Skip to Content

Colonial Cases

Police Court, 1874 NT

Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 2 January 1874, p 2


Tuesday, December 22.

(Before Dr. Ellison, S.M.)

E. Bieber, publican, was summoned for having served drinks in his house, the Royal Hotel, after 11 o'clock at night, but the case was adjourned for the attendance of a witness who was at Southport, and who, it was stated, could prove that the law had not been broken.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 16 January 1874, p 3

What a nice little exposé of the French secret spy system, which seems to be in full vogue here in Palmerston, took place at the Police Court on Tuesday last, when Ernest Bieber was charged with selling intoxicating liquors after 11 p.m. on the night of the 26th ultimo. There is something supremely contemptible in the idea of policemen laying traps to catch the unwary, and prowling about hotels for the sake of obtaining a conviction. One would think a reign of terror is about to be established amongst us. It is certainly very pleasant to contemplate the idea that lodgers stopping at an hotel are liable to have their names dragged before the public gaze in a Court of justice by some spying myrmydon of the law when on "grog duty," or when the water police are told off, according to Mr. Smith, as "brandy and water" police.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 16 January 1874, p 2


Tuesday, January 6.

(Before Dr. Ellison, S.M., Hon. T. Reynolds, Mr. Connor, and Mr. Wells.)

Ernest Bieber, landlord of the Royal Hotel, Palmerston, was charged by the police with having, on the night of the 26th December, failed to close the outer door of his licensed house by eleven o'clock, and with having; supplied liquors after that hour to other persons than travellers or lodgers. Mr. Smith appeared for the defendant.

Sergeant Badman's evidence in support of the information was that the police saw drink served in a room behind the bar to persons sitting there, between twelve and one o'clock at night. The police were on the watch and obtained a knowledge of the offence by looking through a window.

Mr. Smith said that the chief witness for the defence was Trooper Vonderburg, who was lodging in the public house, and who on the night in question was merely sitting there with some other lodgers and a friend, who might have had a glass of drink with him, which he was quite right in doing. But unfortunately Vonderburg was not now present, although he had been summoned from Southport as a witness.

Sergeant Badman thought that perhaps he had not come on account of not having had his expenses tendered to him, as the Government had informed him that they would not pay the expenses.

Mr. Smith called E. Collins, who said that he was lodging at the house on the night in question, there were three other lodgers in the room at the same time, between twelve and half-past twelve o'clock; and there was one other person not a lodger. Did not know who he was. There was drink, but did not notice to whom it was served. About same time Trooper Wilkinson came in and asked for some beer for the Camp, but he was refused.

Case adjourned till the following day, to ascertain if the witness Vonderburg had been duty served with a summons.

[On the following day the witness attended and gave evidence to the effect that he was a lodger on the night in question, and that he paid for the drinks that were served upon which the case was dismissed.]

Martin v. Adcock.

In this case the complainant, a tailor, laid an information against defendant, a storekeeper, charging him with assaulting him whilst in his shop on the 17th December. Mr. Smith for the complainant. The evidence showed that a slight assault had been committed in turning complainant out of the shop, and also that considerable provocation had been given in the use of bad language by the complainant, for which offence he was punished by the Court the day after the assault.

A witness who had been summoned did not appear, although it was stated that he was still in the town. The Court therefore determined to proceed against him with a view to put a stop to such acts of contempt. The information was dismissed.

Ernest Bieber, publican, was summoned by the police for not having certain clauses of the Licensed Victuallers Act affixed in his house, as required by the Act. Defendant said he had given orders for the printing of the clauses.

Information dismissed.

During the hearing of the foregoing cases some warm discussion took place between the Court and Mr. Smith as to interruptions and objections, and Mr. Smith said that whilst the Bench kept the Bar in order, he hoped the Court would not interrupt him or the witnesses with such exclamations as "Hear, hear."

Mr. Reynolds-Oh, that refers to me, I suppose. (Laughter.)

Thursday, January 8.

(Before Dr. Ellison, K.M.)

J.G. Holies, a youth, was charged with stealing seven tins of preserved meat from the Lepanto, the property of the Government. The Court sentenced the prisoner to six months' imprisonment, with hard labor. ...

Jones v. Siebes-Claim for £3 8s., wages due from defendant to plaintiff.

Mr. Smith for the plaintiff. Judgment amount, with costs.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 23 January 1874, p 3




(Before Dr. Ellison, S.M.)

Dr. Ellison, before the cases were called on, wished to ask Mr. Smith, the lawyer, whether the report which appeared in the Northern Territory Times was correct. The report which stated that, at a meeting on Wednesday last, it was asserted by Mr. Smith that the Special Magistrate had received a telegram from Adelaide instructing him, in the event of certain appeals coming before him that he was to decide them in such and such a way. He wished to know whether it was correct or not. Mr. Smith said the report was correct, excepting that he (Mr. Smith) did not speak of the telegram as from his own knowledge, but as a matter which he had been told of upon good authority. He had been told that a telegram had been sent to the Special Magistrate instructing him how to decide in certain cases of appeal if they came before him; and he therefore said that he would draw attention to the matter, at the first sitting of the Local Court in order that the Special Magistrate might have an opportunity of contradicting the statement.

Dr. Ellison asked Mr. Smith if he would state who his informant was?

Mr. Smith declined to do so.

Dr. Ellison-Then, all I can say is that before making such a statement you should have taken every precaution to enquire into its truth. For it is a deliberate falsehood.

Mr. Smith-I am happy to hear you say so.

Dr. Ellison hoped that for the future Mr. Smith would be careful to ascertain the truth before making such statements either about him (Dr. Ellison) or any other person.

Mr. Smith was thankful for the advice as to other people. In this matter his object was to give the Special Magistrate an opportunity to deny the statement; for even if a telegram had been received it was quite certain that the Special Magistrate would not be in the slightest degree influenced by it. His intention had been to ask the question at the next Local Court day, and he would still do so when the time arrived. He would submit the matter, in fact, categorically asking whether a telegram of this kind had been received, and whether from Mr. Bagot or any other person.

Dr. Ellison-My answer is it is a deliberate falsehood.


This was an information for assault, in which Mrs. Grierson complained of Mrs. Shannon for pulling her hair, after knocking her child down; and Mrs. Shannon replied by stating that Mrs. Grierson assaulted her and cut her wrist with a plate. The complainant appealed to the public generally in proof of her good character, and also produced her "marriage lines," besides declaring that every one knew she had never left the paths of virtue. But the case altogether was evidently a neighbor's squabble which had arisen out of a quarrel between their children. Dismissed.


Robert Patrick was charged with having been drunk and riotous on the 18th instant, when according to the evidence of Trooper Raff he caused a disturbance and knocked down a man named Erskine in the public street. Mr. Smith said in extenuation on behalf of defendant that Erskine had been drinking away money belonging to Patrick and others who were associated with him in a mining venture.

Fined £1.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 23 January 1874, p 3


(Before Dr. Ellison.)

Alexander Erskine was charged on the information of Robert Patrick with having appropriated stores, &c., belonging to himself and others.

Mr. Smith appeared for the plaintiff.

Defendant asked for a postponement in order that he might bring witnesses from the country.

Adjourned to the 4th February; bail to be found to the amount of £200.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 23 January 1874, p 3


(Before Dr. Ellison, S.M.)

A Malay boy, named Marcus, lately in the employ of Messrs. Gore, was charged by H. Gore with having stolen a watch, his property. The evidence showed that the watch was found in the possession of the prisoner, who did not deny the theft. Sentenced to six months' imprisonment

with hard labor.


(Before Dr. Ellison.)

A Malay boy lately in the employ of Mr. Clarke was charged with stealing knives from his employer, and, on conviction, was sentenced to three months' imprisonment with hard labour. This is the third or fourth case of the sort lately, and it is time some plan were adopted of making these boys know that their offences are regarded as crimes; a matter which they are likely to overlook as long as they are merely sent to the Police quarters and there allowed to potter about very much according to their own inclination.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 23 January 1874, p 3


(Before Dr. Ellison.)

Alexander Erskine was charged on the information of Robert Patrick with having appropriated stores, &c., belonging to himself and others.

Mr. Smith appeared for the plaintiff.

Defendant asked for a postponement in order that he might bring witnesses from the country.

Adjourned to the 4th February; bail to be found to the amount of £200.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 30 January 1874, p 2




(Before Dr. Ellison, S.M. Mr. Gardiner was also on the Bench.)

William Faulks, of Southport, was brought up under an information for resisting the Police in the execution of their duty, at Southport on the 27th instant.

Mr. Smith for the prosecution.

It appeared from the evidence of Trooper Ring and Mr. J. Lindsay that on the day in question a bailiff, who had been sent to Southport at the instance of Mr. Lindsay, and with a warrant under the seal of the Local Court, took possession of the Royal Hotel, and began to make an inventory of the property there. At first Mr. Faulks, who was in possession, declined to give way to the bailiff, until at last he consented to go out on being formally ejected, which was done by the trooper putting his hand on defendant's shoulder and advising him to go out. The bailiff was thus put in possession. But some time afterwards the trooper sent a message to Mr. Lindsay, saying that Mr. Faulks had again returned, and had ousted the bailiff. Mr. Lindsay therefore ordered a forcible entry to be made, and this was effected with considerable force; and as Mr. Faulks would not on this occasion resign his place, Mr. Lindsay gave him into custody, and he was accordingly brought down to Palmerston on a charge of resisting the police in the execution of their duty.

Mr. Smith now asked that this information might be amended, and an entirely new charge-that of attempting to rescue or of rescuing an hotel-should be substituted in its place.

Mr. Faulkes objected; but the Court allowed the amendment.

The defendant cross-examined the witnesses at considerable length, and tried to elicit that no force was used by himself, or any one in possession of the hotel. He considered, however, that he had a right to resist the bailiff, as he was the owner of the property, and did not agree with Mr. Lindsay that he ought to give up possession to the bailiff and afterwards try the case of ownership on an interpleader.

But Mr. Lindsay's evidence clearly showed that there was resistance. He spoke of one person present amongst a mob inside the hotel who tried to excite people by saying that the authorities in this case were on the side of the rich against the poor; and he (Mr. Lindsay) expected them every moment to lug in Magna Charta, the "Bloody Jefferies," and all the rest of it. (Laughter)

The defendant, in his answer to the charges, said that he was the owner of the place; that he considered that the bailiff was an intruder; and that when he (defendant) was given into custody he was not allowed bail, although plenty of bail was available, which, in his opinion, was different treatment from that Mr. Lindsay would have received if he had been given into custody.

Fined £1 and costs.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 13 February 1874, p 2





(Before Dr. Ellison, S;M.)

James Henretta, laborer, was charged with having, on the 30th day of January, unlawfully, without the authority or consent of the owner thereof, worked one black mare, the property of Her Majesty's Government.

Sergeant Badman said the prisoner had been charged with stealing the horse, and the case had been partly heard by Warden Frampton, who remanded the prisoner to Palmerston. Acting under instructions, however, he had laid an information against prisoner under the Impounding Act for unlawfully working; but if the evidence disclosed an intention to steal, they could proceed with the other charge.

P.T.L. von der Borch said he knew the prisoner, who had lately been doing nothing for a livelihood. On the 29th January inspected prisoner's swag, and found a pad and ropes fitted to ride a horse with. Had received information that prisoner was riding and planting horses. Patrolled the road, suspecting the prisoner would leave that night. At 2 o'clock, in company with Trooper Howard, met prisoner riding on horseback towards Bridge Creek. Recognised the horse he was riding as one belonging to the Government. Arrested and charged him with stealing the mare. The mare was in his charge, was secured by hobbles, and was near the Station between 9 and 10 in the evening. Never gave authority to prisoner to use the mare, and no one else could give permission. The pad was on her back. It was reported that horses were missed lately. Cautioned prisoner after arresting him. He said he would rather do two years in Adelaide Gaol than stop another six months in the Northern Territory. Prisoner had lately been drinking heavily. By prisoner-Believe you had been working for several parties. Told you when arresting you not to commit yourself, as I did not want to hear any of your statements. You told me you took the mare as you thought a reward had been offered for one answering her description. By Sergeant Badman-Prisoner had admired the mare the previous morning. By His Worship-When arrested, prisoner took the pad off the mare and flung it into the bush.

Prisoner stated that he took the mare to cross the Adelaide, as he could not swim, with the intention of letting her go when he got over. When he got off he saw her brands, which appeared to be those answering the description of a mare for which a reward had been offered, and he took her on to see if she was the mare wanted.

His Worship considering the case should go to a higher Court, another information was laid charging prisoner with stealing the mare. The same evidence was given, and the prisoner was committed to take his trial at the next Criminal Sittings of the Supreme Court, to be held in May next.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 27 February 1874, p 3




(Before Dr. Ellison and Mr. Wells.)

A negro boy in the employ of Mr. Spada was brought up on a charge of stealing two sovereigns from his employer, who had given information to the police, and thus caused the boy to be brought down from the country and locked up in the gaol. But he now declined to prosecute, as he had not wished to charge the boy with stealing, but only wished to get him back to his service, as he had been with him a long while.

The Court dismissed the case, and at the same time told the informant that he ought not to have entered a charge of stealing against the boy unless he meant to proceed with the matter criminally.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 27 February 1874, p 4




(Before Dr. Ellison, S.M. and Mr. M. L. Connor, J.P.)

John Trenouth was charged with stealing a watch, value £4 10s. from Phillip Williams, at Palmerston, on the 20th February.

The evidence of the police showed that complainant left his watch in his bedroom at Bieber's public-house, and that prisoner offered it for sale to a young man (T. Ford) for £3, at the same time telling him that he had better not let anyone see it till he reached the "other side," meaning the colony of Victoria. Ford pretended that he would buy the watch, and then took it to informant, who recognized it as his own property.

Prisoner on being asked what he had to say admitted the charge, and was sentenced to six calendar months' imprisonment, with hard labour.


Action for £19 5s., wages due to the plaintiff from the North Australian Gold Prospecting Company. Mr. Smith appeared for the plaintiff, and remarked that the Secretary of the Company in Adelaide had sent a very improper telegram to the Clerk of the Court here, instructing him that the estate of the Company was in sequestration, and warning him not to pay money over to persons claiming in the Northern Territory. This Telegram was accompanied by a solicitor's opinion, but as there had been no insolvency, but simply a mutual winding-up of the Company, the telegram was absurd and childish, as well as improper.

Mr. Anthony said the money was due to complainant, and there would be no objection to pay if he would cancel the agreement.

Mr. Smith said his client would undertake not to bring any further claim against Mr. Anthony; but he might be compelled perhaps to claim against the Company in Adelaide if he found that the amounts due there had not been paid.

Judgment for amount, with costs.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 6 March 1874, p 3



(Before Mr. Price, S.M.)

Campbell v. Bieber.-Information for wages. Verdict, £6 10s., without costs.

The Queen v. Tson Yoning.-Information for obtaining money under false pretences. Remanded until


Verley v. Nicholls.-Information

for wages, £27 10s. Dismissed without costs.

Wright v. Neische & Kohler.-Ad-

journed till Monday, March 9th.

Cox v. Cameron.-Information for absence from service. Plea, not guilty.

Fined £2 and costs, £3 7s., or seven days' imprisonment in default of payment.

Cox v. Cameron and Harvey.-Information for assault. Withdrawn.

Cameron v. Cox. Information for assault. Withdrawn.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 27 March 1874, p 3



Saturday, March 21.

(Before Mr. Price, S.M.)

Edmund C. Cleaves, miner, charged with stealing two £10 notes from William Shepherd, at Palmerston, on the 18th day of March.

The prosecutor stated that he came to Palmerston on the 11th of March, and on the same day drew a cheque for £65 10s. 6d., which he cashed at the bank, and received the change principally in £10 notes. He spent some of the money, and after visiting one or two public houses he missed two £10 pound notes, which had been in his pouch. Had been at Hunt's public house with prisoner, but did not see him touch the money.

A witness named Thomas was called, and stated that he saw prisoner stoop over prisoner whilst he was lying down at Hunt's, and saw him take something out of his pouch. What he took out of the pouch was paper, and he doubled it up and put it in his pocket. Witness said to prisoner, "you are touching that man," and prisoner replied, "if there was a constable here I would give you in charge." This conversation took place loud enough for everyone in the bar to hear.

The case was remanded to the 24th.

Another witness Mr. Hunt, the publican, was then called and said he heard the conversation, and heard prisoner swear at prosecutor for accusing him of "robbing" the man.

Sergeant Badman deposed to having arrested the prisoner on the 20th instant. Told him of the charge, and he said he knew nothing about it. The only money in his possession was 1s. 3d. in silver.

Another witness stated that to say prisoner was "touching" the man meant that he was robbing him.

This being all the evidence, the case was adjourned sine die, and the prisoner was liberated.

Court adjourned.

Monday, March 23.

(Before Mr. Price, S.M.)

Wright v. Kohler.-Claim for £20, wages. Mr. Smith for the complainant. Defendant, who had employed complainant to do work for him as a carpenter, admitted that money was owing, but did not seem to know what the amount was. Ordered to pay amount with costs-total, £25 19s.

Thursday, March 20.

(Before Mr. E. W. Price, S.M. Dr. Ellison and Mr. Gardiner were also on the Bench.

John Connor was charged on the information of Mr. Little, Manager of Telegraphs, with having been on the premises of the informant for an unlawful purpose on the 24th March.

Mr. Smith for the informant, and Dr. Kauffman for the defendant.

The Stipendiary Magistrate thought that the nature of the "unlawful purpose " should be stated in the information.

Mr. Smith submitted that being on the premises in the manner that would be proved in evidence would be sufficient.

Jane Calder, single woman, servant of Mr. Little said that on the morning of the 24th of March, about half past 5, she was in her room in bed when she heard the door opened. It was previously ajar with boxes against it. She was awoke by the boxes moving, and she then cried out for her fellow-servant, who was in the same room, to light the candle. She lit the candle, and witness then shut the door. Got up and went into the next room half-an-hour afterwards, and as she was going in she heard the door open. Turned round and saw defendant standing inside the door. Therefore went into the next room and remained there. Did not see him any more; but after a little dressed herself.

By Dr. Kaufmann-Was positive as to the defendant's identity. He had never on any occasion tried to take liberties with her; but she had been in the habit of speaking to him; nothing more. Told Mr. Little of the matter in the morning.

By the Special Magistrate-It was not clear daylight at the first time referred to, but it was light afterwards. Mr. Little stated that the plan produced was a correct plan of the rooms. Defendant's duties could not possibly bring him near the young woman's room. Had instituted this prosecution because of previous circumstances.

By Dr. Kaufmann-There was not any path by informant's room. Was not on friendly terms with defendant, but spoke to him on business matters occasionally.

By Mr. Smith-Never quarrelled with defendant; but brought this case because there had been previous outrages of the sort.

Inspector Foelsche was called by

Dr. Kaufmann, and stated that about 9 o'clock on the morning of the 24th he found a cockatoo which he had lost, under the verandah of the building where defendant lived. Defendant afterwards said something about having been looking for the bird. Never heard a word against defendant's moral character.

Mr. J. Frew was called and said that he left defendant on the night of the 23rd about 12 o'clock. He was sober then. Had never heard a word against his character.

Several other witnesses were called to the question of character.

The Stipendiary Magistrate said the case was not proved. Dismissed.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 10 April 1874, p 3



Monday, April 4.

(Before Mr. Price, S.M.)

William Slender was brought up on charges of riotous and disorderly behaviour, the first offence being in the public house and the next in the police cells.

Ordered to pay fines and damages, £5 7s.


Source: Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 24 April 1874, p 3



Tuesday, April 21.
(Before E. W. Price, S.M.)
Mr. Smith appeared on behalf of the plaintiff and Mr. Jones for the defendant.
The claim was for wages due to Thomas Sayers, £12 19s. 8d.
Plaintiff stated he was working for Mr. Sebbes up to the 4th April last. Was then discharged without notice, as Mr. Sebbes had no funds. Was quite willing to remain. In consequence of not being able to cash orders received for wages came down to Palmerston, where the Bank refused them.
By Mr. Jones-You offered to pay me £15 3s. 4d. which did not include all my expenses. You said you would pay the Court fees, and that you would pay for the day on which the cheque was dishonored. The witness also spoke of other delays and ex-penses.
By Mr. Smith-I lost 10 days altogether.
Defendant was ordered to pay £12 19s. 8d. and fees, £1 11s.
Claim for £13 14s. 3d.-This case was very similar to the previous one.
Verdict for plaintiff, amount claimed and fees making altogether £17 12s. 3d.
Similar to the two previous cases; amount claimed £21 19s. 3d.
Ordered to pay £16 12s. 7d.: total £20 10s. 7d.
Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones appeared for the parties in both these cases.
Court adjourned. 


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 8 May 1874, pp 2-3



Friday, May 1.

(Before Mr. Price, S.M:, Mr. Frew and Dr. Ellison, J.P.'s.)

Jones v. Reynolds, Smith, and V. J. Smith.

In this case the complainant, Joshua Jones, charged the defendants with using insulting words in a public street whereby a breach of the peace might have been occasioned.

Complainant objected to Dr. Ellison and Mr. Frew being on the Bench, on the grounds that Mr. Frew was intimately connected with one of the defendants, and that Dr. Ellison had been reported by him (Mr. Jones) to the Attorney-General.

The Special Magistrate stopped him by asking him whether either of the Justices was present at the time the alleged offence was committed, or was in any way connected with it?

Mr. Jones-No.

The Special Magistrate-Then, Mr. Jones, you cannot make any valid objection to those gentlemen who do me the honor to assist me on the Bench.

From the evidence in this case it appeared that on the evening in question between 9 and 10 o'clock, Mr. Smith spoke to complainant about serving him with a notice to attend at the Court that night. Complainant objected. Some altercation took place, and Mr. Smith the elder called complainant "a d____d scoundrel." Complainant on being cross-examined admitted that after the language used he said to Mr. Smith "the next time I find you behave in such a blackguard way I will smash your face." Complainant also in his evidence stated that during the quarrel Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Smith, jun. both put their fists in his face.
Several police-troopers were called to speak to the quarrelling, and after their evidence
The Special Magistrate dismissed the case against Mr. Reynolds.
After one or two other witnesses had been examined as to the general row and the language used, Mr. Smith said he had several more witnesses to call; but he admitted calling Mr. Jones an impudent blackguard. He would leave the case in the hands of the Bench.
The Special Magistrate said-We find you guilty of using insulting words in the street; but the whole disturbance seems to have arisen through Mr. Jones not extending the same courtesy to you in waiting to be served with a notice, that I had to him in attending to him after office hours the same day. Under the 109th clause of the Police Act we inflict no fine.
The case against Mr. Smith, jun., was dismissed.
Saturday, May 2.
(Before E. W. Price, S.M.)
Robert Price, mail-contractor, was charged by Mr. Little, under the Post Office Act, with having loitered whilst carrying the mail on the 14th of the present month.
Mr. Rudall for defendant.
Mr. Little produced the contract; and called Mr. Murray, postmaster, at Southport, who stated that he delivered a mail to defendant at 10.30 a.m. on the 14th April. In the evening went to Tumbling Waters, a distance of four miles, and found defendant there; he must have arrived there between 8 and 9 p.m. He ought to have delivered the mail there in one hour. He complained about his horses. He was not drunk when he took the mail from Southport.
Fined £10 and costs.
Monday, May 4.
(Before Mr. Price, S.M.)
Badman v. Smith.-Information for using insulting words in a public street.
This case was connected with a previous one of the same kind. Sergeant Badman was called upon by Mr. J. V. Smith to take J. Jones into custody for assault; but he declined, saying that he had seen no assault, whereupon defendant said, "It's a lie, sir; you saw the assault, and are winking at it." He repeated the statement; and said he would teach complainant his duty, upon which complainant replied that did not know his duty as a gentleman and a lawyer seeing the manner in which he was behaving in a public street. Defendant also said as complainant was walking away. "Ah, I licked you in the Court twice, and I can lick you here."
A great many witnesses were examined and defendant's two sons swore that the word "lie " was not used by defendant.
The case was dismissed.
Yeves v. La Haye.
Dr. Kauffman for complainant; Mr. Smith for defendant.
In this case the complainant a boy on board the Ellie Marie, laid an information against the master for ill treatment, he having put complainant in the hold all day on one occasion with his hand and feet tied together, and without any food. The Captain had also struck him with a stick in the eye. It was the mate who tied him first.
Some further evidence was given as to cruelty. But the defendant said the boy was lazy, and stole some biscuits, and punishment was necessary. He had also laid a charge of desertion against the boy.
The Bench allowed the case to be withdrawn on the boy being liberated from the service of the defendant, the latter paying the boy's wages and the cost of the proceedings. 

Wednesday, May 6.
(Before Mr. Price, S.M., Mr. Lindsay and Mr. Wells, J.P.'s.)
Auctioneer's Licence.
An auctioneer's license was applied for on behalf of Mr. Samuel Isaac Solomon, of the Shackle. Granted.
Mr. W. H. Gray applied through Mr. Smith and the Hon T. Reynolds for the closing of 21 miles of old roads in the Hundred of Beaconsfield, and for the substitution of pieces of land in the Hundred of Colton. Due notices had been served.
Mr. Gardiner, of the Land Office, said there was no opposition.
Westcott v. Marker.-Unsatisfied Judgment.
Mr. Smith for the plaintiff.
Postponed to the next Court of Full Jurisdiction.
Barclay and others v. Reynolds.
This was a claim of Messrs. Barclay,  Abbott, and Jones against S. E. Reynolds formerly of the firm Reynolds,
Gore, & Co. for £57 11s. and interest, making altogether £60 15s.
Dr. Kaufmann for the plaintiffs and Mr. Smith for defendant.
The case was, opened when it appeared from the paticulars of account that Mr. Barclay's name alone appeared in the matter, although he now sued in the name of a firm.
Dr. Kaufmann applied for leave to amend, but the Special Magistrate said he would have to commence de novo.
Masson v. Reynolds.-This was a claim against Mr. S. E. Reynolds for £77 0s.9d. and interest making altogether £83 9s.
Dr. Kaufmann for the plaintiff and Mr. Smith for the defendant.
Dr. Kaufmann said that in April last he went to Mr. Reynolds, at the office of Reynolds, Durand, & Co., and produced the accounts from Masson, at the same time asking for the money. Defendant said he had not got the means, but was making arrangements to pay 10s. in the pound. Afterwards received a letter from defendant, saying he had better proceed against previous members of the firm.
Judgment was given for the plaintiff, £77 0s. 9d.
Wescott v. S. E. Reynolds.-Claim for £87 2s. on a bill of exchange.
Dr. Kaufmann for plaintiff, and Mr. Smith for defendant.
Verdict by consent, for the amount claimed.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 22 May 1874, p 3



(Before Mr. Price, S.M.)

John Runge was charged with unlawfully assaulting and beating Charles Keenan, at Palmerston, on the 5th May. 

Mr. Smith for the plaintiff.

Charles Keenan stated that on the day in question he went into the Telegraph Hotel, and entered a little room off the bar, when defendant came in and swore at him and asked what right he had there. Defendant after a few words took hold of him and tried to put him out, using some force. Had not given him any provocation.

G. C. Colgan confirmed this evidence, and said that plaintiff was not drunk.

For the defence, Robert Slack, billard marker, said that plaintiff stated that he entered the place to annoy defendant.

There was no violence used towards plaintiff, but defendant put him out of the room.

Another witness confirmed this statement; and the Court fined the defendant 1s., and fees 20s.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 12 June 1874, p 3



Friday, June 5.

(Before Mr. Price, S.M.)

Mr. Spada, of the Smith-street billiard-rooms, was charged by the police with having sold intoxicating liquors without being in possession of a license.

Mr. Smith appeared for the defendant, and Sergeant Badman conducted the case on the part of the police.

There were two informations, the first being laid on the 26th May, when two constables, Tasker and Miller, went to defendant's billiard room, and one of them called for lime juice, or "strong" lime juice, and the defendant then served them with a drink containing brandy.

The two constables swore positively as to the brandy, and called a witness, who also stated that the drink he tasted was like bad brandy, though he admitted that defendant claimed that particular nobbler as his own drink, and desired witness to put it down.

Mr. Smith, for the defence, called witnesses who stated that the liquors served by the defendant were not intoxicating drinks, but they could not speak clearly as to the particular drink mentioned by the constables, whose conduct Mr. Smith strongly reprobated, saying that they went to the place determined to entrap the defendant by calling for lime juice, and, at the same time, intimating that they wanted something stronger. He also endeavored to show that the constables (especially Tasker) were not sober on the occasion referred to.

The Magistrate said the police were compelled to do their duty, whether unpleasant or not; and the question as to their sobriety would not touch the merits of the case now before the Court. He must fine the defendant £10, and 21s. witnesses' expenses.

There was another information, charging a similar offence on the 27th May, and the evidence was of the same character as before.

The defendant addressed the Bench, and said that he did not sell any brandy on the day mentioned; and the fact was that the police were dissatisfied with him because he charged them for drinks instead of letting them have them for nothing.

The Magistrate said that defendant ought to obtain a license the same as other publicans.

Fined £10, and 7s. for one witness. 

Thomas Morris was charged with deserting the service of Captain Pearce on board the Gothenburg. He had come ashore and was found drunk in a public house.

Ordered to forfeit two days' pay and costs.

Lee v. Smith.-In this case the plaintiff did not appear, and it was therefore struck out.

Symonds v. Paul.-In this case the recent manager of the amalgamated Companies was summoned for £38 2s. due to the plaintiff a working miner.

Mr. Smith for the plaintiff, and Mr. Rudall for the defendant.

Evidence was given to show that plaintiff had been engaged in Victoria, and that he continued to work until he was told to discontinue. His dismissal had been a loss to him in addition to the amount of wages (£26) due at the time of dismissal.

Verdict for £25 5s., and £3 damages, making, with costs, the amount of £31 3s.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 19 June 1874, p 3




(Before Mr. E. W. Price, S.M.)

Three aborigines were charged with stealing sweet potatoes from the

Public Garden, near Palmerston, on the night of the 30th May. 

W. Hayes, the gardener, stated that he saw the prisoners running away with the potatoes. Lost £2 worth altogether.

Sentenced to one calendar month's imprisonment.

Another native was found guilty of stealing half a loaf of bread from the tent of John Richards, on the Esplanade.

Two calendar months' imprisonment.

Another native was charged with stealing from a hut; but the evidence was inconclusive.



Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 19 June 1874, p 3




(Before Mr. E. W. Price, S.M.)


(Before Mr. Price, S.M.)

Robert Caldwell appeared to the information of Sergeant Badman, charged with allowing four head of cattle to be at large in the town of Palmerston on the 11th June.

Sergeant Badman said that he had frequently told defendant that his buffaloes were doing a great deal of harm, and that it would be necessary to lay an information against him unless he put a stop to the mischief.

Evidence was then called to show that the buffaloes had been trespassing on people's gardens, and that when they were driven out of one place they got into another.

Mr. Caldwell asked Sergeant Badman if he ever knew of the buffaloes being turned loose in the town. Sergeant Badman said he had frequently found them loose at all events, and he supposed they had been turned loose.

Mr. Caldwell said the cattle were turned loose outside the boundaries, but they got into the town. He had now taken all precaution to prevent their getting into the town again, and they would shortly be killed.

The Magistrate said that unless it could be shown that defendant turned the buffaloes loose, the information under the Police Act would fail. It should have been under the Impounding Act. Dismissed.

Thomas Morris was charged with stealing a revolver, at Southport, the property of James Deane.

Thomas Osborne, residing at Yam Creek, said the prisoner had been employed with himself at Newman's works. Was at Southport recently with some drays when he missed the revolver. Afterwards went to prisoner's hut with Trooper Ring, who took the revolver out of prisoner's room. Prisoner said that Deane (the owner of the revolver) had given it to him.

Trooper Ring deposed to having found the revolver in prisoner's hut, and afterwards arrested him. He handed witness the revolver produced, when asked where his revolver was; and he said he had got it from Deane.

The prisoner was asked how he wished to be tried, and he said he would be tried by the present Court.

He pleaded guilty.

One calendar month's imprisonment with hard labor.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 19 June 1874, p 3



(Before Mr. E. W. Price, S.M.)


Jeremiah, a Malay boy, was charged with unlawfully absenting himself from the service of Robert Caldwell.

Mr. Caldwell said he hired the defendant on the 1st of the month at 10s. per week. On the 14th of the month he left the place, and was afterwards found in the Malay camp.

The boy was asked if he would return to Mr. Caldwell, and he said, "'Spose he like it."

Ordered to return to his work, and pay 10s. cost of proceedings.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 26 June 1874, p 3







G. J. Turner, Southport.


Westcott v. Marker.


Smith-Laurie v. Lindsay-Rudall.

Kaufmann-Forster v. Haussen-Smith

Smith-Millner v. Reynolds and Others


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 3 July 1874, p 2



Thursday, July 2.

(Before Mr. E. W. Price, S.M.)

Hugh Sharkey, of Rum Jungle, was ordered to pay £13 and costs, on account of wages due to Roger Ryan.

[Evidence held over till next week.]


Wednesday, July 1.

(Before Mr. Price, S.M., Mr. Lindsay, and Mr. Frew, J.P.'s.)

Auctioneer's license granted to J. Turner, of Southport.

The subjoined cases were heard, but press of matter compels us to hold over report of evidence:

Westcott v Marker-Claim for £27 7s. 5d. Case dismissed.

Forster v. Haussen-Claim for £100. Nonsuit.

Millner v. Reynolds and Others Claim for £50. Adjourned till next Court Day.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 10 July 1874, p 3


Monday, July 6.

(Before Mr. E. W. Price, S.M.)

David Johnstone was charged on the information of Thomas Wright with having assaulted the informant, at Palmerston, on the 4th July.

Mr. Smith for the defendant.

Mr. Wright stated that about 8 o'clock on Saturday evening defendant came in to the quarters of the Overland Telegraph Company, and made some enquiries for persons not present. Complainant told him not to come into his room, and defendant then took hold of informant, who, in the course of a struggle, fell to the ground, when defendant kicked him three times in the chest. He then got away, and complainant went and got a warrant issued for him.

Mr. Smith, a witness, deposed to seeing Mr. Wright trying to put defendant out of the place, and also stated that he saw defendant kick Mr. Wright three times when they got outside.

J. Carrington, another witness, saw Mr. Wright shove defendant out of the room, but did not see the kicks.

Defendant denied having kicked informant, and said he merely tried to get away. Two or three tried to stop him, and he only struggled to get off. He had no intention to offend any one when he went to the place, and was surprised that Mr. Wright ordered him out of the room so suddenly, as he did not object when defendant first passed through the place.

Fined £1, without costs.

Saturday, July 4.

(Before E. W. Mr. Price, S.M.)

Miti Abdoola appeared to the information of Mrs. Cox, charged with having left her service on the 2nd instant, and remained without leave.

Defendant pleaded guilty, and agreed to return to her situation.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 24 July 1874, p 4




(Before Mr. E. W. Price, S.M.)

John Carrington, lately employed on the Overland Telegraph, was charged with being of unsound mind and not fit to be at large. Defendant said he was better than he had been, and thought he could now take care of himself. Dismissed.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 29 August 1874, p 2
Macdonald, one of the men sentenced to penal servitude for life for being concerned in the gigantic Bank forgeries, has just arrived at Portsmouth. He is to be employed with a gang of convicts on the dockyard extension works.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 5 September 1874, p 3
Thursday, September 3.
(Before Mr. E. W. Price, S.M.)
John Carrington was brought up on a remanded charge of being a lunatic, unable to take care of himself. As the evidence showed that the man was imbecile, and had no means of support, the Court committed him to the Adelaide Lunatic Asylum.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 12 September 1874, p 2
Saturday, September 5.
(Before Mr. E. W. Price, S.M.)
Robert Caldwell appeared to the information of Robert Patrick on a demand for £4 17s. 6d., wages alleged to be due from defendant to the plaintiff. The claim was six and a halt days work at 15s. per day.
Plaintiff said he repaired boats for lighthering [sic] the Mary Grant. Was afterwards engaged lightering. But was never paid the wages now demanded.
The defendant said that plaintiff and partner lightered the Mary Grant for him; and he allowed them to use his boats, although they ought to have found their own boats. The repairs done were, therefore, done at plaintiff's own expense. Had overpaid £20 2s. 4d. on the lightering account; and was not indebted a farthing for repairing boats. Had settled up everything with the plaintiff when the lightering was paid for; and had taken a receipt in full of all demands.
Plaintiff said the receipt had nothing to do with the wages now claimed.
Case dismissed.

Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 12 September 1874, p 2
John Chinaman has been trying the "happy despatch," but has failed. It is reported that the two prisoners who were before the Police Court on Thursday, attempted to destroy themselves in the course of the day-one with a rope, and the other with a knife. But they did not screw their courage to the "sticking point." It is strange that neither of them could succeed; but cruel fate was evidently against them. The one who was most in earnest was the Chinaman who was convicted on Thursday. He tried to hang himself in the Police cell with a pockethand kerchief; but was cut down by one of the troopers, though not until he had become senseless.

Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 19 September 1874, p 2
The Chinaman who attempted to commit suicide last week, was brought before the Police Court on Saturday, and after his offence had been proved, and explained to him by a mandore who acted as amicus curiae; he was remanded until his present term of imprisonment expired. It appears that the Chinaman who was charged at the same time for stealing, but who was acquitted, has since disappeared, and is supposed to have drowned himself. He was seen to go into the mangrove swamp about a week ago; and the mandore does not know what has become of him. On being told that he must find him and bring him to the doctor for medical treatment, the mandore states that it is impossible-"Me no can swim!" "Me no can catch him!" are the only answers which he can make.


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 26 September 1874, p 3

[Held over the following cases: Henry John Blankley, one month's imprisonment for disobedience of orders, &c. Luie, charged with being unlawfully on premises. Dismissed.]


Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 10 October 1874, p 3


Monday, September 28.

(Before Warden Plunkett and Dr. Houston, J.P.)

Dhing Ah He was charged with disobedience of orders.

Mr. Bouchier, Manager for the Royal Standard, &c, stated that the defendant was engaged as a general servant under agreement dated 30th July. He was on the 24th inst. ordered to leave work at one place and directed to work at another, but returned twice, even after the tools had been taken from him. The same disobedience had occurred frequently before; defendant will not remain, where he is wanted to work; and absented himself altogether several days without leave.

Defendant asked no questions of the witness; but made a statement through Dr. Guy, who intrepreted, that he had been absent from work only because his eyes had been very sore.

Sentenced to one month's imprisonment.

Tuesday, October 1.

C. Cranston was charged on the information of C. Fisher with having illicitly sold beer to one Andrew Frei.

As the information had been laid for a wrong date the case was not maintained; prosecutor to pay costs.

Published by Centre for Comparative Law, History and Governance at Macquarie Law School