[criminal libel]

R. v. Robertson

Supreme Court of Van Diemen's Land

Montagu J., 7 June 1837

Source: True Colonist, 9 June 1837[1]

We noticed last week the fact, that Mr. Rowlands had been instigated by his evil genius to file a criminal information against the proprietor of this journal. This prosecution arose out of words spoken by Mr. Robertson to Mr. Rowlands at the theatre, under circumstances of great provocation and under excitement. Next morning, Mr. Robertson, no one of his friends representing to him that he had acted incorrectly, sent a letter to Mr. Rowlands, expressing his regret at what occurred, stating that he felt it due to himself and to the other gentlemen who were present to apologise for having so acted. Rowlands did not consider himself included under the term gentlemen, and said that an apology was due to him - and that he would only be satisfied with an apology in the newspaper. Mr. Robertson took no further notice of Rowland’s threats; and Rowlands then presented his “criminal information,” which, to the astonishment of every body, was signed by the Attorney General as Grand Jury. On the first day of the sessions, Mr. Robertson having received a copy of the criminal information, appeared to plead, but the Judge had no sooner taken his seat than Rowlands bustled up, and moved for a bench warrant; his intent was defeated by Mr. Robertson putting in his plea; and the Judge took his own recognizance for his appearance, on receiving two day’s notice to take his trial. On Saturday last, after all the offices were shut, and it was impossible to take our subpoenas, Mr. Robertson received notice of trial for Monday at 9 o’clock; he was detained at the ferry, and did not get in until after ten. Little Rowlands waddled about, telling every one Mr. Robertson had left town that morning at seven o’clock, and had run away from his recognizance. After waiting about the court until four o’clock on Wednesday, at the close of the session the case was called. The Solicitor General, who was for the prosecution, being engaged in the civil court, Mr. Rowlands was in attendance, but without council, at the Police-office, where Mr. Justice Montagu was trying the criminal cases. The Judge said, addressing Mr. Robertson, “I have read the information, and I do not see that you have committed any offence - and I can see nothing wherewith to charge the jury; but as you have pleaded, you are entitled to your verdict, and if you wish I will charge the jury to acquit you.” Mr. Robertson thanked his Honor, and said that he was very anxious that the trial should go on, that he might clear himself of the charge of having used a word which he considered disgraceful to any man to use - and which he could prove he had never used on that or any other occasion. The judge said he could not hear him, as he could not see that any offence was charged. The first count charged -

That Gilbert Robertson, of Hobart Town, in Van Diemen’s Land, Printer, intending to vex, injure, disquiet, harass and annoy Thomas Wood Rowlands of Hobart Town, in Van Diemen’s Land, gentleman, and to provoke, instigate, and excite the said Thomas Wood Rowlands to break the peace of our Lord the King heretofore to wit, on the third day of May, one thousand eight hundred and thirty seven (to wit) at Hobart Town, in Van Diemen’s Land, wickedly, unlawfully, maliciously, and openly, and in the presence of hearing of the said Thomas Wood Rowlands, and of divers other persons, did utter, pronounce, and say to the said Thomas Wood Rowlands the provocative words following (that is to say): “You little wretch, you wished to see me in jail to night, you little blackguard. I had not to pay a shilling; the whole of the debt was paid by subscription. None would subscribe ten pence for you, if it was to save you from being hanged on the gallows,” (meaning and intending such expressions to apply to the said Thomas Wood Rowlands). And the said Gilbert Robertson then and there uttered the said words with intent to excite, instigate, and provoke the said Thomas Wood Rowlands, then and there to assault the said Gilbert Robertson, &c.

Now, this charge was all true, except that Rowlands omitted to state that Mr. Robertson said, I did not owe the debt and well you know it you pitiful blackguard. The second count charged that the said Gilbert Robertson.

Did utter, pronounce, and say to and in the hearing of the said Thomas Wood Rowlands, and of diver other persons, the provocative words following (that is to say). “You little _____ you could not manage to get me in goal you see - get along, you little wretch, I will wring your neck of; get along you little _____“ (meaning and intending such expressions to apply to the said Thomas Wood Rowlands.) And the said Gilbert Robertson did at the time of uttering the said words, point this finger at the said Thomas Wood Rowlands, with intent to excite, instigate, and provoke the said Thomas Wood Rowlands, &c.

Now, one word which we cannot print, never was uttered by Mr. Robertson in his life to any man - and no one but Little Rowlands could have entertained the idea of such a word being spoken, but it and similar filthy expressions are so often in his own mouth, that he no doubt thought it was a matter of course, expression for any angry man to use.

The third count charges that the said Gilbert Robertson

Wilfully, unlawfully, maliciously, and openly did utter, pronounce, and say to, and in the hearing of the said Thomas Wood Rowlands, and of divers other persons, the provocative words following, (that is to say) “Look at the pitiful little wretch, he is such a blackguard, that no one will notice him, no one will even stand near him,” (meaning and intending such words to apply to the said Thomas Wood Rowlands), and did also, at the same time of uttering the said words, point his finger at the said Thomas Wood Rowlands, with intent to excite, instigate, and provoke, the said Thomas Wood Rowlands, &c.

It is all true, and a great deal more was said which Rowlands did not choose to repeat.

The fourth count charges that the said Gilbert Robertson

Wilfully, unlawfully, maliciously, and openly did utter, pronounce, and say, to, and in the presence and hearing of the said Thomas Wood Rowlands, and of divers other persons, “you little blackguard, I will throw you down stairs,” &c.

It is true that Mr. Robertson did say all this in reply to some very insolent and abusive language addressed to him by Rowlands, which would have quite justified the fulfilment of the threat.

All of which varied, and spun out as it is to eight counts! Justice Montagu very correctly said was no offence at all.

Mr. Robertson regrets much that the trial did not go on that he might have shown up Master Rowlands a bit. The fact is, if Rowlands were to assault every man who has called him much worse to his head, he would have to fight every inch of his way through the street - and if he were to prosecute them, it would take up all the time of the two Judges constantly sitting to try his cases. Such terms are just as familiar to him as his own name. The poor little creature waddled away quite chop fallen, and we were happy to hear most people remark that it was evident from Judge Montagu’s manner, that he is about to cut acquaintance with the little “intricate.” We repeat we are sorry and ashamed for having spoken to him at all at the theatre.

Notes