of Great Britain, to be made and levied on his Goods and Chattels, Lands and Tenements, to the use of our said Lady the Queen, her Heirs and Successors, if Sydney Lyndhurst Day shall fail in the condition indorsed.

[Signed] SC Day.

Taken and acknowledged, the day and year first above mentioned, at Broken Hill in the said Colony, before me.
[Signed] EL Maitland, PM.

The condition of the within written Recognizance is such, that whereas Charles Borromee Werner was this day charged before Ernest Leslie Maitland Esquire one of Her Majesty’s Justices of the Peace for the said Colony, with indecent assault.

If therefore, the before mentioned person Sydney Lyndhurst Day shall appear at the Court of Quarter Sessions to be holden at Broken Hill in and for the Colony of New South Wales, on the 10th day of December instant at nine of the clock in the forenoon, and then and there give such evidence as he know, upon an information to be then and there preferred against the said Charles Borromee Werner for the offence aforesaid, to the jurors who shall pass upon the trial of the said Charles Borromee Werner.

Then the said Recognizance to be void, or else to stand in full force and virtue.
[Signed] EL Maitland, PM.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

[On the depositions’ cover sheet is the following]

Quarter Sessions.
Circuit Court
At Broken Hill
on 10 December1900
1 April 1901
No. 505 53 AG
Depositions.
CS’s No. 10
Regina
v.
Charles Borromee Werner
Indecent assault
Forwarded to the Secretary to the Attorney General
[Initialled] WRB 18.12.00
The Attorney General directs the trial to take place at the Broken Hill Circuit Court
[Initial illegible] 22.3.01
Committed at: Broken Hill
on: 10th December 1890

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

1. Assault with intent to commit buggery
2. Indecent assault upon a male person
[Initialled] C[harles] G[regory] W[ade, Crown Prosecutor]
20/3/01

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

    Accused having been committed for trial only the day before the court sat at Broken Hill he applied for a postponement of the case until next Court which was granted.

    The witnesses were bound over excepting the two boys.
[Signed] Walter Bevan
18.12.0

Approved.
[Initialled] B[ernard] R[ingrose] W[ise, QC, AG]
28.12.00

    This is the only case at present for trial at Broken Hill Quarter Sessions and as I understand it is intended that Court shall only sit for hearing of appeals (if any) I venture to suggest that the trial of Werner should be ordered to take place at Broken Hill Circuit Court on 1st April.
[Initialled] WRB
8.3.01

Broken Hill CC
[Initialled] B[ernard] R[ingrose] W[ise, QC, AG]
11.3.01

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Barrier Miner, Tue 2 Apr 1901 9

    In the Circuit Court to-day, before Mr Acting Justice Gibson 10

CIRCUIT COURT.
A CHARGE OF DISGUSTING CONDUCT.

    AFTER the MINERS part closed last evening, Charles Werner, a foreigner, was charged with committing an assault with intent on a boy. There was a second count of indecent assault. He pleaded not guilty and conducted his own defence.

    The evidence was too filthy for publication.

    Accused’s defence was that the prosecution was a conspiracy got up by the prosecutor and other boys to ruin him, as he had chastised the boys for damaging his property. He handed to the court a lengthy and “true statement of the facts of the case,” which began “Your Honor, your humble accused was not at home at the time,” and concluded with the hope that the jury would have pity on “an undefended and simple foreigner and working man.”

    The jury after deliberating for an hour and a half, returned a verdict of not guilty.

    Accused: Will your Honor say that I leave the court without a stain on my character.

    His Honor (very emphatically): No, indeed I won’t.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Advertiser, Wed 3 Apr 1901 11

BROKEN HILL.
———◦———

Broken Hill, April 2.

    A light rain commenced to fall this afternoon, and a heavy storm now appears to be approaching.

———
THE CIRCUIT COURT.

    The Circuit Court concluded its sittings to-day. Charles Werner, charged with having committed an indecent assault, [on Sydney Lyndhurst Day , 14], was acquited [sic].

 


 

Charles Burromee Werner, 1901

Barrier Miner, Mon 27 May 1901 12

PRESENTATION TO Mr J WATT.
———

Mr JAMES WATTS, CPS leaves for his new office at Parramatta on Monday evening. His fellow-officers at the courthouse took leave of him at noon to-day, and marked the occasion by a pleasant little gathering in the sheriff’s office. Mr Maitland, PM, presided, and on behalf of the officers of the Crown Law and Lands Departments, presented Mr Watt with a handsome Russian leather dressing bag. He was glad to see, he said, that the department had recognised Mr Watt’s abilities and given him a better office. At the same time, there was a general feeling of regret at Broken Hill losing so genial and courteous an officer. He did not suppose there was another office in New South Wales where the officials had to put up with the same disadvantages as in Broken Hill; yet Mr Watt was always unruffled. Probably before long, the department would see fit to place Mr Watt in the ranks of the PM’s, and if so there was no doubt that his duties would be performed with the same credit as when Mr Watt was CPS. Other officers supplemented the PM’s remarks, and Mr Watt’s health was drunk. Mr Watt suitably replied.

————————
A SCOUNDREL PUNISHED.
———

IN the Police Court to-day, before Messrs Maitland, PM, and Bright, JP, Charles Burromee Werner was charged with unlawfully assaulting a little girl [Lily Symons ] 10 years of age. The evidence for the prosecution was to the effect that accused met the child, who was minding a baby yesterday afternoon in the Central Reserve, and persuaded her to go with him into the urinal. Another man then appeared on the scene, and accused let the child go. Subsequently Werner again approached her, and wheedled her into a second time entering the urinal with him. Accused pleaded not guilty, his defence being a complete denial of the charge. The bench, however, found the case proved, and the accused was sentenced to six months’ hard labor in Broken Hill Gaol.

    When accused was being removed from the dock he vilely accused a witness for the prosecution named Gerald Dowling, an insurance agent, who had sworn to having seen accused with the little girl. The PM then called him back and fined him £5 or two months, cumulative on his former sentence.

 


 

Louis Joseph Maurice Charles de Viernietz, 1904

The Pastoral Times, Sat 5 March 1904 13

DENILIQUIN POLICE COURT.

Wednesday, March 2.

ALLEGED INDECENT ASSAULT.

(Before Mr F[rederick] W[right] Garstang, PM., and Messrs JP Ivess, J Kelly and GH Perrin, JsP.)

    Joseph Louis Maurice Charles De Veirneitz, alias Charles Werner, more familiarly known as “Frenchy,” was charged with indecently assaulting Frank Alfred Loy, at Deniliquin, on the 14th February. Evidence was taken as follows:–

    Senior Constable Cook stated that he served a duplicate of the summons produced on accused who said he would be at court. Witness told him Loy’s boy had said he was passing Cairns house (where accused had been stopping), when accused called him in to look at some pups and afterwards interfered with him. Accused said “he’s a d----- liar. I know Mrs Loy; she had eight or nine children. I don’t know any of them particularly.” He further said the boy was never at Cairns’ place. On Tuesday from something he heard witness sent a report to the police at Moama and Mathoura.

    To accused: Witness was first informed of the complaint on the 26th. He didn’t know why proceedings weren’t taken before. There was no warrant out for his arrest. He didn’t know if accused was following his lawful occupation when arrested.

    Constable Kelton stated that on Monday evening he saw defendant near the Royal Hotel with a swag on his back and some bamboo sticks. He asked if he was clearing out, and he said “No: I’m shifting my camp on the other side of the river. My mate has gone on ahead of me to get tea.”

    Constable Lucas stated that from information received from the Deniliquin police on 3 pm on Tuesday he went to Hill Plain and then to the residence of John Leetham where he arrived about 5 pm. He saw the accused in an outhouse at the back of Leetham’s dwelling and asked if his name was De Veirneitz and he said “Yes.” He said he answered the description of a man wanted by the Deniliquin police, and he said “what for?” Witness told him, and asked when he left Deniliquin. He said “Yesterday evening. I camped at the freezing works last night.” He asked what time he left the freezing works, and he said “about two o’clock, and travelled during the night.” He said as he appeared to be leaving the State and making for Victoria he must arrest him. He then brought him to the Deniliquin lockup. He had with him a very large swag, six fishing rods and tackle, a bitch and two young pups, 3 billy cans and several other articles.

    To accused: He had no warrant for his arrest. His authority was the instruction he received from his superintendent. Accused did not say witness was taking very high-handed proceedings in interfering with the liberty of the subject in arresting him without a warrant. Accused said he would be in Deniliquin on the 3rd to answer the summons. He did not say he went purposely to secure a job at Leetham’s. He said he wasn’t going to Victoria. He said he had some property here, but he didn’t say he was going into Deniliquin that night.

    Susan Loy, widow residing in George-street stated she was the mother of Frank Alfred Loy. From something her boy told her she laid an information against the accused.

    To accused: The boy told her something a few days before she laid the information. She did not lay the information for monetary reasons. She was not pressed by Senior Constable Cook to lay the information.

    Frank Alfred Loy, aged 13, stated he met accused near the Edward-street bridge on Sunday, 14th February at half-past seven o’clock and walked to Cairns’ residence (opposite the court house), where accused was stopping. Accused said “Come on over and have a look at the pups.” He went over and saw the pups and as he was going out accused caught hold of him and pulled him back and threw him against the wall. (The witness then gave details of the alleged offence.)

    To accused: He did not use any violence.

    For the defence:–

    The accused [de Viernietz] went into the box and made a long rambling statement. He denied having committed the offence.

    Thomas Wallace Cairns, carpenter, stated he saw the boy Loy at his house on Sunday evening, 14th ultimo. He said he was going fishing with accused, but he was then out. He heard some boys there that morning, but didn’t hear any calling out.

    Frank Grieve stated about a fortnight ago Loy told him that Werner put his hand round his waist and his hand over his mouth, then pulled him into the room and knocked him against the wall. Werner then interfered with him. Witness afterwards told his father what Loy had told him.

    James Holden stated that last Sunday week he had a conversation with Loy, who told him not to go near Werner, as he had dome something to him.

    The Bench decided to commit the accused for trial at the Circuit Court on April 20. Bail was allowed, self in £100 and two sureties in £80 each or one in £160.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Depositions for Louis Joseph Maurice Charles de Viernietz 20 Apr 1904 Deniliquin trial 14


(a) Town.

Letter from Bench of Magistrates at (a) Deniliquin

 

transmitting Depositions

(b) Name in full of accused.

in the case Rex v(b) Louis Joseph Maurice Charles De Veirneitz alias Charles Werner

(c) Offence.

(c) At Deniliquin on the 14th February, 1904 indecently assaulting Frank Alfred Loy, a male person.

(d) Town.

Police Office(d) Deniliquin

 

3rd March 1904  

 

Sir,
I have the honor, by direction of the Bench of Magistrates,
to transmit herewith the Depositions, and other documents in the

(e) Name of accused

case of (e) Louis Joseph Maurice Charles De Veirneitz alias Charles Werner

(f) “His” or “her”

who has been committed to take (f) his

(g) “Circuit Court,” or 
“Quarter Sessions.”

trial at the (g) Circuit Court

to be held at (h) Deniliquin

on Wednesday

(h) Town where Court 
to be held.

the 20th day of April 1904

The accused is (i) confined in the gaol at Deniliquin (Bail allowed self in £100 and 2 sureties in £80 each or one in £160 – not forthcoming)

(i) “Is confined in the 
Gaol at …,” or “has been admitted to bail” (with full particulars as to sureties, addresses, occupations, and amounts, as set out in Recognizance.)

(k) As in Recognizance, both for Crown and defence, specifying also what witnesses gave evidence but were not bound over, with reason for omission.

The Witnesses bound over are (k) Joseph H Cook, Senior Constable, John Lindsay Kelton, Constable, Alfred Thomas Jones, Newspaper Proprietor, (for Frank Alfred Loy) all of Deniliquin. Allan William Oliver Lucas of Mathoura, Constable. For the defence in addition to the accused Thomas Wallace Cairns, James Francis Holden, and Frank Grieve. The three last were not bound over as their evidence did not appear to be material to the defence. Susan Loy gave evidence bu for the prosecution but was not bound over as her evidence did not appear to be material to the prosecution.

 

(l) Short description to enable identification.

The Exhibits enclosed are (l) Nil

 

I have the honor to be,
Sir,
Your obedient Servant,

 

[Signed] Beilby Porteous Pell Kemp]

 

Clerk of Petty Sessions

The Under Secretary,
Department of the Attorney General and of Justice.

N.B.– When a Police Constable acts as Clerk of Petty Sessions, this letter should be signed by one of the Committing Magistrates

4g 201-90

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

    Rex versus Defendant Veirneitz alias Werner indecent assault on a male person. Committed for trial Deniliquin Circuit Court statement by Sarah Burns forwarded.

Police Station, Deniliquin
1:4:04

    Senior Constable Cook respectfully reports for the information of his Superintendent.

    Accused in his evidence at the lower Court stated, that, at the time the offence is alleged to have been committed he saw the back door of the cottage (situated immediately at the back of Cairns’ residence), open, and the lady of the house moving about inside.

    Miss Sarah Burns, the lady referred to has been interviewed by the Police and she contradicts those statements made by accused.

    Miss Burns’s statement is attached.

[Signed] Joseph H Cook, Senior Constable.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

    Subject:– Re Joseph Louis Maurice Charles De Veirneitz alias Charles Werner. Indecent assault on a male person (Frank Alfred Loy) at Deniliquin 14th February 1904.

Deniliquin
15:3:04.

    Sarah Burns states, I am a single woman. I live with my brother in Duncan Street, Deniliquin.

    The house I live in is on the same allotment and backs up to the house occupied by Thomas Wallace Cairns in Poictiers Street.

    I remember Sunday the 14th day of February 1904.

    I was not well that morning and did not get up till 9.30 am.

    The back door of my house was not opened until 9.30 am.

    I did not see De Veirneitz alias Werner or Frank Alfred Loy at the back of Cairns’s house that morning.

[Signed] Sarah Burns.

Joseph H Cook, Senior Constable; HJ Leggat, 1st Class Constable, witnesses.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

[Subpoena]

EDWARD THE SEVENTH, by the Grace of
God, of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland, King, Defender of
the Faith, &c.

New South Wales, Deniliquin
TO WIT.                                }

To: Fan Tan Liz, chinese Camp, Deniliquin. (Elizabeth Ann Pearce) Thomas Cairns, Deniliquin.

    Greetings:–

We command you and every of you, firmly enjoining you, that laying aside all pretences and excuses whatsoever, you and every of you be and appear in your proper persons, before Our Justices assigned to hold Pleas before Us, on Wednesday the 20th day of April, 1904 next, by Nine of the Clock in the forenoon of the same day, at Deniliquin in our State of New South Wales, in the Court House, situate in Wellington and Poictiers Deniliquin there to testify the truth, and give evidence, on the part of the Prisoner, before Our said Justices, touching a certain information to be preferred against

Joseph Louis Maurice Charles De Veirneitz.

in the case of Assault on a male person
and that you so appear, from day to day, until the case is tried; and this you, or any, or either of you, are not to omit, under the penalty of One Hundred Pounds, to be levied upon your and every of your Goods and Chattels, Lands and Tenements, if you, or any, or either of you shall fail in the premises.

    Witness the Honorable Sir Frederick Darley, Knight Commander of the Most Distinguished Order of Saint Michael and Saint George, Our Chief Justice of Our supreme Court of New South Wales, at Sydney, the 8th day of April in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred and four.

For the Prothonotary
MJ Dunphy
Clerk of the Supreme Court.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

NEW SOUTH WALES POLICE.

South Western District,

Deniliquin Station.
4th March 1904.

Report relative to antecedents of:–

Name: Joseph Louis Maurice Charles De Veirneitz alias Charles Werner
Offence: Indecent assault on a male person.
Committed for trial at: Deniliquin Circuit Court.
Date: 20th April 1904.

    Senior Constable Cook reports:– Offender is a Frenchman about 51 years of age. He has been living in Deniliquin for the past month, during which time he has earned a living by gathering bottles and doing casual work.

    Offender has been previously convicted as follows:–
Port Pirie 3:6:81, larceny, six months imprisonment; Gladstone CC, 24:3:82, Forgery and uttering, 7 years hard labour; Adelaide SC – :2:91 Larceny, 4 years hard labour; Broken Hill Police Court, 15:12:97, vagrancy, 2 months; Broken Hill Police Court, 29:6:98, drunk, 5/- or 24 hours; Broken Hill Police Court, 8:8:98, False pretences, 6 months hard labour; Broken Hill Police Court, 9:8:99, drunk 10/- or 3 days; Broken Hill Police Court, 11:4:01, insulting language, fined £3, or one month imprisonment; Broken Hill Police Court, 25:5:01, unlawfully assaulting a female child under the age of 12 years, six months hard labour; Broken Hill Police Court, 25:5:01, insulting language, fined £3 or 2 months; Berrigan Police Court, 17:12:04, having knives, spoons, forks &c in his possession, reasonably suspected to be stolen, 1 month hard labour, Deniliquin Gaol.

[Signed] Joseph Cook, Senior Constable.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Depositions of Witnesses.

New South Wales, Deniliquin.
TO WIT.                                }

The examination of Joseph H Cook, Senior Constable of Police of Deniliquin in the State of New South Wales, Alan William Oliver Lucas, Constable of Police stationed at Mathoura, John Lindsay Kelton, Constable of Police stationed at Deniliquin, Susan Loy, widow of Deniliquin, Frank Alfred Loy of Deniliquin (per AT Jones), Thomas Wallace Cairns, of Deniliquin, Frank Grieve of Deniliquin (statement – only not on oath), Louis Joseph Maurice Charles de Veirneitz alias Charles Werner and James Francis Holden of Deniliquin in the said State, taken on oath this second day of March in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred and four at Deniliquin Police Office, in the said State, before the undersigned, one of His Majesty’s Justices of the Peace in and for the said State, in the presence and hearing of Louis Joseph Maurice Charles de Veirneitz alias Charles Werner who was charged this day before us for that he, the said Louis Joseph Maurice Charles de Veirneitz alias Charles Werner on the 14th day of February in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred and four at Deniliquin in the said State, did indecently assault Frank Alfred Loy a male person.

[Signed] Joseph H Cook.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Information – (General Purposes). 

2nd March 1904

No.152

New South Wales,
TO WIT.                 }

Be it remembered, that on this 29th day of February in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred and four at Deniliquin in the State of New South Wales, Susan Loy of Deniliquin appears before me, the undersigned, one of His Majesty’s Justices duly assigned to keep the Peace of our Lord the King in and for the State of New South Wales, being informed and (?) believes in (?) me, that on the 14th day of February in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred and four at Deniliquin in the said State aforesaid Joseph Louis Maurice Charles de Veirneitz alias Charles Werner did indecently assault Frank Alfred Loy a male person contrary to the act in such case made and provided; whereupon the said Susan Loy prays that I, the said Justice, will proceed in the premises according to law.

[Signed] Susan Loy.

Sworn at Deniliquin in the said State, on the day first above written, before me.
[Signature illegible], JP.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Summons – Divisions 1 and 2, “Justices Act, 1902.”

    To Joseph Louis Maurice Charles de Veirneitz, alias Charles Werner of Deniliquin in the State of New South Wales.

    Whereas information hath this day been laid before the undersigned, one of His Majesty’s Justices of the Peace in and for the State of New South Wales, for that you did, on the 14th day of February 1904 at Deniliquin in the said State aforesaid indecently assault Frank Alfred Loy a male person.
These are therefore to command you, in His Majesty’s name, to be and appear, on Wednesday the second day of March 1904, at ten of the clock in the forenoon, at the Police Office, Deniliquin in the said State, before such Justice or Justices of the Peace for the said State as may then be there, to answer to the said information and to be further dealt with according to law.

    Given under my hand and seal, this 29th day of February in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred and four at Deniliquin in the said State,.
[Signature illegible], JP.

1

This deponent Joseph H Cook on his oath, saith as follows:–

    I am a Senior Constable of Police and reside at Deniliquin.

    About noon on the 29th ultimo I saw the accused at his camp at the back of the Royal Hotel. Constable Kelton was with me. I saw a dog there, I said “Is this your slut?” Accused replied “Yes.” I said “Has she had pups?” Accused said “Yes, she had four, they are in the camp.” Accused showed me two of them. I said “How old are they?” He said “About a month old.” I said “How long is it since you left Cairns’s place?” Accused said “I left last Saturday week, Cairns complained about my getting up too early.” I said to the accused “How long did you stay with Cairns?” He replied “About a fortnight.” I then served a duplicate of the summons which I now produce on the accused. I read it and explained it to him. He said “All right, I will be there.” I then said “Loy’s boy said he was passing Cairns’s place on the morning of the 14th February last when you called him in to look at your pups which were in the shed at the back of the cottage.” He said “When he was leaving you pulled him back into the shed and indecently assaulted him,” and defendant said “He is a dam [sic] liar. I know Mrs Loy, she has eight or nine children. I don’t know any

2

of them particularly.” He said “The boy was never at Cairns’s place.” Yesterday from something that I heard I sent a report to Moama to the Police and also to the Police at Mathoura.

    Cairns’s place referred to is in Poictiers Street opposite the Court House, to my knowledge the accused was staying there for about a fortnight.

    By the accused: The information was laid on the 29th February last. I was first informed of the matter on the 26th of last month. I have known you personally for about two or three weeks. There was no warrant out for your arrest. You were arrested yesterday. I do not know if you were following your lawful occupation when arrested. To the Bench.

[Signed] Joseph H Cook.

Taken and sworn at Deniliquin this 2 day of March 1904 before.
[Signed] Fred W Garstang, PM, John Kelly, JP, GH Perrin, JP, J Percival Ivess, JP.

3

This deponent Alan William Oliver Lucas on his oath, saith as follows:–

    I am a Constable of Police and reside at Mathoura.

    From information received about 2 o’clock yesterday from the Deniliquin Police, I went to Hill Plain and from something told me there I proceeded to the residence of John Leetham arriving there about 5 pm. I there saw the accused in an outhouse at the back of Leetham’s dwelling and I said to him “Is your name Joseph Louis Maurice Charles de Veirneitz?” He said “Yes.” I said “You answer to the description of a man wanted by the Deniliquin Police.” He said “What for?” I said “For committing an indecent assault on Frank Alfred Loy at Deniliquin on the 14th of last month.” I said “When did you leave Deniliquin?” Accused said “Yesterday evening and camped at the freezing works last night.” I said “What time did you leave the freezing works last night?” I said “What time did you leave the freezing works this morning?” Accused said “About 2 o’clock and travelled during the night.” I said “As you appear to be leaving the State and making for Victoria I must arrest you.” I then charged the accused and brought him to Deniliquin lock up. The accused had with him a very large swag, also six fishing rods and tackle, a bitch

4

and two young pups, three billy cans and several other articles.

    He appeared to have the usual equipment for a tramp. The accused made no reply to the charge.

    To the accused: I never had a warrant for your arrest. I proceeded on instructions from my Superintendent. You never told me that you were I was taking a very high handed proceeding by interfering with the liberty of a subject without a warrant. You did tell me you were served with a summons. You said “I will be there in time on the 3rd of this month.” You said that you were looking for work. You never told me that you went purposely to Leetham’s to secure a job for fear of anyone being before you. You were sitting in an outhouse when I saw you at Leetham’s. I had conversation with Mrs Leetham. I went to the outhouse because I heard you were there. I stated I went to Hill Plain about half a mile from Leetham’s. I heard that you were camped in the bush at Hill Plain. You were carving a cigar box when I came up to you at the door of the hut. You told me that you were not going to Victoria after I told you that I thought you were making for Victoria. You told me that you had some property but did not tell me that you were coming into Deniliquin last night. I don’t remember you mentioning that you had left two pups in Deniliquin. You came with me of your own free will. I have known you since the 3rd of last month.

    To the Bench: I knew that there was an information laid.

[Signed] AWO Lucas, Constable.

Taken and sworn at Deniliquin this 2nd day of March 1904 before.
[Signed] Fred W Garstang, PM, John Kelly, JP, GH Perrin, JP, J Percival Ivess, JP.

5

This deponent John Lindsay Kelton on his oath, saith as follows:–

    I am a Constable of Police and reside at Deniliquin.

    To the Police: I remember the night of the 29th ultimo. I saw the accused between 7 and half past in front of the Royal Hotel. He had a swag on his back and a some bamboo sticks. I went up to him and I said “Well Charlie, are you clearing out?” He said “Oh no, I’m just shifting my camp to the other side of the river.” (This conversation took place in front of the Royal Hotel) He said “My mate has gone ahead to get tea. I then left him and went on down the street on my beat. He mentioned a previous camp of his which I knew.

    The accused asks no questions.

[Signed] John L Kelton, 1st Class Constable.

Taken and sworn at Deniliquin this 2nd day of March 1904 before us.
[Signed] Fred W Garstang, PM, John Kelly, JP, GH Perrin, JP, J Percival Ivess, JP.

6

This deponent Susan Loy on his [sic] oath, saith as follows:–

    I am a widow and reside at Deniliquin.

    To the Police: I am the mother of Frank Alfred Loy. From something that my boy told me I laid an information at the Deniliquin Police Court against accused before the Court. The information produced is mine.

    To the accused: My boy told me the information a few days before I laid the information. When my boy told me I intended there and then to take proceedings. I laid the information last Monday. I never laid the information at once because I was busy working.

    To the Police: I have to support a large family of children.

    To the accused: I never laid this information for monetary reasons. I never had any conversation with a any person respecting this offence between the 14th and 29th of last month, only with Mr Cook Senior Constable Cook in his official capacity. I am not supported by my family. I was not pressed by Senior Constable Cook to lay the information.

    To the Police: I took this action purely on my own account, I was not influenced by anyone.

[Signed] Susan Loy.

Taken and sworn at Deniliquin this 2nd day of March 1904 before.
[Signed] Fred W Garstang, PM, John Kelly, JP, GH Perrin, JP, J Percival Ivess, JP.

7

This deponent Frank Alfred Loy on his oath, saith as follows:–

    I am 13 years of age and a schoolboy and res[ide] at Deniliquin.

    To the Police: I mind Mr Wilkinson’s ponies. I attend 2 or 3 times a day – from 8 till 9 and from about 1 till half past and from about 5 until 6 in the afternoon, I go to work. I have seen accused before. On going to work I met the accused at the bridge in Edward Street and walked with him from the bridge. The accused was living with Mr Cairns. I saw the accused at Cairns’s place last Sunday week (two weeks ago last Sunday) about half past 7 in the morning, he called me over to look at the pups – I went, I saw four pups in a shed at the back of the cottage. I was going out the door and the accused caught hold of me and pulled me back. He caught hold of my coat. He threw me against the wall. He kept hold of the lower part of the back of my coat. I had my back against the wall. He opened the buttons in the front of my trousers. He did not hold me when he opened my trousers. He then took out his private and put it in between my two legs and my privates and sang out “Ooh!” and then he let me go. He never said anything. He had me in the shed for about a quarter of an hour. Before I went into the shed I did not see

8

anybody about. I never saw anybody about when I came out. I left the place and went to work at Mr Wilkinson’s. In going to my work I passed Cairns’s place. I have never spoken to the accused before.

    To the Bench: The accused did nothing more than I have described. He had his person between my legs for a quarter of an hour.

    To the accused: The offence happened two weeks last Sunday. You pulled me into the shed. You were not rough. You caught hold of my coat – my coat was of (crash clothe ? Bon has doubts ?) I never went and had conversation with Mr Cairns on the particular morning. I went home when I finished my work at Mr Wilkinson’s. I didn’t speak to anybody after leaving Mr Wilkinson’s and going home. I do not know Cairns, I spoke to [a] man at at a gate at a cottage in the front of the Court House. The man was Mr Cairns – this was before I went to Mr Wilkinson’s – I saw Mr Cairns before I went to Mr Wilkinson’s, you told me that he was living with you. Cairns asked me what my father did and I said “He used to drive a coach.” No-one was near when I was coming home from Mr Wilkinson’s on the morning referred to. I did not ask Cairns for you. I called at the cottage at about half past 5. I saw you and Cairns at the gate. I stopped there for about ten minutes. I asked you if you were going fishing. You said to come down half past 7 to go fishing. I never told you that I had plenty of bait. I told you that I would show you a good

9

place for fishing where I caught fish. We did not go fishing. I did not see you again on that or the next day. I saw my mother when I went home on the 14th February last. I did not tell her anything. I told I know a boys named Grieves. I told one of them of the offence, it was Frank Grieve and Jim Holden. I did not tell la Policeman. I told my mother first the night that Mr Senior Constable Cook came. I forgot what day it was. I do not know which week. Cook was dressed in uniform. Senior Constable Cook told me to tell my mother when he was at my mother’s house. I was going to tell my mother whether Constable Cook told me or not. I did not tell her before because I did not like to. I did not like to say the offence to my mother. I have no other reason for not telling my mother. I have seen you very often since the offence complained of. You kept your person on my person for a quarter of an hour. It was an open shed. This shed is not far from the door of the cottage. There is no division between the cottage and the shed. I do not know if anyone was in the cottage at the time. I never looked. I never heard anybody in the cottage. I did not sing out when you pulled me into the shed because I was frightened of you. I only went once for you to come fishing after. I did not call there in the morning coming back from Mr Wilkinson’s. I called there at mid-day on the Sunday. I called there twice.

    To the Police: I never went inside, I saw Mr Cairns at the gate. I did not enter the house, I was only once in the shed.

10

    To the accused: I was not frightened to go back to the cottage. You did not meet me in front of mother’s place in the same week. You never met me or spoke to me later on. I saw you fishing near the gaol on the following week. I was on top of the bank of the river. I did not sing out to you. You did not send a dog after us. You had hold of my coat at the back and pulled my trousers open in the front.

    You touched my person with your hand. I don’t know which hand. I could not have got away from you at the shed if I wished to. There were people living near the shed, very near. People live at the back and at the side of the shed and the other side is unoccupied. The people at the back cannot see all that is going on if their door is open. If anyone sung out in the shed the neighbours could hear it. If anyone was in the cottage adjoining the shed they would hear if anyone sang out in the shed. You pulled me into the shed without hurting me. It is a fact that you did touch me. I was in the yard on the Sunday morning at my own free will, I was walking past and you called me to see the puppies.

    I never stopped at the shed for a quarter of an hour at my own free will. I was not doing anything during that quarter of an hour. I have been in the shed on my own before.

    I told my mother of the offence in the back yard at home. I don’t know when my mother came to lay the information.

    To the Police: The shed is built up against the wall of the cottage. It is closed in on one side, next to Maygers. There is a door to the shed, which looks

11

towards the empty cottage, the shed is partly closed on the side near the doorway. At the back towards Burn’s there is a small opening for a window. I am sure that there is a door to the shed. While I was in the shed with the accused the door was open. The assault happened just near the door away from the door. No-one passing in the street could have seen into the shed where we were. Maygers could not have seen us from their place. I could not have been seen from Burn’s place, or from the vacant allotments. I was frightened because I though the accused would hit me. I did not sing out very loud. I am not afraid of being with the accused in an open place or in any with anyone else.

    To the Bench: During the time of the assault the accused was quiet and still, and he did not speak to me. Nothing happened, I was quite dry. I saw the private part of the accused, it was stiff.

[Signed] Frank Alfred Loy.

Taken and sworn at Deniliquin this 2nd day of March 1904 before us.
[Signed] Fred W Garstang, PM, John Kelly, JP, GH Perrin, JP, J Percival Ivess, JP.

12

This deponent John Lindsay Kelton (on his former oath recalled) on his oath, saith as follows:–

    To Senior Constable Cook: I was present when you served the summons on the accused on the 29th of last month. The accused said “He is a dam liar, I don’t know Loy’s boy, the boy mentioned in the summons. I know Mrs Loy and her two daughters.” He said “There was some boy at Cairn’s place but he did not know who he was and that there were a lot of boys about Cairn’s place.” Constable Cook then said “Then you don’t know Loy’s boy.” He said “I do know him. I know him since I was staying there.”

[Signed] John L Kelton, 1st Class Constable.

Taken and sworn at Deniliquin this 2nd day of March 1904 before us.
[Signed] Fred W Garstang, PM, John Kelly, JP, GH Perrin, JP, J Percival Ivess, JP.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

(F. 2 – “Justices Act, 1902.”)

Statement of the Accused.

State of New South Wales, Deniliquin
TO WIT.                                             }

Charles Werner (aka de Viernietz) 1904. SRNSW: NRS2191, [3/5996], Photo: SRNSW
Charles Werner (aka de Viernietz) 
1904. SRNSW: NRS2191, [3/5996], 
Photo: SRNSW

Joseph Louis Maurice Charles de Veirneitz alias Charles Werner (hereinafter called the defendant) stands charged before the undersigned, four of His Majesty’s Justices of the Peace in and for the said State, this 2nd day of March in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred and four for that he, the said defendant, on the 14th day of February 1904, at Deniliquin in the said State, did indecently assault Frank Alfred Loy a male person and the said charge being read to the said defendant, and the witnesses for the prosecution Joseph H Cook, John L Kelton, Alan William Oliver Lucas, Frank Alfred Loy and Susan Loy being severally examined in his presence, and (the depositions of the said witnesses having been read to him), the said defendant is now addressed by us, the said Justices as follows:– “Having heard the evidence, do you wish to say anything in answer to the charge? You are not obliged to say anything unless you desire to do so, but whatever you say will be taken down in writing and may be given against you in evidence at your trial; and you are also informed, and are to clearly understand, that you have nothing to hope from any promise of favour, and nothing to fear from any threat which may have been holden out to you to induce you to make any admission or confession of your guilt, but whatever you now say may be given in evidence against you upon your trial notwithstanding such promise or threat. Whereupon the said defendant saith as follows:– “I wish to give evidence.”

[Signed] LJ Maurice.

Taken before us and read over to the said defendant at Deniliquin in the said State, the day and year first above mentioned.
[Signed] Fred W Garstang, PM, John Kelly, JP, GH Perrin, JP, J Percival Ivess, JP.

1

This deponent Louis Joseph Maurice Charles de Veirneitz on his oath, saith as follows:–

    I am a mechanical engineer and reside at no fixed place of abode. On the morning of Sunday the 14th of February, last about 7 am I happened to stand in the yard of premises situated opposite the Deniliquin Court House occupied by Mr Thomas Cairns, carpenter, and myself, also a friend stopping there temporarily at the same date. While standing on the fence the prosecutor in this matter Frank Alfred Loy came up and passed me and said “Good morning.” I said “Good morning Sonny, where are you off to?” He said “I’m going to work at Mr Wilkinson’s.” We had further conversation. The shed is a skillion to the cottage. Loy went away about his business, I expect. I went indoors. At this time Cairns in the cottage grumbled about being disturbed in his sleep. The boy went away, I went inside to get my breakfast ready. The boy said “I will come back after I have done my work at Mr Wilkinson’s. The boy and I then went and got some baits. After I had my breakfast I dressed and went to church. I did not come back home until dinner time at about 1 pm. I had at tea 5 pm and went to church at 7. When I came home to dinner at 1 pm Cairns said that the boy had called and waited for a while for me. When I came back

2

after tea on Sunday evening Cairns said “Have you seen the boy Loy? He has been here and waited about half an hour for you.” and After church I went to my line. I left church about 20 minutes to nine. I remained at my lines until about 11 pm. I did not see the boy Loy until two days afterwards. Three days On the Wednesday a number of boys sung out about young Loy putting me up, they then said “All right, we will put you to gaol, Frenchy.” Half a dozen different persons, men, amongst others the Inspector of Nuisances stopped me and asked me if it was a fact that I had committed the offence. I told him to bring me face to face with his informers, that I would prove them lies. On the 29th Senior Constable Cook in company with another Constable came to my camp. Constable Cook called me aside and produced a summons. He handed it to me and I took it. I said “Very well, I will be there.” I was packing up previous to the Police coming intending to shift camp to the north side of the river. A Constable met me near the Royal Hotel on Monday evening near the Royal Hotel and said “Well, Charlie, are you clearing out?”, I said “No, only shifting camp to the other side of the river”, a place which the Constable knew. I then had a conversation with a settler living nine mile along the Mathoura road, I promised to go to Mathoura on the following morning and I went. I did not commit the offence I am charged with.

3

I state that there is a mistake in taking down my depositions. The boy and I did not go to get bait. He said “We will go and get bait.”

    To the Police: I don’t know the name of the friend who stopped in the cottage. The stranger was not present in the morning when the boy was there – no-one else was present in the shed when I was showing the boy the pups. I saw a lady there on that mer – (at her back door) near the cottage. The shed is not connected with the main building by a door. I never occupied the room next to the skillion. On the Sunday that I was at the cottage I only saw the boy there once. Cairns said that the boy had been there twice during my absence.

[Signed] Louis J Maurice.

Taken and sworn at Deniliquin this 2nd day of March 1904 before.
[Signed] Fred W Garstang, PM, John Kelly, JP, GH Perrin, JP, J Percival Ivess, JP.

4

This deponent Thomas Wallace Cairns on his oath, saith as follows:–

    I am a carpenter and reside at Deniliquin.

    To the accused: I remember last Sunday fortnight. You had a camp in my place for a day or two. I have seen Frank Alfred Loy before. I saw him twice on the night of the Sunday referred to, at my gate. He said you and he were going fishing. I never saw him before on the Sunday. I told the boy that he might see you near the hospital. I never saw the boy previously on the same day. I heard you talking to some boys on the Sunday morning about your pups at the door. If anyone sung out at the back door I could hear. If anything took place in the skillion room I could have heard it, I heard nothing. I could not tell how leg long you were talking to the boys. I did not hear you sent the boys away. I could not say if you came inside after the boys went away. The petition between the cottage and the skillion is weatherboard. The boards are in good condition. They are lined with hessian. The door from my room into the cottage leads directly into the skillion. Miss Burns lives near the cottage. Miss Burns’s door faces my door and she could see right in. The window opening faces Miss Burns’s back door. The boy did not tell me anything else.

5

    To the Bench: I was in bed at the cottage at 7 on the Sunday morning. I might have been asleep. I do not know of anything coming to the place or being in the skillion about that time. I am easily wakened.

    To the accused: My bed is right along the skillion room.

    To the Police: It was after 8 that the accused was speaking to the boys, it might be between 8 and 9. I think I was asleep at half past 7.

[Signed] Thomas W Cairns.

Taken and sworn at Deniliquin this 2nd day of March 1904 before us.
[Signed] Fred W Garstang, PM, John Kelly, JP, GH Perrin, JP, J Percival Ivess, JP.

6

    This deponent James Francis Holden on his oath, saith as follows:– I reside at Deniliquin with my parents. I know Frank Alfred Loy. About a fortnight ago last Sunday as I was coming home from the river Loy told me not to go near Werner (the accused) as he done, as he was going up to work Werner put his hand over his mouth and as Loy was going out he got him against the wall and opened his fly and put his private into his private. I have had conversation with other people concerning this matter. A lot of boys and other people knew of it and a lot of old men.

[Signed] James Francis Holden.

Taken and sworn at Deniliquin this 2nd day of March before us.
[Signed] Fred W Garstang, PM, John Kelly, JP, GH Perrin, JP, J Percival Ivess, JP.

7

  This deponent Frank Grieve was not sworn but makes the following statement. I am twelve years of age and the son of Constable Grieve of Deniliquin:– I know Frank Alfred Loy – Loy told me that Werner the accused got Loy in the front of the where Holeys used to live and put his hand over his waist and put his hand over his mouth and pulled him into where he was living and knocked him against the wall and took out his private and put it into the boy Loy’s trousers. I did nothing after this statement. I told my father.
[Signed] F Grieve.

8

 G. 190.

New South Wales, Deniliquin
TO WIT.                                   }

REX.
versus
Joseph Louis Maurice Charles de Veirneitz alias Charles Werner

Offence,— Indecent assault on a male person

    The accused stands committed to take his trial at the next Court of Assizes to be holden at Deniliquin, in the State of New South Wales, on the 20th day of April 1904. Bail allowed the accused in £100 and two sureties in £80 each, or one in £160.

[Signed] Fred W Garstang, PM, John Kelly, JP, GH Perrin, JP, J Percival Ives, JP.

Dated at the Police
Office, Deniliquin
in the said State,
this Second
day of March
AD 1904
4g 416 - 88

9

Justices Act, 1902.”

Recognizance to give Evidence.

State of New South Wales, Deniliquin
TO WIT.                                             }

Be it remembered, that on the 2nd day of March in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred and four Joseph H Cook a Senior Constable of the Police Force stationed at Deniliquin in the State of New South Wales, Alan William Oliver Lucas Police Constable of Mathoura in the said State, John Lindsay Kelton Police Constable of Deniliquin in the said State, Frank Alfred Loy (per AJ Jones) of Deniliquin personally came before the undersigned, one of His Majesty’s Justices of the Peace for the said State, and acknowledged themselves to owe our Sovereign Lord the King the sum of

FORTY POUNDS EACH,

of good and lawful money of Great Britain, to be made and levied of their goods and chattels, and lands and tenements, to the use of our said Lord the King, his Heirs and Successors, if they the said before mentioned persons shall fail in the condition indorsed.

Taken and acknowledged, the day and year first above mentioned, at Deniliquin in the said State, before me.
[Signed] Fred W Garstang, PM.

The condition of the within written Recognizance is such, that whereas one Louis Joseph Maurice Charles de Veirneitz alias Charles Werner was this day charged before FW Garstang, PM, John Kelly, GH Perrin and J Percival Ivess, esquires, four of His majesty’s Justices of the Peace for the said State for that on the 14th February 1904 at Deniliquin in the aforesaid State he did indecently assault one Frank Alfred Loy a male person.

If, therefore, they the before mentioned persons shall appear at the next Court of Assizes to be holden at Deniliquin in and for the State of New South Wales, on Wednesday the 20th day of April 1904, at nine of the clock in the forenoon, and then and there give such evidence as they know upon an information to be then and there preferred against the said Louis Joseph Maurice Charles de Veirneitz alias Charles Werner for the offence aforesaid, to the jurors who shall pass upon the trial of the said Louis Joseph Maurice Charles de Veirneitz alias Charles Werner.

Then the said Recognizance to be void, or else to stand in full force and virtue.
[Signed] Fred W Garstang, PM.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

[On the depositions’ cover sheet is the following]

Circuit Court.
Deniliquin
20th April 1904
AG’s No. 161 04/78
Depositions.
CS’s No. 3
v.
Louis Joseph Charles de Veirneitz alias Charles Werner
Indecently assaulting a male person
Committed at: Deniliquin
on: 2nd March 1904

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Court. Deniliquin Circuit
Date. 20 & 21 April 04
Cor. GB Simpson Judge. 15
Plea. Not guilty
Verdict. Guilty
Judgment. Sentence imprisonment with hard labour for 1 year and 4 months in Deniliquin Gaol
Note.– In event of postponement, it should be stated whether accused admitted to bail.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Indecent assault on a male person.
[Signed] Hugh Pollock S[olicitor] G[eneral]
8.3.04
Susan Loy not bound over

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Pastoral Times, Sat 23 April 1904 16

DENILIQUIN CIRCUIT COURT.
Wednesday, April 20.
(Before his Honor Mr Justice GB Simpson.) 17

    Crown Prosecutor, Mr FJ Lyons; Deputy Sheriff, Mr FW Garstang, PM.

INDECENT ASSAULT.

    Louis Joseph Maurice Charles Du Viernitz [sic] was charged with indecently assaulting a boy. He pleaded not guilty. The following jury was sworn: D Reid, JW Adams, —, Middlemiss, C Rowbottom, A Herwin, A Cameron, G Casley, AJ McLaurin, S Currie, WJ Priestly, A Fegan and SJ Outram.

    Evidence for the Crown was given by Frank Alfred Loy, Senior Constable Cook, Constable Kelton and Constable Lucas.

    For the defence, the prisoner handed in a long written statement, which was read by the associate. Prisoner assured the jury of his innocence and asked for acquittal.

    He called Thomas Cairns, and Lizzie Ann Pears to give evidence on his behalf.

    After a retirement of 20 minutes the jury brought in a verdict of guilty.

    The gaoler read a list of eight previous convictions against the prisoner, viz., Port Pirie (SA), 1881, larceny, 3 months; Gladstone (SA), 1882, forgery and uttering, seven years; Adelaide (SA), 1891, larceny, 4 years; Broken [Hill], 1897, vagrancy, 2 months; same place, 1898, false pretences, 6 months; same place, 1899, drunkenness, 10s. or three days; Berrigan, 1903, being in possession of stolen property, one month.

    Prisoner denied the three South Australian convictions. He was sentenced to 16 months’ imprisonment with hard labour in Deniliquin Gaol.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~


Louis Joseph Maurice Charles Devierneitz, Gaol photo sheet 18

SRNSW: NRS2191, [3/5996], Deniliquin Gaol photographic description book, 1895-1929, No. 28, p. 29, R5118. Emphasis added.


Gaol Photo Sheet - 
Transcribed Details

No. 28
Deniliquin

Date when Portrait was taken: 13th May 1904

Name: Louis Joseph Maurice Charles Devierneitz
(aka Charles Werner)

Native place: France

Year of birth: 1850

Arrived       Ship: City of Nankin
in Colony }   Year: 1876

Trade or occupation
previous to conviction  } Mechanical engineer

Religion: R. C.

Education, degree of: R. & W.

Height: 5' 4"

Weight     On committal: 140
in lbs     } On discharge:

Colour of hair: Grey

Colour of eyes: Grey

Marks or special features: Bullet wound mark on right shin, scar on left side of forehead. Scar below left breast. Scar on right side of chin. Scar over left eyebrow. Bald on top of head.

(No. of previous Portrait ... ) 

CONVICTIONS

Where and When Offence. Sentence

Port Pirie PS

Gladstone SACC

Adelaide SC

Broken Hill PS

ditto

ditto

ditto

Berrigan PC

Deniliquin CC

  3

24

24

15

29

  8

  9

17

21

 6

 3

 2

12

 6

 9

 9

12

 4

1881

1882

1891

1897

1898

1898

1899

1903

1904

Larceny

Forgery and uttering

Larceny 

Vagrancy

Drunk

False pretences

Drunk

In possession stolen property

Indecent assault on a male person

3 months H.L.

7 years H.L.

4 years H.L.

2 months H.L.

5/. Or 24 hours imprisonment

6 months H.L.

10/. Or 3 days imprisonment

1 months H.L.

16 months H.L.

 



Charles Werner
, 1915

The Corowa Free Press, Fri 4 Jun 1915 19

COROWA POLICE COURT.
———◦———
Wednesday, June 2.
————
(Before Mr JJ Jamieson, PM, and
Mr FC Piggin, JP.)
———


    Charles Werner, charged with using indecent language in Sanger-street, pleaded not guilty.

    Constable Armstrong gave evidence as to the arrest of accused, who said in a loud voice, “I don’t care a —– for anyone, not even King George.”

    The accused handed to the bench a sheet of paper on which he detailed his doings on the day in question, and stated that he did not use the language complained of. He had been knocked down by a man and roughly handled, and had suffered considerably in consequence. He did not drink, and had a residence in River-street, where he carried on a business. He had only been in Corowa a week and was looking for a carrier when he met his present trouble.

    Fined 10/-, or 3 days’ hard labour.

 



Charles Borolee
, 1915


The Corowa Free Press, Tue 8 Jun 1915
20

COROWA POLICE COURT.
———◦———
Thursday, June 3.
———
(Before Mr JJ Jamieson, PM.)

    Charles Borolee was charged by the police with stealing six boards, the property of Alexander Haig, valued at 3/; also a quantity of motor cycle tools and one sparking plug, the property of Cletus Vaughan, valued at £1/15/.

    Accused pleaded not guilty on both charges, and submitted lengthy statements in writing to the bench. The text of these was to the effect that the boards he was charged with stealing legally belonged to him, as he took them in exchange for double the amount of secondhand timber used in the construction of the two doors ordered by Mr Haig. With reference to the motor cycle tools, he said they were in a place where they could be taken by anyone; that the value placed on them was fictitious, and though some of them were found on his premises none were found in his personal effects. The statements also gave details of the treatment he had received since his arrest. He had been deprived of food for 40 consecutive hours, and he was suffering great pain from wounds inflicted by a man who knocked him down. He had given the man in charge, but the police told him to consult a solicitor. He also complained of the harsh and cruel treatment he had received, and also that he had been deprived of tobacco, pipe, matches; half perished with cold, and was not guilty.

    The following evidence was taken:—

    Harry Fleming, police constable, stationed at Corowa, deposed that at 12.50 on the 2nd inst, in company with Constable Armstrong, he went to defendant’s residence in River-street, Corowa, where he had a quantity of old chairs, etc, stored. Saw a quantity of timber in a shed adjoining. Defendant was standing near the shed. Said to him, “Where is the timber belonging to Mr Haig?” Defendant replied, “I have no timber of Mr Haig’s; it all belongs to me.” Searched the shed and found the six pieces produced, along with other old timber. Asked defendant if the timber produced was his, and he replied, “That is mine; I bought it in Benalla.” A few minutes after he said, “No, two of the longest pieces belong to me; the others belong to Mr Haig.” Constable Armstrong went for Mr Haig. He came and looked at the timber and said, “I gave him an order to get 70 feet of timber from Mr W Parkin to do some work at the shop.” Mr Haig added, “This is the balance of the 70 feet,” pointing to the timber produced. Defendant was present at the time, and said, “I swapped some of the old timber I had with you for some of this.” Mr Haig did not reply, but walked away. Then arrested defendant, and charged him with the offence. In answer to the charge he said, “I am not guilty; I bought the timber in Benalla.”

    Alex Haig deposed that he was a resident of Corowa, of independent means. Knew the defendant. Called at his private house about ten days ago and arranged to let him a shop in Sanger-street. Arranged with defendant to put a new floor over the cellar, fix a rail on the verandah, and remove the water pipe. That is all he could remember. Did this work. Defendant told him what material would be required. Could not remember the quantity. Gave defendant an order to Mr Parkin to supply the timber. Saw the timber after it was delivered at the place defendant had rented. Defendant completed the job. Went to Mr Parkin afterwards and paid him for the timber. After the job was finished he saw the timber produced in the kitchen. Said to defendant, “This timber is mine.” Defedant [sic] replied, “It is not yours, I bought this timber myself.” That was all he could remember took place then. Defendant afterwards left the premises. On Tuesday morning last, 1st June, he inspected the premises, and found the timber gone, and reported the matter to the police. Saw the timber afterwards when the police arrested the defendant. Did not remember saying anything about the timber to the police. Recognised the timber as that the police had in their possession. Had no doubt it was his timber. Saw the timber after it arrived from Parkin’s. It was a quantity of boards like those produced. Gave no authority to the defendant or any other person to remove the timber from the kitchen. He valued it at 3/ or 4/. He remembered a conversation with defendant before he started the job; he did not give defendant carte blanche to get any timber he required to do the job; probably told defendant that he was to use secondhand boards to save the cost of new material. After the job was done he did not measure the material that was used in it; he told me he had used up a lot of secondhand boards; he did not know th measurement of the cellar doors. Knew where defendant was living. Never said anything about the timber to him. Was looking for a cold chisel, which he did not get, nor had he got since. Lent him the cold chisel when he was on the job, and he never returned it; he said, “I’ll try and find it,” and hunted in his tool box. He afterwards said, “I’ll find it bye and bye, and give it to you. Had not seen the chisel since. Believe he tried to find it.

    William Parkin deposed he was a timber merchant, and resided in Corowa. He transacted some business on 25th May last. Brought an order signed by Mr Haig, which read, “Kindly give bearer, on my account, 5/12 and 2/7, 6 x 7/8 T and G softwood, pair of hinges, and 1 lb of nails,” all of which were supplied and delivered to Mr Haig’s place in Sanger-street. The timber produced was purchased at his establishment. The defendant had never bought any timber from him. The only timber supplied to him was on Mr Haig’s order. He had measured the timber used up in the job, and that, with the balance now in court, made up the quantity purchased from him. He did not open the doors. One door was 7 x 3, the other was made of old material.

    William Parkin, at the request of the bench went to Mr Haig’s premises, and inspected the job in question. He had examined the doors, there was no new timber other than that which he had previously mentioned.

    With reference to the second charge,

    Harry Fleming deposed that at about 7 pm on the 2nd inst, in company with Constable Armstrong and defendant, he went through his (defendant’s) place in River-street, while defendant got some clothes. While defendant was getting them he (Constable Fleming) asked defendant if he could look in his port to see if there were any tools there that had been reported stolen from a kit bag on Mr Vaughan’s motor cycle, which was on the back verandah of his shop. He said, “You can look wherever you like.” He searched the port but found nothing there. After pulling a few tins away from the wall he found this sparking plug, small oiler, and sundry small screws, and bicycle outfit all in a kerosene tin. He held the sparking plug in his hand, and said to defendant, “What is this?” He replied that it was an axle off his bike. I asked him where he got it, to which he replied he found it in a rubbish tip. Then showed him the small oiler, and asked him where he got it. He said it was an oiler belonging to his machine. Constable Armstrong then asked defendant if he was aware that this (holding up the sparking plug) was a sparking plug, and was amongst the property stolen from Mr Vaughan. Defendant said it was a lie, adding that he did not steal it. Then took him back to the lockup, and charged him with the present charge. Cletus Vaughan came to the lockup to-day. Defendant was present. He asked Mr Vaughan if these were his property, showing him the articles in question, to which he said they were, and they were in his kit bag with the other things stolen from the rear of his premises. Mr Vaughan said he had not given anyone permission to take or remove anything from the motor cycle in the yard. He asked defendant if he had any authority to remove the sparking plug, and he said he found it in the shop.

    Cletus Vaughan deposed that he was a newsagent, residing in Corowa, next door to where defendant had rented a shop from Mr Haig. He owned a motor cycle on the back verandah of the premises occupied by the defendant until about eight days ago there was a tool bag attached to the bicycle. About Tuesday he went to the tool bag for some tools, and found the complete set missing. It consisted of three spanners, belt punch, screw-driver, knife, and a number of other tools wrapped in a bag. There was also a sparking plug and oiler, and cyclist’s patching outfit. About 10 days previously they were all in the kit bag. Had used the bicycle, but had no occasion to open the kit bag. Identify [sic] the articles produced as his property, which were in the kit bag 10 days ago, but were missing on Monday last. Valued them at 10/. The whole contents of the bag were worth 35/. Saw the defendant this afternoon in the court yard. Said to him, “Hadn’t you better tell us what you have done with those tools?” He replied, “I have not got them, but I know where they can be found.” Then said to him, “Had you not better tell the Sergeant where they are?” He replied, “It would implicate another person, and I would prefer to get them myself.” Gave no one authority to take or use them.

    The court then adjourned until next day to allow the defendant to prepare his defence.

————————
Friday, June 4.
————

    The PM said the statement handed in by the accused reflected great credit on his intellectual ingenuity, but the facts of the case as brought out in the evidence were too strong for a defence of that description. It was quite true that goods were left in a place where anybody might have access to them, and might have been stolen by anyone, but all doubts as to whether the accused was guilty or not were dispelled by the fact that he told the police where the rest of the goods were, which he could not do unless he were guilty. He would, therefore, find him guilty of the offence of stealing the bicycle kit and other articles.

    The defendant [Charles Borolee] stated that he merely told the police that he had a good clue as to where the goods were, as tools similar to the ones in question were offered to him, and which he refused to buy, as he stated he had no use for them.

    At this stage Senior Sergeant Hanna read the following list of prior convictions, and said that there was a further list in the Gazette, but they had not had time to prepare details of same:—

    Charles Barromes Werner, on 5th June, 1901, at Broken Hill, for unlawfully assaulting a child under the age of 12 years, 6 months hard labour.

    Joseph Louis Maurice Charles de Viernietz, alias Charles Werner, at Deniliquin Criminal Court, for indecent assault on a male person, 4th May, 1904, 16 months’ hard labour; also on 3rd January, 1908, at Echuca, for false representation to obtain money, 6 months’ hard labour; on 1st December, 1904, at Wangaratta, obscene language, three months’ hard labour; on 1st June, 1915, at Corowa, Charles Borolee, alias Chas Werner, indecent language, 10/, or three days.

    The Sergeant also produced the accused’s photograph in the discharged prisoner’s album.

    The accused, [Charles Borolee] in his statement to the bench, asked if it was fair for the police to rake up the past. Would anyone of us, he said, if we were analysed, be found chaste and without a blemish? No. If a man, after he had paid the penalty for a crime, came out into the world and had to fight the battle of life against all the police who endeavoured to hound a man down wherever he went, and succeeded in earning an honest living in spite of those odds, that man had more brains than any other man. “Once marked, always marked; once stained, always stained,” is the remark of the cleverest Supreme Court judges. He would ask the bench to take no notice of the list of charges read out. He was there charged with stealing tools, of which he was not guilty. He feared no man, and called no man his master. He had a vast amount of experience and had moved in the highest society and the lowest. Nothing was unknown to him, and he could read human nature like no one else could, having made a special study of it in France. He had studied man, and why is man not known to-day? Because he is only a common animal! No man alive to-day could see human nature as he could; he could see beyond the stars, and was possessed of second sight. Nothing that was hidden in the world to-day was hidden to him, although he was only a common wood splitter, and he asked the bench to take into consideration the circumstances. He said before his God that he was innocent, and no notice should be taken of the list of convictions read by the sergeant. He could bring men to uphold his character. He had always tried to keep straight, and was a hard worker. He did not drink, and had formed an idea as to the whereabouts of the stolen property and felt sure he was right. He had suffered from chronic heart disease for 20 years, and lived artificially on strychnine, and had been in gaol for 4 days, half starved and almost perished with cold, and begged the bench to take a lenient view of the case.

    The PM [J[ohn] J Jamieson] said the accused remarked that he possessed considerable knowledge of human nature, and he firmly believed he had. In fact, he had demonstrated that fact to his complete satisfaction. He had a profound knowledge of human nature, but it was not the right thing to use that knowledge for the bad purpose of preying on human nature. When a man had been found guilty of an offence and had endured the punishment, it was unfair that he should be asked to bear the burden of that punishment again. Even when a man had been found guilty he should not be brought up again so long as he had led a decent life, and the law at present in the land was so just that it would not allow such to be done unless another charge were proved. The desire was not that a man should bear an additional burden because he had been found guilty, but the public should and must be protected. If a man frequented courts through offences against society he must be treated in a way that society will be protected. This man is evidently a menace to society, and must be removed to a place where he won’t offend for a period of time according to the seriousness of the offence. With regard to the stealing of the timber, the value is very small. If the defendant had come here with a clean record a fine would have met the case, but under the circumstances he must be sentenced to three months’ hard labour in Albury Gaol. With regard to the second case of stealing the tools, he is also found guilty, and is sentenced to six months’ hard labour in Albury Gaol.

    The Defendant: Well, I will appeal against the decision of the court; it is unjust.

    The PM: You can’t appeal here. You will have an opportunity of appealing later on, but you can’t think about it here.

    The defendant was then taken to the cell.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Charles Borolee, Gaol photo sheet 21

SRNSW: NRS1966, [3/5999], Albury Gaol photographic description book, 1910-1929, No. 197, p. 22, R5082. Emphasis added.


Gaol Photo Sheet - 
Transcribed Details

No. 197
Albury

Date when Portrait was taken: 23rd June 1915

Name: Charles Borolee
(aka Louis Joseph Maurice Deverniety; Wernier; Werner)

Native place: France

Year of birth: 19-6-1853

Arrived       Ship: City of Nankin
in Colony }   Year: 1875

Trade or occupation
previous to conviction  } Cabinet maker

Religion: Roman Catholic

Education, degree of: Read & Write

Height: 5' 4½"

Weight     On committal: 134
in lbs     } On discharge:

Colour of hair: Grey

Colour of eyes: Grey

Marks or special features: Slight (hair ?) Bold top of head Scar top of head Scar right temple Chest hairy Bullet scar left side Ruptured right side.

(No. of previous Portrait .. 28 Deniliquin)

CONVICTIONS

Where and When Offence. Sentence

South Australia

Port Pirie PS

Gladstone SACC

Adelaide SC

NSW

Broken Hill PS

ditto

ditto

Berrigan PC

Deniliquin CC

Echucha [sic] PC 

Wangaratta PC.

Corowa PC
ditto

 

  3

24

24

 

15

  8

  9

  7

21

  3

  1

  4
  4

 

 6

 3

 2

 

12

 9

 9

12

 4

 4

 4

 6
 6

 

1881

1882

1891

 

1897

1898

1899

1903

1904

1908

1914

1915
1915

 

Larceny

Forgery & Uttering

Larceny 

 

Vagrancy

False pretences

Drunk

Stolen property in possession

Indecent assault on a male person

False pretences

Obscene Language

1) Stealing
2) Stealing

 

3 months HL

7 years PS

4 years HL

 

2 months HL

6 months HL

10/- or 2 days HL

1 months HL

16 months HL

6 months HL

3 months HL

3 months HL
6 months HL  |  Accumulative

 


1     South Australian Weekly Chronicle, (Adelaide, SA), Sat 25 Mar 1882, p. 21.

2     South Australian Register (Adelaide, SA), Wed 21 Jan 1891, p. 7. Emphasis added.

3     South Australian Chronicle, (Adelaide, SA), Sat 24 Jan 1891, p. 12. Emphasis added.

4     South Australian Register (Adelaide, SA), Thu 5 Feb 1891, p. 7.

5     South Australian Chronicle, (Adelaide, SA), Sat 14 Feb 1891, p. 13. Emphasis added.

6     South Australian Register (Adelaide, SA), Wed 18 Feb 1891, p. 7.

7     Barrier Miner, Wed 15 Aug 1900, p. 4. Emphasis added.

8     SRNSW: NRS880, [9/7023], Supreme Court, Papers and depositions, Broken Hill, 1901, No. 53. Emphasis added.

9     Barrier Miner, Tue 2 Apr 1901, pp. 1-2. Emphasis added.

10   Acting Justice Gibson’s notebooks could not be located at SRNSW.

11   The Advertiser, Wed 3 Apr 1901, p. 4. Emphasis added.

12   Barrier Miner, Mon 27 May 1901, p. 4. Emphasis added.

13   The Pastoral Times (Deniliquin), Sat 5 March 1904, p. 2. Emphasis added.

14   SRNSW: NRS880, [9/7069], Supreme Court, Papers and depositions, Deniliquin, 1904, No. 161. Emphasis added.

15   Justice GB Simpson notes could not be located at SRNSW.

16   The Pastoral Times (Deniliquin), Sat 23 April 1904, p. 2. Emphasis added.

17   Justice GB Simpson’s notes, for this case, could not be located at SRNSW.

18   SRNSW: NRS2191, [3/5996], Deniliquin Gaol photographic description book, 1895-1929, No. 28, p. 29, R5118. Emphasis added.

19   The Corowa Free Press, Fri 4 Jun 1915, p. 5. Emphasis added.

20   The Corowa Free Press, Tue 8 Jun 1915, p. 5. Emphasis added.

21   SRNSW: NRS1966, [3/5999], Albury Gaol photographic description book, 1910-1929, No. 197, p. 22, R5082. Emphasis added.