The Armidale Express and New England General Advertiser, Sat 7 Jan 1865 1
ARMIDALE POLICE COURT.
Tuesday, Jan. 3.
(Before the Police Magistrate.)
Wm Walsh was charged, at the instance of Francis Schaup. With the commission of an unnatural crime about two o’clock on Sunday morning last. The court was cleared and the doors were shut—the reporter for the local journal being permitted to remain. Evidence was taken from Constable McDonald, who apprehended prisoner, and also from the prosecutor. Eventually it was found necessary, as additional evidence was promised for the prosecution, and prisoner wished to have two witnesses produced for the defence, to adjourn further hearing till Saturday (this day), at 10 am. The Bench intimated that if prisoner could give bail—himself in £50, and one surety of £50, or two of £25 each, he would be admitted to it. Prisoner said he could not get bail, as he was a stranger here. He was then removed in custody. Mr Jackes sat with the PM during a portion of the case. We postpone the few additional particulars which can be published in relation to such a charge until the accused is either acquitted or committed.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Armidale Express and New England General Advertiser, Sat 14 Jan 1865 2
ARMIDALE POLICE COURT.
Tuesday, Jan. 3.
(Before the Police Magistrate and, for a portion of the time, Mr Jackes, JP.)
(In our last issue we mentioned that a charge of commission of an unnatural crime had been initiated on the above date, and that we would defer publishing the particulars, so far as we could mention them in our columns, till the prisoner was either acquitted or committed. A committal having now taken place, we will dispose of this disgusting case according to our promise.)
William Walsh was charged, by Francis Schaup, with the commission of an unnatural offence, about two o'clock on the morning of Sunday, 1st instant. The Court having been cleared, with the exception of the reporter for the ‘Express,’ whom the PM permitted to be present,
Constable John McDonald deposed that he was on town duty on Sunday morning, 1st January, when he received information that a certain crime had been committed; from the information he subsequently received, he went to the house of Mr Zeitler, and, going into a skilling room, saw prisoner, and asked him his name; he replied “William Walsh”; witness told him he wanted him; prisoner replied that he was not going to run away—that, he knew he was looking for him; he told prisoner that he arrested him on a charge of committing the crime of —– on Francis Schaup; prisoner replied Schaup was a b —– fool—he was drunk; witness asked him if he understood the charge made against him? prisoner replied he did; witness then told him to come with him to the lock-up; prisoner said, “All right—I will go with you”—that he had never been in the lock-up but once before, and that was for being drunk, and that he had done nothing he was afraid of; on his way to the lock-up he said that Frank being drunk, he was trying to get him home, and this was his thanks now; that he could not keep him quiet, that Frank had been singing out for Forster, and blowing about Cooper, all the night; witness then put prisoner in the lock-up; complainant was perfectly sober when he made the charge against prisoner, at six o’clock on Sunday evening, 1st Jan; prisoner also was perfectly sober when arrested at seven the same evening; Schaup said, “I am going to give a man in charge;” witness said, “For what?” his reply was that a person (describing prisoner) had taken him home and committed a certain offence last night, after having tried to do it several times on the way; complainant gave him certain additional particulars, and added that the offence was committed in the curriers’ house or room where he lived (then followed details unfit for publication); complainant told witness that be only knew prisoner as William, a Frenchman; witness then asked Schaup why he did not report the matter to the police before now? Schaup replied that it being Sunday, be did not think he could get a warrant; witness told him it did not matter about the warrant—he had a right to report it to the police before then; complainant then said, but he did not think the man (meaning prisoner) would go away till to-morrow, and that he believed he was at Gordon’s. (At this stage Mr Jackes and Mr WA Dumaresq came upon the Bench, but the latter gentleman left in a few minutes). Witness, resuming, stated he then told complainant that he would go and look for the man, and from the description of him given by Schaup he did so; Schaup said he was a man who worked in the currying shop; witness asked, Was it a little man, a German? Schaup said, No, it was a Frenchman; witness said, then, that he knew him; after looking for him for about an hour, witness met Schaup at Trim’s garden; Schaup said, “Go down to Zeitler’s—he’s just gone in there now;” witness went to Zeitler’s, and did as he had before stated; after he had arrested prisoner, witness asked Schaup if that was the man? Schaup said it was—“all right”; witness then told Schaup to follow him to the lock-up, and sign the charge book, and he did so. Sergeant Du Vernet offered to speak in French to the prisoner, but the latter (who did not seem to understand French) declined to speak it, and said he was now an Englishman. He put no question to Constable McDonald.
Francis Schaup, the complainant, deposed that he had been working at Mr Zeitler’s tan-yard; on Saturday evening last he was at Galvin’s Inn; he left there, he thought, about one on Sunday morning; after leaving, prisoner joined him, and compelled him to walk with him; many times he tried to get away from prisoner, but he could not; prisoner wanted to fight him, and kicked up a row; witness would not fight; witness wanted him to go to Mr Mulligan’s, to get a glass of grog, but only because he knew that public houses would not then be open, and that by this means he hoped he would get rid of him; prisoner again wanted to fight him, which witness refused to do, and said he would go home, but prisoner would not leave him; they went round by McLean’s store; on witness’s way home, he slipped away for a time, but prisoner found him out and wanted again to fight him; he told prisoner to go home, and then went into Zeitler’s curriers’ shop; prisoner followed him, and tried to pull his coat off; one sleeve witness pulled off himself, and the other prisoner pulled off; witness asked him what he wanted ? prisoner told him several times * * * *; witness did not know what that meant; prisoner would not let him go; witness was rather weak, and the worse for liquor, though he had been as sober as he was now when he left Galvin’s, but he had been pulled about and troubled, and therefore the liquor he had taken had effect upon him; witness then lay down upon the wool, to get a sleep; prisoner then knocked him down with his fist; witness then asked him, for G—‘s sake to let him alone, for he would get him what he wanted in the morning; he only said this that he might get away from him, but it was of no use; he screamed out then, but the offence was committed; afterwards he went home to Mr Zeitler’s private residence; he thought the offence was committed about two in the morning; prisoner had been working at the same place as him for about a fortnight; he considered prisoner was half drunk at the time, or he might have been drunk; witness did not give information to the police early on Sunday, as he was ill, and as he believed that a warrant could not be obtained till Monday, or was doubtful if there was punishment for a certain offence, but at last he thought that there must be punishment for such a thing as prisoner had done; when he went home, he found prisoner there; witness could not tell how he got home, whether prisoner took him there or not; when, on the Sunday, he got up late, and saw prisoner, he did not say anything to him then; he was sober when he left Galvin’s; described what prisoner did immediately previous to the offence; could not recollect if prisoner said anything to him when he was committing the offence.
Cross-examined by prisoner: He was not shouting when he left Galvin’s; he asked prisoner to go to Mulligan’s, for two nobblers; never recollected sleeping under Mulligan’s verandah for two hours or at all, and did not believe it; did not ask prisoner to strike a match to look after his hat, on Mulligan’s verandah. (Mr Jackes left the Bench.) Had got the hat yet (prisoner said he might, for he had found it for him); never recollected saying he would take a knife, and kill prisoner; denied that he had lain down in the street and cried out that J— C— was last, and that Forster was first, and that prisoner had then slapped him on the month, aud told him to be quiet, and not to be using such language in the street; he had only used the former name in crying for assistance when prisoner was committing the offence for which he stood charged, but the hour was late, and all the people about seemed asleep, so he received no assistance. Prisoner said that he could produce two witnesses in his defence.
The Bench : Could he get bail ?
Prisoner: No— he was a stranger here.
The police having also additional evidence to produce, the Bench adjourned further hearing of the case till Saturday morning. If prisoner could give bail—himself in £50, and one responsible surety of £50, or two sureties of £25 each, it would be taken. Bail not being forthcoming, prisoner was remanded in custody.
Saturday, Jan. 7.
(Before the Police Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police.)
(Before the Police Magistrate.)
Wm Walsh was again brought up, and the court shut.
Mr Rowsell now appeared for prisoner.
The previous evidence having been read over, Dr West deposed to having examined both prisoner and complainant. His evidence was to the effect that it was very improbable the alleged offence had been committed as stated.
John Jones deposed that about one or two on Sunday morning he heard voices in the vicinity of his place, but he did not hear a sentence of what was said, and had never told anyone that he recognised the voices.
John Morris, cook at Mr Trim’s, deposed that about half-past one on Sunday morning prisoner came to his place and tapped at the door; on witness opening it prisoner made a rush at him, and tore his shirt right down; finding that prisoner was a stronger man than him he turned round, got a stick, struck prisoner a blow on the head, and then closed the door upon him; prisoner then came back three times to the window, and witness saw that his shirt was very bloody from the blow he had given him; witness saw prisoner no more that night, but prisoner came back next morning and said he was sorry for what he had done; witness told him he was sorry for having had to strike him (a shirt much stained with blood, and believed to have been prisoner’s, was now produced, but witness could not identify it); prisoner was alone when he came; he believed prisoner was very groggy; the shirt had no blood upon it till after he had struck prisoner.
By Mr Rowsell: Had known complainant for a long time; complainant was very noisy when in drink; did not know if he was subject to hallucinations, as he had had no conversation with him.
John Galvin, innkeeper, deposed that complainant was at his house on Saturday night, Dec 31; complainant left about 25 minutes past 12, to the best of witness’s belief; his clock was about a quarter of an hour fast; complainant was then under the influence of liquor, but not drunk; witness put him out; nobody was then with complainant, who, when he put him out, was very excitable.
By complainant: He was not in the same state when he left witness’s house as when he had come there; when complainant was with the gentlemen witness did not notice he was under the influence of liquor, but immediately afterwards, when he put him out, he did notice it.
This closing the case for the prosecution, Mr Rowsell asked if the Bench considered it necessary for him to call witnesses for the defence? The Bench replied that Mr Rowsell could use his own discretion, but at present there appeared to be sufficient to oblige him (the PM) to send the case before another tribunal. All the evidence having been read over, the usual question and caution were given to the prisoner, who replied, “I am innocent; I wish to call two witnesses.”
Thomas Banks Williams deposed he was a licensed hawker, residing in Armidale; on the morning of Sunday last, he believed between one and two, he saw and heard complainant passing his place; complainant was then swearing a repetition of oaths; witness lived next door to Bell’s; complainant was going down Falconer-street, apparently on his way home, to Zeitler’s private residence, and not at all towards the tannery, which was in Dumaresq street; witness believed that complainant was drunk, as he did not walk nor behave like a sober man; he did not see complainant afterwards that morning; did not see any person with him when he was passing witness’s place; saw complainant on Sunday afternoon, when witness told him about his swearing in the morning; complainant replied that he had no recollection of what he had done when he was drunk, adding that he would insult even a friend when he was drunk, though he hated himself for it after he was sober; he told witness, too, that he would never take another glass of grog as long as he lived, and he made no complaint whatever to him against prisoner.
Cross-examined by complainant: He swore positively to having seen and heard complainant conduct himself as he had stated on Sunday morning.
By Sergeant Du Vernet: Complainant when swearing mentioned no names.
Charles Zeitler deposed he was manager of Mr Tysoe’s tannery; complainant had told him of visions of a black man walking up and down for about two hours at a time in the place he slept in at the tannery; complainant thought the place was haunted, and did not like to sleep there; he therefore slept elsewhere, and two or three days before he made the charge against Walsh witness allowed him to sleep on the sofa; complainant was rather much excited when under the influence of liquor; he was then noisy, and kind of half-mad.
Cross examined: Complainant did not say two minutes about the black man, but two hours; he neither saw nor heard complainant on Saturday night, when he was informed he had gone to a dinner given to Mr Forster; he found complainant lying on the sofa in witness’s place on Sunday morning; when complainant was under the influence of liquor he would say anything; he had never heard him abusing witness.
Mr Rowsell addressed the Bench, pointing out the utter improbability of a conviction on such evidence as had been adduced for the prosecution, and also drawing attention to the conduct and state of the complainant, as deposed to by several witnesses, on the night during which be alleged the offence was committed. Moreover, he urged strongly in favour of the prisoner the tenor of the Dr’s evidence and the fact that complainant was subject to hallucinations.
The Bench committed prisoner for trial at the Maitland Circuit Court. Mr Rowsell applied to have prisoner admitted to bail if he could procure it, and that any magistrate might take it.
The PM said that prisoner might be admitted to bail, himself in £50 and one surety of £50, or two sureties of £25 each, and that he would endorse the warrant of commitment so that any magistrate could accept the bail. The PM remarked that he would have the depositions forwarded as early as possible to the Attorney General, and that he would not fail to draw attention to the points mentioned by Mr Rowsell in prisoner’s favour. Mr Rowsell wished that prisoner might be retained in Armidale gaol for a short time until it could be ascertained if the Attorney General would decline to prosecute, but the PM replied that he had no power to authorise such detention, and that prisoner would be forwarded on in the usual way to Maitland. He said it was unnecessary to bind over Messrs Jones, Galvin, and Morris to prosecute; but the other witnesses could attend on Monday morning for that purpose.
Monday, Jan. 9.
(Before the Police Magistrate [Abram Orpen Moriarty] 3 and Alderman Moore, JP.)
John McDonald and Francis Schaup entered into recognisances to appear at the Circuit Court, Maitland, on, 6th April next, in the case against Wm Walsh.
ARMIDALE POST OFFICE.
On Monday afternoon the prisoner Wm Walsh, under committal on a charge of unnatural crime, left Armidale under escort for Maitland.
1 The Armidale Express and New England General Advertiser, (NSW), Sat 7 Jan 1865, p. 2.
2 The Armidale Express and New England General Advertiser, (NSW), Sat 14 Jan 1865, pp. 2, 3. Emphasis added.
3 Goulburn Evening Penny Post, (NSW), Thu 23 May 1918, p. 2. Emphasis added.
MR AO MORIARTY.
Mr Abram Orpen Moriarty died last night at his late residence, “Iveragh,” Brisbane Grove, [Goulburn] at the age of 88. The interment will be at Tirranna, and the funeral cortege will leave “Iveragh’ at 2.30 to-morrow (Friday) afternoon. Mr Moriarty leaves a widow and 8 children. The daughters are Mrs WM Chisholm, of Merrilla, the Misses AD (Goulburn), AC (Sydney), and SD Moriarty (of Goulburn); and the sons are Messrs H AO Moriarty (Moree), FFZ Moriarty (Cooma), AW Moriarty (Goulburn), and NSP Moriarty (captain AI Forces, in England). Captain Moriarty has been wounded and gassed.
The late Mr Moriarty had a long and honourable career in the public service. He retired from the position of chairman of the Goulburn Land Board during 1896. He was then senior officer of the public service, having been appointed to a clerkship in the Colonial Secretary’s office on January10, 1846. He arrived in Sydney in January, 1843, with his father, Commander Moriarty, RN (one of the last officers appointed from home). The deceased’s father for a time represented Braidwood in the NSW Legislative Assembly. In 1849 Mr Moriarty was appointed chief clerk in the Lands Department under Colonel Burney, RE, Chief Commissioner, and held that position until 1837. Subsequently he became Commissioner of Crown Lands for New England and Macleay, and Police Magistrate of Armidale. On the abolition of this office, he entered the Legislative Assembly as member for those districts. At the close of 1858, Mr Merewether, Clerk of the Executive Council, having been sent to England on a special mission, Mr Moriarty (who had retired from the Assembly) was appointed to act for him, and on Mr Merewether’s return was offered by Sir W Denison the post of private secretary to the Governor. The separation of the new colony of Queensland having been decided upon, and the first Governor (Sir Geo Bowen) having arrived, Mr Moriarty at his invitation accompanied him to Brisbane on HMS Cordelia, and was appointed Assistant Colonial Secretary and Clerk of the Council, and also for a time as Private Secretary. In 1860 Mr Moriarty was invited by Sir J Robertson to return to Sydney to assist in framing the land bills then in preparation, and was appointed Chief Commissioner for Crown Lands. In 1870 Mr Moriarty became Under-Secretary for Lands. Subsequently he received invitations from three constituencies to represent them in Parliament, and contested Monaro, but was defeated. Shortly afterwards Sir A Stephen appointed Mr Moriarty private secretary and aide-de-camp, which positions he held till the arrival of Sir Hercules Robinson. After rejoining the Lands Department, in 1873, many special services were entrusted to Mr Moriarty by successive Ministers. Later he was appointed Commissioner of the conditional sales branch and Chief Commissioner for Crown Lands. In 1881 Mr Moriarty, for health reasons, took a trip to England. Regaining his health, he returned to New South Wales and resumed duty as Chief Commissioner, which office he continued to hold until the passing of the Act of 1884. Subsequently he was appointed Chairman of the Land Board District of Goulburn, which he held up to his retirement in 1886. Afterwards he was a member of the Land Board. At different periods he took an interest in the Volunteer Force, of which he was still a member in 1896, having retired with the rank of captain. Mr Moriarty always took a keen interest in public affairs. His work in connection with the effort to have the Federal Capital established in Goulburn will long be remembered. He was a man of fine personal qualities, and was deeply respected.”