| Notes |
- 1867-1868 Resided at 12 De Witt Street, Battery Point and later at ‘Belvoir’ cottage, 49 Argyle Street, Hobart whilst a Dancing Master and also at ‘Courier’.
The Mercury 2 June 1869
LAW INTELLIGENCE.
POLICE COURT.
TUESDAY, JUNE 1ST, 1869.
BEFORE the Stipendiary Magistrate.
UNLAWFULLY ON PREMISES.-Thomas Smith charged with being on the old Acid Works, Battery Point, belonging to Mr. Degraves, for an unlawful purpose.
Plea not guilty.
Benjamin Dyer, boatbuilder, residing on the premises, deposed that defendant was last week employed by Mr. Wilson ; yesterday he was prowling about in the neighborhood, and went into the workshop about five o'clock, where witness found him ; he had something in his hand, but on seeing witness he dropped it. On being addressed he said he cameo there to get something to eat. Tried to escape from a window, and witness detained him till Constable Lucas came and arrested him.
In reply to the Stipendiary Magistrate,
Detective Vickers said prisoner had only just come up from Port Arthur, where he had served a sentence of eight years.
Ordered to be imprisoned and kept to hard labor for three months.
CITY POLICE COURT.
Thursday, September 14th, 1876. Before the Police Magistrate.
A Quarrel Between Neighbours.-James Neall v. Benjamin R. Dyer. The complainant charged the defendant with having unlawfully beat his wife. Mr. Graves appeared for the complainant, and Mr. Dodds for the defendant.
Annie Neall deposed that she lived at Battery Point, in premises adjoining those of the defendant. On the 8th of this month her baby was on the ash heap near the fence. The defendant called witness to the fence, and then threw a bucket of water over her, which stunned her. He had a stick in his hand, and said he would give her the weight of it, and if her husband was at home he would murder him. Witness said, " You wouldn't hit a woman,'' and he replied that he would. He then struck her with the stick several times across the shoulders ; and when she picked up the baby and walked away, he threw the stick after her. She went into a neighbour's house until her husband came home, when she went into her own house.
To Mr. Dodds : There was some defective drainage on the premises, and it was a great nuisance to them (the Nealls). Witness did, not take the stick up from her yard and strike the defendant, nor did she speak in objectionable language of the defendant's wife and children. After the assault, witness threw a piece of stick at defendant.
To the Bench : Witness gave defendant no provocation whatever.
Dr. Benjafield deposed that he was called in to the complainant's house on tho evening of the 8th inst. He found Mrs. Neall apparently insensible, and he could not get her to speak. He examined her body, and found a black bruise on the left shoulder, and a second one across the left shoulder blade. The apparent insensibility was not necessarily the result of any beating she might have received ; but if she had not received blows, he did not think she would have been in that state. The bruises presented all the appearances of having been inflicted that day.
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Dodds was proceeding to say that an attempt had been made to bias the minds of the Magistrates by a sensational paragraph in The Mercury respecting the case, when Mr. Tarleton said that when he saw the local, he passed it over at once, and, therefore, he was absolutely unbiassed as far as that was concerned.
Mr. Dodds continued to comment on the para- graph, and was about to read the last part of the paragraph, which he said was inspired by the complainant ; when '
Mr. Tarleton said that unless the learned counsel
could show that the paragraph was written by the complainant, it ought not to be introduced here. Of course, the learned counsel knew very well that in law nothing ought to be published concerning a case which was sub-judice, and he thought it was an improper practice to put in that paragraph about a case which was to come before the Bench.
Mr. Dodds contended that the paragraph was written to damage the defendant, and also that it showed malice on the part of the complainant. After giving the defendant's version of the case, which differed entirely from that sworn to by the complainant's wife, he called Ella Dyer, daughter of the defendant, who deposed she was present at the dispute between her father and Mrs. Neall. In the afternoon Mrs. Neall was throwing water over witness's brother, and afterwards her father went outside to wash himself with a dipper of water in his hand, when Mrs. Neall threw a stick at him. Her father threw it back again into Mrs. Neall's yard. Then she threw a lot of old wood and tins at him, and afterwards some big stones ; that was after defendant went in. Her father did not go out any more. Mrs. Neall had often called witness names. Did not see her father strike Mrs. Neall at all. Witness could not see what took place between her father and Mrs. Neall at the fence. She only saw the missiles come into the yard from Neall's yard.
Alfred A. Butler deposed that he had been a neighbour of the defendant's for the last three years, and had found him very quiet and peaceable.
Robert Logan, landlord of the houses occupied by complainant and defendant, deposed that some time ago defendant gave notice to quit because of the obscene language of Mrs. Neall. Witness had known defendant for some years, and knew nothing against him.
Mr. Tarleton said it appeared to the magistrates that, whilst an assault had been committed by the defendant on the complainant's wife, the facts had been exaggerated, and that the assault was com- mitted under circumstances of some considerable provocation. The magistrates did not think the fault lay altogether with the defendant. Provocation seemed to have been given to him, and whilst in the heat of the moment, he did that for which he ought to be sorry, namely, strike a woman, yet still he had some grounds for the passion he was labouring under. The bruises inflicted upon the complainant's wife were not of a severe character, and although the defendant had no business to strike her, yet he did not seem to have injured her. As to the hysterical affection, that was, perhaps,
the result of an excitable nature.
The defendant was fined 40s. 6d. and costs, professional costs being refused.
[We think it right to say that when we received the information on which the paragraph was written, we had no idea that any legal redress had been sought. In fact we were led to believe that no proceedings had been taken.-Ep. M.]
Daily Telegraph (Launceston) 29 Jul 1886
TELEGRAMS.
TASMANIA. HOBABT. July 28.
Benjamin R. Dyer, contractor, Hobart ; Wm. Henry Reynolds, farmer, Old Beach ; Charles Henry Cracknell, Hobart, restaurant-keeper, presented petitions to day for liquidation of their estates by arrangement with their creditors. The Registrar filed the petitions. The dates for hearing the petitions were not fixed.
|