Category: The Clarkes

Articles pertaining to the Clarke bushrangers and their network of associates and sympathisers.

BUSHRANGING AND OUR POLICE SYSTEM (Part One)

Empire (Sydney, NSW : 1850 – 1875), Thursday 24 October 1867, page 2

BUSHRANGING AND OUR POLICE SYSTEM.

BY A NATIVE TROOPER.

The public have frequently had official glimpses of our costly police force, especially during the career of Tommy Clarke and his associates in the Braidwood district; and they have frequently complained that the police should be found to be so incompetent as to necessitate the passing of the Felons’ Apprehension Act, and the organising of secret police to suppress a crime which, from the impunity with which it was committed in the South, and now being perpetrated in the North, brings so much disgrace upon us in the eyes of the world. For months, we might almost say for years, correspondence has continuously reached us — sometimes from persons of influence, sometimes from policemen, themselves — and the press, which in scarcely any instance cast blame upon the men themselves, saw good reason why the present semi-military police system should be abolished, and a system organised adapted rather to the state of Australia than of Ireland. It will therefore have peculiar interest with the public to set before them, in a popular form, the Inner Life of our Police System, from the pen of one whose personal experience as a mounted trooper in pursuit of bushrangers, whose thorough knowledge of the country, and whose respectability will be a guarantee for generally substantial accuracy. This narrative, so interesting, and in places exciting in detail, will occupy, many columns, and, for this reason, will be published as space permits. The public will, at least for the first time, have a detailed account of all the circumstances preceding and succeeding the atrocious Jinden murders.

THE JINGERA MOB.

When I first went to Braidwood Tommy Clarke had just escaped from gaol. His chief stopping place then, was at his father’s, from which place he would go up the gully. What is termed the gully is the creek running down from Jinden into the Shoalhaven River, about six miles from the Ballalaba police-station, which is the property of the Hon. Hugh Wallace, who built a small barracks for the accommodation of the police, and gave them the use of his stables gratis. Jinden is a cattle-station, now the property of Mr. Mason, but was the property of Mr. E. Smith during the time the Clarkes were out; and a very jolly place it was for all the rowdy natives and cattle duffers who would call here, get a feed, and hear the news. Smith, of course, was a very respectable man, and kept a rifle to keep off all bushrangers. Jinden station is about fifty miles from the Ballalaba station. Ballalaba is sixteen miles from Braidwood; eight miles from Major’s Creek; eighteen miles from Araluen; about thirty five miles from Queanbeyan; and about thirty seven miles from Michelago, which lies towards Cooma. Queanbeyan lies towards Goulburn; and the Jinden run lies between Michelago and Araluen. The next police station lies between Ballalaba and Michelago, about sixteen miles from the centre station. As the reader will perceive, Ballalaba, lies in the heart of the run of the “Boys”, as the bushrangers were called. What is termed Jerrabat Gully is the creek I have previously spoken of. On each side of this creek there are free selectors, whose land runs about half a mile back on each side. Then there is a range of mountains, running right up to the head of the creek. On the left side of the gully, some eight miles across, runs the Shoalhaven river, which takes its head at the back of the Jinden station, springing out of Snowball mountain. On this river there is another lot of small settlers — one of whom was the renowned Mick Connell, who kept here a store, public house, post-office, and black-smith’s shop. This was the theatre where all sorts of hocussing and rowdyism were carried on. If anything was to be done, Mick Connell’s was the place to meet. At this time Pat Connell was getting his living from one station to another — horse-stealing and duffing cattle being his chief employment. Thomas Connell’s life was something after the same fashion; sometimes he would go sheep shearing, get a cheque, and that would be work enough for him for one year. John Connell was the best of the lot to work. He was married to Ellen Berriman, who got five years imprisonment for passing stolen notes. He lived in the gully, close to his mother’s place, in a poor delapidated old hut that a man would hardly keep pigs in. This hut had been thatched at one time with grass, but the wind had blown one half away, and the slabs were taken down and burnt. Lucy Hurley, Tom Connell’s mistress, lived here with them, and cooked the grub for the “Boys”, who were “wanted”, brought them grog, took messages, and did all the telegraphing. At this time Tom Connell was with Clarke, but he was not known, since everyone thought it was Berriman who, however, was over in Queensland at this time.

Tom Clarke had done nothing extraordinary until he stuck up the Foxlow station. This is Mr. Hoskin’s head station, and under the superintendence of Mr. Wallace. This place is eighteen miles from Ballalaba, and fourteen miles from Jingera police station — or what is called Wild Cattle Flat. This is about the middle of the Jingera mountains. All the mountains between Cooma, Araluen, Queanbeyan, Braidwood, and round to Araluen again are called the Jingeras. At this time, senior constable X. was stationed at J. He was a particular friend of the boys Pat Connell, Tyrie, an old bushranger, Bruce, and, in fact, all the mob. These chaps would never see X. want for anything, especially beef, which they would bring to him on a packhorse. Sometimes X. would pay them for it with one hand and take it back with the other so as to “cloak the mate”, for there was generally a second constable at the station. When X. wanted a spree he would tell his mate there was some cattle duffing going on, and away he would go, and leave the mate to mind the barracks. He would make off for B——’s about twelve miles off. This is another cattle station the property of Mr. Shanahan who himself lives at Michelago. B. was the stockkeeper, overseer, and master sometimes, as regards disposing of a beast quietly. This was another meeting place of the boys who would make off to Michelago for a keg of rum. The Senior constable would remain sometimes a week, and then, after his spree, would return from his pursuit of the cattle duffers, thrash his wife, and report his mate for something. This was done to make things look well to his superiors. Sometimes these sprees would take place at Mick Connell’s, but generally back in the ranges. X. never kept a man with him longer than he could help, as soon as he wanted to get shut of him; and as sure as X. reported a man it was a case with him. It was all one whether the man was guilty or not, for he would stick to his report, and the superintendent believed all he said. In fact, Mr. Q. thought he was the best man he had. Sergeant S. was the bush trooper at this time, and, to do him justice, he was the bitter enemy of Tom Clarke and Pat Connell. He was generally in the gully after some of them.

THE FOXLOW ROBBERY.

Such was the state of things when Clarke stuck up Foxlow the first time. They took a great deal of grog, and four or five pack-horse loads of property. It was like as if a war had broken out. It was reported that there were eight men, all masked, sticking-up, and none of them known. The Jingera police were the first out, and the Queanbeyan police joined them, and ran the tracks down to within two miles of old G.’s, where they divided the spoil, and drank fifty-six bottles of grog. But at this place the tracks parted, most going towards the gully, the rest, about three tracks, towards old G.’s. Old X. led them on the tracks going to the gully, till they were getting close on the boys, who were all drunk by this time. Old X. then managed to lose tracks, and after holding a council of war it was resolved to turn back and run the other lot — thus giving both parties of robbers a chance to get away with the spoil. They then followed the other tracks to old G.’s. There they scattered and searched the rocks all round, till they found some of the property among a lot of granite boulders. They took this and old G., and had him tried for it, but as the goods were not found in his possession they could do nothing.

While they were doing this we got information of a plant near the gully, about two miles at the back of old Mrs. Connell’s, so off we started from the station at about dusk. For myself, I did not know at the moment what we were going out for. We had the superintendent with us. The man who had the information was waiting to meet us about eight miles up the gully where we were to have met him at 8 o’clock, instead of which it was 10 o’clock. Tom Clarke, Pat Connell, and Tom Connell were seen near this camp that morning, and Tommy was to have been at night at his brother-in-law’s, about a mile from where we were to have met, to see his wife and have supper. Tommy Clarke was to see his wife at 8 o’clock. She stopped with her brother at this time. When we came to the river, six miles from the station, we resolved to cross it one at a time, so as not to attract the notice of the people living near the crossing. Senior-constable B. was the first to cross, the Super next, then myself. B. was to go on a short distance and wait, and the Super was to wait for me. B. went over but proceeded on the wrong road. As soon as I joined Mr. Q., he went on, of course it was beneath his dignity to speak much to a common trooper. In this way we went on for about two miles till we got to the bend of the river again. The Superintendent then halted and asked me if we were going right. I answered with becoming respect that I did not know. And indeed how could I, for I did not know then whether they were trying to make for New Zealand or Gipps’ Land. If they had told me when they were starting where they wished to go I could have taken them straight to the place. Well, the Superintendent reflected for a few minutes and then said very softly, “I want to go to Hart’s crossing”. This is the crossing place of Jerrabat Gully creek. “All right, sir”, said I, and wheeled short to the left and came on the track and followed it down to the creek where we met the men who were waiting for us. B., the leading man, pulled us up at this place, and some of the men who were behind us again. We then mustered about eight or nine strong, so on we went to catch Tommy Clarke at supper with his wife two hours after the time we were told he would be with her. We surrounded the house and searched it, but the bird had flown of course. We determined then to take the camp, so on we went through sticks and water-holes — you could not see your horses’ head. After about four hours march we had advanced about four miles, when we halted till, daylight. Our informant was to meet us at daylight, and show us the camp, and so he did. There was the log where some one had camped, but no one was there. The goods, however, were there, so we guarded them. On the first day I was sent back to the station for rations, and got back in the middle of the night with them. While I was away John Connell rode all round the camp, and at last approached and enquired for working bullocks. As soon as he saw what was up, he soon let the rest know, so it was useless then stopping any longer. The next day, therefore, we packed up and went home with the goods.

ABOUT THE POLICE.

I must here digress a little, for I cannot help it. If we had come in at the back of the range with our horses and two or three days rations, and left our horses a couple of miles off, instead of taking them right up to the place, we could have done some good. But you see the folly of placing men in charge of officers who know no more about the bush than a child. Yet this is really the case. A “new chum”, for instance, lands in the colony and is taken into the police force, taught to ride a little, up and down, a la cavalry, before the depot at Sydney, and is then sent up the country to capture bushrangers — experienced natives — and criminals long familiar with every hole and corner of the bush. This is most unfair to the man who is thus placed at a disadvantage, and it is frightfully expensive to the country. I will ask, what can a new arrival know about the Australian bush, or about the nags of the country, or the laws of the country, the connexions, the deceptions, and peculiar feelings of one portion of our population? The people of the country cry out about crime being committed, and the expense of the police force, but it is plain enough to see the evil. Why not put a man in charge who can himself lead a party through any part of the bush and direct them with skill and judgment? I am not disparaging the officers, far from it; nor do I wish to take greater credit for the native troopers than is due. If I point out an evil, it may be permitted me to suggest a remedy. Supposing that a native, were to be sent to the mountains of Wicklow in search of Fenians, or whiskey makers, and were in charge of a party, what success would I expect in the expedition, unless extraordinary good luck favoured me! So here how willing and plucky soever a man may be, what can he do when he is under an inexperienced leader? What can a man do when he is depending with confidence on his mate who, like X., a friend to the bushrangers, and as great a tool as ever scoured the bush or mounted a horse? Sergeant B. was a new hand, and at this time had never been in the bush in his life, except occasionally about the station. He was stationed at the gulf before he came to our station, so what could you expect him to know? If a native joins the force he is placed under the orders of some of these new hands, and as most of them are Irishmen they have, for some reason or other, jealously against native-born Australians. They cannot ride themselves, or trust themselves in the bush, and appear to hate those who can. The moment these people get in the force, and a little money in their pockets, they want to be promoted as sergeants, and from that up; so, anything they can make a case out of, they take it up at once, make a great noise in the worin, and, with a moderate amount of blarney, they succeed in getting promoted. And what are they promoted for? Can you answer that? I have tried to solve that mystery for a long time, but failed. Go to what part of the country you will, and in eight cases out of ten you will always find some man in charge that has scarcely been twelve months in the colony. No doubt very excellent men these in the Irish or London constabulary, but for years unfit to become leaders of expeditions in this country. What, in fact, can such a man do in pursuing bushrangers? Can he ride, can he travel the bush during the night as well as day, can he strike the bush so as to make any point he wishes? If his horse knocks-up can he ride a young one? If his horse takes sick can he cure him? I say no; and how could it be expected when most of them never mounted and perhaps never touched a horse till they came here. I don’t wish to ridicule any man because he cannot ride well, but am just showing the kind of men we have in the police. It is the country people who suffer for it, and the police authorities suffer too.

TOM CLARKE.

We were out on patrol one day up the gully. We had just passed old Mrs. Connell’s place, about half a mile, and were riding close under the range, which is all low spurs, breaking down to the flat. As we were in the bottom of one of these I saw the heads of two men. They both had new cabbage-tree hats on and could be easily seen. They did not see us at the time, so I pulled up and whistled to L. softly, who was riding some twenty-five yards below me, and the tracker below him again. I signalled to them several times but they took not the least notice, and kept going up the spur. The two “boys” were coming straight towards us till they saw L. just ahead, when they pulled up and looked till they saw me start out of the cree. Tom Clarke then wheeled round like a flash of lightning up the range. I sprang towards Tom Connell before he could get started as he was leading a beautiful black horse — a stolen one — packed with a lot of the Foxlow goods and some blankets. When he saw my revolver pointed close to him he turned the colour of death. I told him to stand quiet, and he replied, “All right.” I stood by him till L. and the tracker came up. They were before me when I started at the “boys”, but I had to wait, I suppose three minutes, before they were up.

Tom Clarke was, in the meantime going up the range, which was very steep at this place. As soon as they came up I told L. to look after him. I then went on after Tommy, but my horse would not race at first — going away from the rest — till I faced him straight up the range at Clarke. I was gaining on him fast, as my horse was stronger than his, Tommy was riding a race-horse but not up to his weight. He had got over the crown of the hill when I was 200 yards off. I had to wait for a while near the top, as coming straight up the hill my horse was blown. When I had ridden on the top of the range a short distance I saw Tommy three parts down the hill again, making down as fast as he could below old Mrs. Connell’s. I lost sight of him but followed. As I came out on the flat I came across the tracker, whom I had left with sergeant B. in charge of Tom Connell, half a mile above old Mr. Connell’s place, and we were then about that distance below Connell’s. I asked the tracker if he had seen Tom Clarke come down, and he said no. It was certainly very scrubby on that part of the hill, but he must have seen him if he come on the flat, and I was positive he did. So I asked him where he left B. and Tom Connell. He said Tom had got away. Well, this intelligence amazed me. He told me Tom had made down this way, but they did not know which part he had made for — the mountain, or the creek. I could then see what was up and knew he had made for the creek where Tommy Clarke would join him; but how to account for the tracker telling me that Tom Clarke did not come that way was a puzzler.

We made down to the crossing place of the creek and found fresh tracks, just crossed. Here B. joined us, and was positive they had not crossed there. So we went back a mile and a half to where Tom Connell got away, and ran his tracks right down to the crossing place we had just left. It seems that after I had gone up the hill after Clarke, B. and the tracker had been watching me, and Tom Connell seeing them so deeply engaged, skedaddled, and was 100 yards away before they could believe it. They made after him then, but Tom Connell was not to be caught in scrub, ridden after by a new chum; and it seems they lost sight of him. When near the creek they made up the flat, then towards the range. There they saw Clarke and gave him another spin for a couple of hundred yards, but they found they could do nothing. The tracker was coming to pick me up, with strict orders to say nothing to me about Clarke having joined Tom Connell again. Now as I was only a few minutes behind them at the crossing place the first time, if I had known the truth, I could have got up to Tom Connell again, and perhaps Clarke to, for his horse was too small to carry him long in a clear chase. But they denied they had crossed there, and so made matters worse; for after going back and running the tracks down, we crossed the creek ,and followed the tracks for about a mile when we came up to the pack horse, white with perspiring foam, and knocked up. He was either too fat to travel, or they must have had a heavy load on him. We searched about, looking for the property stolen from Foxlow, till near dark, but could see nothing of it, so we took the horse home with us to the station. If this had been known at the time we should all have been dismissed. Sometime after this the tracker got drunk and told me all about Tom Clarke’s coming down the range just ahead of me, and so-and-so telling him to say nothing about it. So you see what a pretty mess was made of it that day. If I had had a reliable mate with me that day we could have captured these two men before any crimes had been committed. If my signal had been attended to at first we could have turned under the bank where we were, into the creek, and waylaid the two boys, and taken or shot them. Instead of this we only made matters worse, and by showing them our weakness made them more daring. Nothing about this affair was ever known to the authorities. The horse was reported to have been picked up in the gully, as a “sweater”. He was claimed, and given up to the owner, so there was no more about him.

(TO BE CONTINUED.)

[Links to other chapters here]

Posted on by AJFPhelan56 0

Spotlight: The Bushrangers John and Thomas Clarke (22 June 1867)

Illustrated Adelaide Post (SA : 1867 – 1874), Saturday 22 June 1867, page 14

THE BUSHRANGERS JOHN AND THOMAS CLARKE.

SOME particulars of the apprehension of the Clarkes were published in our last, but the following additional circumstances connected with their capture have since been contributed by a Sydney journal:— “After the surrender Tom Clarke was very communicative, and spoke of the many hair-breadth escapes he had had with particular gusto, and this man’s mind and feelings are so deadened that he looked upon the awful position he was then in as a piece of by-play. His brother, on the contrary, was extremely morose, and it was with some difficulty that he would allow Dr. Pattison to dress his wound, which was a very bad one, the shot having taken a piece of his shirt into the orifice. The doctor had to probe the wound, at which he called out lustily. The ball passed right through the top of the left arm. Sir Watkin, the black tracker, was shot by Tom Clarke from the window of the hut, the ball striking him above the wrist of the left arm, splintering the bone very much, taking a zig-zag direction, and lodged in the elbow. After Tom Clarke was handcuffed, Sir Watkin went up to him, and said — ‘Tommy, you shot me cowardly.’ ‘ No,’ said Clarke, ‘I merely shot you in defence; you wanted to take my life.’ ‘Well,’ said Sir Watkin, ‘I forgive you;— shake hands.’ Tommy raised his manacled hands, which Sir Watkin heartily clenched and shook cordially. Sir Watkin is now under the medical care of Dr. Pattison, in the Braidwood hospital. On the evening when the two Clarkes made for Guinea’s hut, in which resided Thomas Berry, junior, and his wife, they shortly after their arrival laid down to sleep. About day-light, on the following morning, Tommy awoke first, calling Johnny, saying, ‘Johnny, I’ve had a dream that Byrnes (a senior sergeant stationed at Ballalaba) had trapped us.’ Johnny exclaimed, ‘all nonsense.’ ‘Well,’ said Tommy, ‘this day will tell something.’ This was related by Tommy Clarke while Dr. Pattison was dressing the wound of Johnny. After Sir Watkin’s and Johnny’s wounds had been attended to, Tommy pulled up his trousers to show a wound he had received in the affray—a flesh wound in the back, caused by a slug from Sir Watkin’s gun. While he was stripping to show his wound, Tommy pointed out two bullet-wound marks he had received in his legs, one on his left shin and the other on his right. He said the one on his right leg bad been very bad, so much so that he could scarcely at one time raise it to get into his saddle. This fact tallies with what had been stated that he had been wounded and walked very lame. Guinea’s hut, as it is called, where this affray took piece, is about two miles distant from the spot where Carroll and his party were barbarously murdered — a circumstance which is now fresh in the recollection of every person. In the hut the police found a quantity of ammunition, and a breech-loading rifle, supposed to belong to Carroll. It seems from circumstances that the dream that Tommy had, being fresh in his mind, must have somewhat cowed him, for had he made a bolt out of the hut, by removing a slab or otherwise, there might have been a possibility of escape; for when the constable left for Ballalaba for reinforcements, there were only three police and the wounded tracker to guard.” The prisoners were tried on the 28th ult. for shooting at a police constable named Walsh, and found guilty. They were sentenced to death, and the 25th inst. was appointed for their execution. Both heard their condemnation unmoved.

Posted on by AJFPhelan56 2

Spotlight: Conviction of the Bushrangers, Thomas & John Clarke (1 June 1867)

Bell’s Life in Sydney and Sporting Chronicle (NSW : 1860 – 1870), Saturday 1 June 1867, page 5

Conviction of the Bushrangers, Thomas & John Clarke.

SENTENCE OF DEATH!

CENTRAL CRIMINAL. COURT, TUESDAY, MAY 28.

(Before His Honor tho Chief Justice.)

WOUNDING WITH INTENT TO MURDER.

Thomas Clarke and John Clarke were indicted for that they did, on the 27th Apr last, near Jinden, in the colony of New South Wales, wound one William Walsh, with intent to murder the said William Walsh.

The prisoners pleaded not guilty, and were defended by Messrs. Dalley and Blake, instructed by Mr Joseph Leary. Mr Isaacs, Solicitor-General, prosecuted on behalf of the Crown.

The history of the capture of the outlaw Thomas Clarke and his brother John, when the prisoners fired upon and wounded Walsh is familiar to our readers. We therefore deem it only necessary to give the opening of the case by the Solicitor-General, the summing up of the Judge, the verdict and the sentence.

The Solicitor-General, in opening the case said the jury had a duty of a most difficult nature to perform. They were called upon to try the prisoners at the bar on a capital charge and it devolved upon them to weigh the evidence carefully as it applied to one or both prisoners Thomas Clarke was outlawed by an Act of the Legislature for several felonies. It therefore became the duty of the police to pursue him and secure his apprehension. In the discharge of this duty, it is alleged by the Crown that a constable was shot at and wounded by Thomas Clarke. With regard to the prisoner John Clarke, it was alleged that he also, in company with his brother, fired upon the police sent to arrest them, and that by Thomas Clarke constable William Walsh was wounded. He was not anxious to anticipate any portion of the evidence; but he believed it would be such as to bring the charge, from the lips of three or four witnesses, conclusively home to the prisoners. The principal facts were these: On the evening of the 20th April last, a party of police, under the command of senior-constable Wright, consisting of constables Walsh, Lenehan, J. Wright, Egan, and an aboriginal tracker named Sir Watkin Wynne, arrived close to a hut neat Jinden. They saw, at about 1 o’clock in the morning of 27th April, in a paddock in front of the hut, two horses, which they led towards a haystack. At about 6 o’clock the same morning they saw the two prisoners, Thomas and John Clarke, coming out of the hut towards the horses. The party under sub-inspector Wright attacked the prisoners, who retreated to the hut, and fired upon their pursuers. Constable Walsh and the aboriginal tracker Sir Watkin had approached nearer to the hut than the others. Thomas Clarke, who knew constable Walsh, deliberately fired at him, and wounded him in the thigh. After both had seen Walsh, whom the prisoners knew, it would be proved that John Clarke fired, and wounded Sir Watkin. This shot was fired by John Clarke, through a square hole at the end of the hut. It would also be proved that when the prisoners surrendered to Walsh that there was no one in the hut when the firing took place but Thomas and John Clarke. The nature of the wound indicted upon constable Walsh, the subject under immediate inquiry, would be described to them, and other circumstances that would point to the guilt of the prisoners. The crime, in law, was one which would deprive the prisoners of life. It was, therefore, a case of life or death with which the jury had to deal. The jury had thus a solemn responsibility cast upon them. They had sworn to give a verdict according to the evidence. If any juror, from conscientious principles, had an objection to find a person guilty, when he knew that the effect of his verdict would deprive a fellow-creature of life, he was equally guilty of a serious crime if he continued to sit in the jury-box, and refused to give his verdict according to the evidence because the extreme penalty of the law was involved. He felt sure, however, that the jury would discharge their duty fearlessly and conscientiously, without any feeling as to the effect of their verdict. The evidence of the witnesses would be given in a straightforward manner; and if they detailed the circumstances to which he had alluded, they had only one duty to discharge, solemn as it was to return a verdict of guilty. It was fortunate for the prisoners that they were in a country where the laws allowed them a fair and open trial. They were fortunate also in having secured two gentlemen of great learning, of great ability, and great eloquence to defend them; and they were tried before a magistrate, impartial, of great wisdom and experience in criminal practice. No doubt the two learned counsel, Mr Dalley and Mr Blake, would separately address the jury. After which they would have the lucid summary of the evidence by the Chief Justice. It would then rest with them to pronounce their verdict. If that verdict should be guilty, then the further duty of disposing of the prisoners devolved upon another power with which the jury had nothing to do. If the evidence was clear, they must not flinch from pronouncing their verdict. If there was any fair and reasonable doubt, they would be bound to give the prisoners the benefit of it. He would now call the witnesses to establish the charge.

[The witnesses for the Crown were then called and examined, after which, Mr Blake addressed the jury for Thomas Clarke, and Mr Dalley for John Clarke.]

His HONOR then summed up. He said that considering the great importance of this trial, he must express his regret at the great length to which the trial had extended; because it was impossible but that the attention of the jury must have been fatigued. Many extraneous matters had been introduced, but the facts lay in an extremely narrow compass. The prisoners stood charged with wounding a constable, in discharge of his duty, with intent to kill him. The first question was, did the prisoner Thomas Clarke fire the shot, and wound Walsh? Secondly, what was his intention in firing the shot? Walsh’s evidence, supported by that of more than one other witness, proved that the shot proceeded from the revolver of Clarke. Whether the shot fired from that pistol reached the body of the constable directly, or whether it touched the ground first, was a matter, of no moment.

The simple questions were, first, was the wound inflicted by the prisoner at all? If not, it would be absurd to suppose that it was inflicted by persons standing behind Walsh. Whether the prisoners turned round and shot him or not, no one behind Walsh inflicted the wound; since the wound was inflicted in the man’s front.

He (the Chief Justice) would not follow the learned counsel into any question as to the propriety of the punishment of death. He would suppose that the jury would discharge their [maths?] and find simply a matter of fact and of inferences arising from fact according to their conscientious views, and not for one moment be induced to swerve from the truth by any consideration of what the result of their verdict would be. Neither did he think it necessary to make any remarks on the Felons’ Apprehension Act. He understood Mr Dalley to say that the necessity for that Act was a disgrace to our civilisation. ln that he (the Chief Justice) agreed with him. The existence of the outrages which gave birth to that law was discreditable to us. The law had been recommended from this bench years before it was passed, and was simply a re-enactment of laws as old as the time of Alfred the Great, and adopted by Sovereigns the most enlightened that England ever had known. It was adopted here in consequence of a series of outrages that unless checked would paralyse industry, and render all property and life insecure. It was a system of outrage not directed against large property or for the re-dress of grievances; but against all classes of the community, rich and poor, high and low. Where have those robbers been known to pass by the hoards of the poor man, or of the widow or the orphan when it suited their purposes to rob them? They had been the common robbers of all classes; and they had been murderers of the worst kind. The slightest resistance had been met by attempts to take life. The law was directed only against persons having arms in their hands and likely to use arms in taking life. And not until a criminal had committed a crime punishable with death was he outlawed. Notice was given in every quarter of the country, and then only could the outlaw be shot down. That is the law as it stands in our statute book. (But for the purpose of this trial it was of no importance whether this man was an outlaw or not. It would be quite sufficient if the jury found that the constables were acting with a common design to take Clarke, believing that he was outlawed, or that he had committed a felony. A constable has power to arrest any man whom he suspects to be guilty of felony; and if he cannot otherwise take him, he has power to shoot him down. The law has always been so. The constables are ministers of justice. And are they to expose their own lives to thieves and murderers without the protection of the law? Will any Judge uphold it as law that a constable is to wait until he is shot at, if he sees that revolvers are worn by the men he is seeking to arrest? Do they meet as soldiers in single combat, in honourable warfare? Although he made every allowance for gallant feeling in a man who having shot at another, and finding himself shot, asked and granted forgiveness, he (the Chief Justice) could not but feel it to be a humiliation that this constable (Walsh) on the impulse of the moment did not remember that these men were charged with felony and murder; that he descended, as a minister of justice to shake hands with a man whom he believed to be a robber and a murderer, was a degradation to his character. He (the Chief Justice) had no notion of such tampering with crime. To treat such men cruelly would be barbarous and un-English; but the constable might have said when the man held out his hand, “No, sir, you have shot me, and I have shot at you. I forgive the personal injury; but you are my prisoner. We are not on the same platform. My hand meets not that of a man whom I believe to be a felon.” He (the Chief Justico) sat there to see principles of honour and honesty carried out, and to teach men right notions, and how to act up to them, and not to let the land of his adoption, the land of his children be disgraced by such deeds as these. But these remarks had nothing to do with the trial. A man must be supposed innocent of all crimes laid to his charge until found guilty. It is nothing to a constable whether the man he seeks to arrest is guilty or not. If he is charged with felony, it is his duty to surrender, and it is the duty of the constable to arrest him. The question was did the prisoner Thomas Clarke shoot. If they had any reasonable doubt that he did so, they must acquit both prisoners. They were not nicely to weigh the probabilities of opposing evidence. The next question was this — Was Walsh, when he was shot, in the execution of his duty as a constable endeavouring to arrest the Clarkes for felony, and one of them because he believed him to be an outlaw? The evidence was that a party had been formed to arrest two persons, whom they believed to be guilty of several robberies, and of more than one murder. Then if so, were the Clarkes, or was Thomas Clarke conscious of that fact? On this subject his Honor read a short extract from Archbold to the effect that when an officer of justice is killed in the discharge of his duty, in quelling an affray or arresting a person charged with felony — if the slayer know: the officer’s business, the slaying is murder. The question was, did Thomas Clarke, when he fired at Walsh, know that he was a constable; According to the evidence Clarke, when within twenty yards of Walsh, turned round and fired at him. Walsh said he was known personally to both prisoners. It was said that when Walsh came back with his new party, Thomas Clarke said to him “If I had known you were here, I would have surrendered long ago.” But he also said “I called for you several times.” How could he call on the man unless he knew him? The next question was, did Walsh do more than was reasonably necessary to protect himself and to apprehend the prisoners? A constable is not bound to wait until he is shot at. He has a right to use his own firearms. (His Honor then read part of the evidence of Walsh, as to at Thomas Clarke, and that Thomas Clarke turned round, took aim at him (Walsh) and fired.) A person who aims at a vital part, whether the person shot at dies or not, is responsible for his intention. Something was said about discrepancies. The jury would judge how far they were material. If they met with two or three persons who saw an event, they would agree in their account of the event, but differ as to circumstances. The more witnesses, the more variations there would be. One man may have been so excited that he forgot the nature of the ground over which he passed. (His Honor then read the evidence of William Wright as to his calling on the prisoners to stand and surrender.) The question remained whether, from all circumstances, the prisoners were likely to have known that they were officers of justice. Then came this great question, did or did not the prisoner Thomas Clarke, at the moment he fired intend to take life, for nothing he did afterwards could make him guilty of this charge. Mistakes might be made as to a man’s intention. But looking at the matter as men of common sense, did they believe in their hearts that this man did intend to take life? As to his having no bad feeling, because he did not take life afterwards when he was safe in the house, it might be that he felt that it was better to abstain when there were at least two to one against him. He might have thought that to take life would be useless. When he shot he may have thought that to take the life of two or three would diminish the numbers of their enemies, whereas by merely wounding they would not accomplish this, for a wounded man might still fire on them. By law a man is presumed to intend what circumstances show to be the natural and inevitable consequence of this act. What was the probable consequence of the man’s turning round and firing a revolver at a pursuer within twenty yards of him? This was a maxim of law from the earliest times; and it was not merely a rule of reason and propriety. When a man does an act, is it not natural that that which that particular act is likely to effect the man intended to effect? A man fires a pistol at another’s head. Does it not seem that he intended to take his life? That was the whole of the case as respected the prisoner Thomas Clarke. Now came the question as to John Clarke. He did not fire the shot. The rule is if two or more persons are engaged in an unlawful act, every one is responsible for the act of the others. If men go out for a lawful purpose, and one does something quite apart from the common purpose, there is no reason to invite the others. But if men go out for a common purpose of robbing, and one commits a murder in so doing, all are responsible as murderers. That is a rule that pervades the whole of the criminal law. And it is founded on common sense. It tends to deter men from banding together for unlawful purposes. There is a difficulty in this case. What illegal design were John and Thomas Clarke concerned in at the time the shot was fired? If they had been inside the house, doing all they could to kill or wound the constables, they would both have been engaged in felony. Then whatever one did the other was responsible for. That is the general principle. It is founded on good sense. But at the time when Thomas Clarke fired, John was committing no crime. He was endeavouring to run away. There was no crime in that.

The constables were entitled to shoot him for it. But it was no crime to try to escape. If he turned round and endeavoured to shoot the constable then he was guilty of murder. The difficulty is this: At the time the shot was fired they were both running away. The common design did not seem at that time to be illegal.

John must have known that the constables were endeavouring to arrest his brother. Whether he thought the constables sought to arrest both, or only his brother, was he acting in concert with his brother in resisting Walsh? They were both running away. Thomas turned and fired; John fired a second afterwards. Was his meaning, at that time, to kill or wound the apprehending constable? or was it merely to prevent his own or his brother’s apprehension? If the jury found that John was endeavouring to prevent the arrest, and intended to help his brother to the uttermost, not intending to kill but to wound, so as to prevent the apprehension, he would be equally responsible with his brother, because then there was a common design to help each other against the constables at all hazards. If the common design of wounding any one of the constables were proved, then, though John might not have intended to have killed Walsh at the moment, he is responsible for the capital felony. This is a point of law entirely new, and matter of reasoning from general principles alone. With these remarks he left the case in the hands of the jury.

His Honor concluded his address at ten minutes past 10.

The jury returned into court at 11 o’clock with a verdict of guilty against both prisoners.

The prisoners, in reply to the Clerk of Arraigns, had nothing to say why sentence of death should not be passed upon them.

The CHIEF JUSTICE, amidst the breathless silence of a very crowded court, then proceeded to pass sentence in a most impressive manner, as follows :— Thomas Clarke and John Clarke, if, in the opinion of most of those who hear me, or if it should be thought by a large portion of the community, that you are now about to receive a just retribution for your crimes, it is proper for me to say that no such feelings influence this Court. Such a principle does not belong to our law. You are not to receive punishment as a retribution, but because the taking of your lives is believed to be necessary for the peace and good order, for the safety as well as the welfare of the community: because of the example and warning that a capital execution may hold out to others, by acting as a terror and a restraint from the committal of similar crimes of which you stand convicted. This is the principle, the true principle, of all human punishment. I told the jury they were to conclude that you were innocent of those various crimes in respect of which efforts were made to apprehend you, and by which you were apprehended, and the jury took for granted that you were innocent. But now that I have to pass sentence upon you, I am not restricted by any such feeling. It is proper, however, in what I may say, that I should not hurt your feelings, nor add anything to your degradation, but for the good of the community show what really is the extent of the crime either committed or reasonably supposed to have been committed by you, and upon which the Executive will be asked whether mercy can be extended to you. Thomas Clarke, I hold in my hand a list of offences of which you stand charged within the last two years, and the amount of the whole, exclusive of murders of which you are supposed to be guilty, there are nine robberies of mails and thirty-six robberies of individuals; and among the individuals whom you have robbed there are all classes — Chinamen, labourers, publicans, storekeepers, draymen, and settlers. With respect to you, John Clarke, I find that the offences charged against you within the last year, most of which were committed in company with your brother, amount to twenty-six robberies. Consider your position. This is the result of a long career of bushranging. You have had many abettors — you both must have had many abettors in the district from which you come; and I have no doubt there are others, blind as they are, who have sympathised with your crimes generally. I shall not waste words in respect of such crimes imputed to you. The community is disgraced by the committal of such crimes. I would ask others — and this I recommend you to reflect upon before you die — what is the result, what the value of this course of wickedness, violence, and outrage which you have been pursuing for so long? In all the cases which have come before me it has been a question — Where is the money they have gained? What is the benefit of it? You have not now a shilling in the world after all your robberies. You have not, therefore profited by your career of crime. I have not heard of anyone being a gainer by such a lawless course except one (Gardiner) who is now serving thirty-two years’ penal servitude. A criminal career must end sooner or later. How many lives are taken, how much misery inflicted — and all this for no earthly good accruing to one of you. All is to end ignominiously! You, young men, might have pursued a very different career. You might have been the fathers of respectable families, happy — for happiness is to be found in the circle of home, made home, by honest industry. Instead of that you are to die a dishonoured death, in your young days, on the gallows. There is another consideration. You must have expected that, after you had taken to firearms and robbery the result must have been death. It is shocking to think of — infamous that you, should continue such a career. Those who pursue this course must not only reflect that there is a public shame hanging over them, but that they gain nothing by their robberies. You must have been constantly in terror — always in a state of alarm lest the police tracked you out. And the hard life you must lead. I am not willing to embitter your feelings; but what I am now saying may not be heard by this crowded Court, but I have a hope that other ears may hear me and be prevented from entering on a career similar to yours. I say men like you must be in constant fear of the police entering your dwellings when you have one, and hence you wander about like wild beasts, and undergo an amount of fatigue and privation more severe than that imposed on any labourer, and which, if directed to its proper channel, would bring you peace of mind, would more than furnish you with the comforts of this life. Take this into consideration, and you will admit that the balance must be against you. Tell me, where is the man you have ever heard of, who, by a course of bushranging, has gained a shilling’s worth of property he can call his own. If liberated tomorrow where are their gains? I will read you a list of bushrangers who have appeared during the last four years and a half, all of whom have been either shot dead, or hanged, or imprisoned for life — a list almost of demons. There was Peisley, he was executed. Davis, sentenced to death, but commuted to fifteen years. Gardiner, sentenced to thirty two years. Gilbert, shot dead. Ben Hall, shot dead. Bow and Fordyce, sentenced to death, commuted to imprisonment for life. Manns, executed. Vane, ten years. O’Mealley, shot dead. Burke, shot dead. Gordon, Ben Hall’s mate, sentenced to fifteen years. Dunleavy, the same. Dunn, executed. Lowry, shot dead. Foley, sentenced to fifteen years. Morgan, shot dead. Yourself, Thomas Clarke, and you John Clarke, about to be sentenced to be hanged. Fletcher, shot dead, Pat Connell, a mate and relation of yours Thomas Clarke, shot dead. Tom Connell, another relation, sentenced to death, but commuted to penal servitude for life; and Bill Scott, a mate of yours, believed to have been murdered. How many widows, how many orphans, how much property is lost by the career of these men? I have a list here which shows that since June, 1864, seven persons, mostly police, were killed, and sixteen policemen wounded — all within three years. Much as I have had to do with criminals, I do not know that there is anything in the world so abhorrent as the sympathy which has been expressed for this class of highway robbers — the scum of the earth, the lowest of the low — they have been held up as heroes worthy of example. But better days are coming. It was the convict element that was still working, that caused the sympathy I am alluding to. Yes, a brighter day is coming. You will not live to see it, for your days are numbered. A better and a healthier feeling is rising and pervading all classes. There will be no longer this vile sympathy which has hitherto so much disgraced us. It is shocking when I think of it. It pains me. It humiliates me when I reflect upon it. But two or three years ago one, a young man, the head and front of bushranging amongst us, was in the dock where you now stand, and was acquitted wrongfully — I say wrongfully acquitted. And there was rejoicing in this court, such an exhibition as would disgrace the vilest country on earth; but I am happy to say such days are gone. If there are any in this court now who participated in that unseemly exhibition, they live now to see their shame. I am grieved that two young men like you are to receive the last sentence of the law — that you are to pass away from a country which, by honest industry, you might have assisted to raise in the estimation of the world, but from which you pass after disgracing it.

His HONOR then, with much solemnity, pronounced the awful sentence of death upon the prisoners, who were then received by the gaolers to the condemned cells.

The prisoners remained apparently unconcerned at their fate. An elderly woman, said to be Mrs Clarke, stood near the dock, and her feelings can be better imagined than described to see her two sons conducted to their last habitation in this world.

The Court which had been orderly throughout the day, adjourned at 11:30 p.m.

Posted on by AJFPhelan56 2

Spotlight: The Story of Constable Miles O’Grady

Evening News (Sydney, NSW : 1869 – 1931), Saturday 14 October 1899, page 2

A LITTLE-KNOWN MONUMENT.

THE STORY OF CONSTABLE MILES O’GRADY

(Contributed.)

At the top of a street in the ancient gold diggings town of Nerrigundah, N.S.W., stands this monument on a small plot of grass-covered ground, that has been reserved from the pick and shovel of the gold-seeker, although rich claims were worked just a few vards from the monument. It stands opposite the site of the old police barracks, erected after the death of the brave fellow. It is of substantial construction, and is of sandstone, enclosed with iron railings. Its height may be imagined by comparing it with the figure of the present officer of Nerrigundah, Constable Stinson, who stood by the monument as it was being photographed for our artist, who has made a drawing from the photograph.

On the column is inscribed the following, which may be taken as a heading to the short story of Miles O’Grady:

‘Erected by the Government of New South Wales, in honor of Constable Miles O’Grady, who on the 9th April, 1866, while suffering from severe illness. Single-handed attacked Armed bushrangers, and lost his life in the encounter, thus setting a noble example of bravery in the discharge of public duty.’

The town was ‘stuck up’ by the Clark gang of bushrangers, and the news was soon conveyed to O’Grady, who was lying on his bed suffering from low fever. He said, ‘I must do my duty,’ and was soon in his uniform, armed ready for action. In company with Constable Smythe (who till recently has been In charge of the Candelo Police Station, which he left, having retired on a pension, taxing up his residence in Sydney, where his death was chronicled a few months ago), he set out to protect the inhabitants. On reaching the scene where the bushrangers had ‘bailed up’ all the people that had come to that part of the town on business, and had them under guard of one of the gang in the large ballroom of Wallace’s Hotel (for in those days every hotel had its ballroom), the police soon saw that the rest of the gang were busy robbing Pollock’s store, but they could not fire at these for fear of shooting the storekeeper or his wife, who looked on as the bushrangers helped themselves. They fired at the one who was guarding the ballroom door, shooting him dead. The police then went across the street, and the gang ran out of the store and fired a volley, with the result that O’Grady was shot through the stomach. The poor fellow lingered a few hours, but said he was satisfied that he had done his duty. He died like the brave man he was, with his friends around his bed, and his sweetheart holding his hand.

Posted on by AJFPhelan56 1

Spotlight: Pat Connell Enquiry

Burrangong Argus (NSW : 1865 – 1913), Saturday 28 July 1866, page 3

SHOOTING OF PAT CONNELL BUSHRANGER.

The following is the evidence which was taken at the magisterial enquiry touching the death of Connell, at the Braidwood police-office by J. H. Griffin, Esq., on Wednesday afternoon.

Sergeant Creagh on oath states :— In consequence of instructions I received I started on Tuesday morning about 5 a.m. from Ballalaba after the robbers at Mudmelong. We made along the track leading from Mr. Connell’s public-house to Araluen about fifteen miles; about 10 o’clock we came to a mountain when the black tracker was placed at a pass which the robbers were likely to take, and the remainder of the party kept a little way off in the bush; about twenty minutes after the black tracker came and told us that two of the party we were in quest of had passed with a mob of horses; I at once got the men in readiness to start on the track; at eleven o’clock started and followed the tracks till 3 o’clock in the afternoon, proceeding in a walk and part of the time in a hard gallop; at this time came across signs of several horses having been feeding. Dismounted and followed these tracks cautiously along on foot; in about ten minutes the black tracker in advance put up his hands to ensure silence and pointed down to a thick scrub, in the midst of which we saw a camp and a man moving about. Left the horses in charge of the tracker and stole cautiously down to the camp when we saw three other men; our party consisted of myself, Senior-constable Byrne, and constables Kelly and Gracy; stole to within 60 yards of the camp and told the men to fire. We immediately all fired, and directly afterwards rushed on to the camp, each man drawing his revolver. Saw four men. When we rushed the camp three of them ran away making the direction of the creek which was very scrubby on the other side; Pat Connell getting a horse and making away, Constable Kelly and Gracy following him, while I and Byrne followed the three others on foot. As soon as they got into the scrub on the other side, the bushrangers commenced firing, one of them having first taken a deliberate aim with a revolving rifle at Byrne. The firing then ceased for some time till we called out to them then they commenced firing again, to which we replied, when they again ran away. After the ceasing of the fire for some time two other shots were fired by the retreating parties, and after waiting for some time we went down to the creek after Pat Connell’s body which was lying near the creek. As soon as we got his body up to the camp, we took possession of the following articles which the bushrangers had left; four saddles and bridles, three revolvers, one calico tent, one cloak, and a pair of saddle bags, besides a quantity of provisions, clothing, blacksmith’s tools, one bottle of old tom, and also some mail bags, the camp had not long been made. They were getting ready for supper when we came up to them; we sewed the body up in some blankets, and while we were doing this, I saw two of the bushrangers returning and we fired upon them, then they went back to the scrub, and as it was getting dark, we could see no more of them. The whole affair lasted about two hours. We then got two of their horses and brought the body to the police station at Ballalaba which we reached at about 12 o’clock at night. When we got to the police station found a silver watch (Flaville Brothers), two gold rings, (one horse shoe pattern and the other a Chinese ring), four one pound notes, and £1 11s., in silver in a leather clasp purse, and a meerschaum pipe. I brought the body this morning to Braidwood.

Thomas Kelly, a mounted constable stationed at Ballalaba, on oath, gave the same narrative as Sergeant Creagh of the events which took place up to meeting the bushrangers and starting in pursuit of them, when they tracked horses for about fifteen miles and then dismounted to go up a ridge. When they got on the top of the ridge deponent saw the bushrangers’ camp, which they stole up to within about fifty or sixty yards, Pat Connell jumped on his horse before the police fired. On the first exchange of shots the police separated, Sergeant Creagh and Senior-Constable Byrnes following the three men on foot, deponent and Constable Gracy rushed after the mounted man. He drew his revolver at about sixty yards distance, when Connell looked back, and said, ” Stand back you ———;” fired upon him, upon which he immediately threw up his hands, groaned, and fell backwards off his horse on his head. On going up to him he immediately recognised him as Pat Connell; he appeared to be in great agony and to live for some minutes after; seeing deceased was fatally wounded, went on to the remainder of the police to fire upon the other bushrangers, who were in a thick scrub; the firing continued for about an hour and a half; when about dusk the whole party went to the body and removed it with the things left by the bushrangers to Ballalaba as stated by Sergeant Creagh.

George John Pattison, a duly qualified medical practitioner, on oath, saith as follows : — I have identified the body lying in the lock-up as that of Pat Connell, and have held a post mortem examination. Head: Incised wound about half an inch in length over right angle of frontal bone ; face besmeared with blood and nasal cartilage bent slightly to left side; small part of tongue protruding between lips. Thorax: Over upper and anterior surface of thorax on right side found ecchymosed patch. On pressing with the fingers over 2nd rib of this side could feel a hard and moveable substance; made an incision through the skin and pectoral muscles, and found a revolver bullet in contact with the second rib; on removal of sternum and anterior parts of ribs found a large quantity of blood, partly coagulated in right plural cavity; wound in middle lobe of lung; right pulmonary vein and artery wounded and lower lateral surface of body of 6th dorsal vertebra grooved, communicating externally with a circular wound over spinous process of 6th dorsal vertebra. I am of opinion death was caused by a gunshot wound; the bullet entering by the wound in the back, passing through part of the right lung, wounding the bloodvessels already described perforating the cartilage of the 2nd rib on the right side close to the sternum, and lodging in tissues immediately above that rib. — B. Dispatch.

Posted on by AJFPhelan56 0

Spotlight: Shooting of Pat Connell

Queanbeyan Age and General Advertiser (NSW : 1864 – 1867), Thursday 26 July 1866, page 2

SHOOTING OF PAT CONNELL.

From the Braidwood Dispatch.

INFORMATION was brought into town on Wednesday morning last of the police having, the day previous, pursued the bushrangers whose depredations at Mudmelong on Monday last were recorded in our last issue, and of the death of one of their number, Pat Connell, during the encounter which ensued. The news was brought into town at an early hour in the morning, between one and two o’clock the same day the body of the dead outlaw was brought in by Sergeant Creagh and his party from Ballalaba, where it had been conveyed and detained the previous night. It appears that the bushrangers, after their outrageous proceedings at Mudmelong on Monday afternoon, camped in the Araluen mountains somewhere about Betowynd, only a few miles from Mudmelong, that night Sergeant Creagh, in charge of the station at Ballalaba, having received instructions the previous night from the superintendent at Braidwood, proceeded, early on Tuesday morning with a party of police consisting of Senior Constable Byrne, constables Kelly and Gracy, and a black tracker, to intercept them or pick up their tracks and follow them on the route they had taken from Mudmelong through the mountains to their haunts at Jingera.

As will be seen by the narrative of that officer and of constable Kelly given below they proceeded about fifteen miles on a track leading to Araluen, and when they had arrived at a position the most likely to pick up the bushrangers’ tracks or to intercept them, on the side of a mountain contiguous to the valley, their efforts after waiting some short time were rewarded with success, the black tracker pointing out to them Pat Connell and another of the gang driving a mob of horses along a path leading through the mountains to a point of the table land higher up than the path along which the police party had come. The police then followed their tracks for about fifteen miles and came upon the robbers encamped in the Krawarre ranges, at about three o’clock in the afternoon. The police were made aware of their near approach to the robbers by the signs of several horses having been feeding. The black tracker having been ordered to reconnoitre in advance, while the remainder of the party having dismounted, cautiously proceeded behind him on foot, was not long in scenting them out. In about ten minutes from the time the party dismounted, the tracker put up his hands to caution his companions to be silent, and pointing down the side of the hill upon which they were proceeding they obtained a full view of the robbers’ camp down in the creek, and observed one man moving about. Leaving the horses in charge of the tracker the police stole cautiously and unobserved to within sixty yards of the camp. They then saw four men, one of them (Pat Connell) being at that moment about to jump upon a horse. The other three were engaged round the fire and were evidently preparing for supper, a pot being on the fire and a quantity of provisions strewn about. They had a tent and appeared to be quite at their ease without the most distant apprehension of being disturbed. Pat Connell it was supposed was about to ride round the camp to see that all was safe for the night and to look after the horses which he and one of his companions had been observed driving in the morning.

The police under the direction of Sergeant Creagh, gave one volley into the camp when they had approached within the distance stated and then rushed upon the robbers, each of the attacking party drawing his revolver in readiness for the fight in close quarters. The robbers fled however before their assailants, the three on foot making direct for the creek, and Pat Connell, who was on horseback, making off up the creek. The three who made for the creek returned the fire before retreating, but neither volley had any effect. The police then fired upon them again, but the robbers who had run across the creek were protected by a dense scrub at the other side, a feature of the position admirably chosen for affording an escape in the event of a surprise of this kind. Sergeant Creagh and senior-constable Byrne followed the fugitives across the creek. When retiring into the shelter of this scrub, one of the robbers (John Clarke we believe) knelt down on one knee and presenting what appeared to be a revolving rifle, took deliberate aim at Byrne, and fired, the shot fortunately missing him, but not being very far wide of the mark. As soon as the robbers got into the scrub they commenced blazing away at their two assailants, after which their firing ceased for some time, when Sergeant Creagh and Byrne called out to them to come out and face them, and make good their braggadocio at Mudmelong, and other places about themselves and the police, but the birds were not to be caught with chaff, they merely emerged from their cover for a moment to take aim, and then retreated again into the scrub.

While this was going on here, constables Kelly and Gracy had pursued Pat Connell in an opposite direction, and the luck which has hitherto attended this robber, who is said to be the real captain of the gang, he being the most powerful and active as well as the most experienced man amongst them, on this occasion deserted him. He appears to have been caught in a fix, and to have been placed at a great disadvantage in the saddle, a position in which he has hitherto been unassailable, and in which his splendid daring feats have so often carried him triumphant out of the most hair breadth difficulties. As a bush rider he, perhaps, has never been surpassed by any man in Australia, and it is quite possible he may have placed more faith in his powers in the saddle than on his legs, and mounted his horse from choice and not for another purpose unconnected with his escape. If so, however, his disappointment must have been fearful when he found that he was unable to rush his horse up the hill which he was trying to get over speedily enough to get out of reach of constable Kelly’s revolver. Kelly says that when he got within sixty yards of him he fired upon him. Just before doing so Connell all intent, apparently, upon urging his horse over the hill, looked round and said, “Stand back you —– .” These were the last words the robber uttered for immediately the words were out of his mouth Kelly’s bullet had accomplished its fatal mission, and passed through his back between the left shoulder-blade at the bottom of the shoulder and the spine. The outlaw threw up his arms, groaned, and fell backwards from his horse, with his head foremost to the ground.

Kelly remained with him a few minutes, and believing he was mortally wounded, left him to rejoin the remainder of the party. The firing with the remainder of the bushrangers continued for about an hour and a half after this, and the police party then resolved upon returning to the station, and having placed the body of the dead bushranger upon the horse he had been riding, and secured the things left in the camp, which will be found enumerated below in Sergeant Creagh’s statement, they started at about five o’clock for Ballalaba, which they reached about midnight. We may mention that it is rumoured that the names of the other bushrangers are John Clarke, Thomas Connell, and Thomas Lawler, a young man, a resident of Collector, who has for some time been suspected as connected with this gang. Thomas Clarke, the principal outlaw, was not seen amongst them at all, and it is impossible to say whether he had been with them or not. There was some talk of a fifth man being seen at Mudmelong, but whether there was or not it is hard to say. If there was it is probable that Thomas Clarke was the other man, and was absent at the time the police came upon the camp, tailing the horses. The expedition after the robbers appears to have been conceived and executed with a promptitude and decision which reflects the greatest credit on all parties. The robbers will have been now taught a lesson which they have long been in need of, viz., that an equal body of police meeting them on equal terms, doubly armed, as they are in the justice of their cause, can make them flee before them, with all their of boasting, like so many demons before their avenging angels. It will teach them that they can be hunted down in their mountainous strongholds as successful as across the stretching plains, as it is apparent that they can be taken at a great advantage by a pursuing party, who can espy their position from the surrounding hills and pounce down upon them unawares as in this instance. It is a matter of surprise indeed, that the assailants’ first volley did not do some execution amongst them, and the manner in which they escaped unharmed was a piece of luck which it is very improbable they would meet with in any attack under similar circumstances again.

The dead body of the outlaw, Pat Connell, underwent a post mortem examination at the hands of Dr. Pattison, on Wednesday, in the Braidwood lockup, when the ball was taken out from the right breast, having passed through from where it entered in his back. The body was afterwards given over to Mr. Thomas Farrell, the undertaker, by whom it was placed in a coffin and removed, at the request of the deceased’s family, to Jerrabatgully, to be interred with others of the family there buried. We learn from those who saw the body that the deceased appeared to be in a better state of physical health at the time of his death than he ever had been known to be during his life. He was about 36 years of age, and presented as fine a form as ever nature endowed mortal man with. When living he stood about five feet ten inches, and was a most compact and firmly knit, athletic, active man, and one of the best riders in the colony.

A magisterial inquiry touching the death of Connell was held at the Braidwood police-office by J. H. Griffin, Esq., on Wednesday afternoon, when Sergeant Creagh, in addition to what is stated above, said as follows :– At the camp we took possession of the following articles which the bushrangers had left; four saddles and bridles, three revolvers, one calico tent, one cloak, and a pair of saddle bags, besides a quantity of provisions, clothing, blacksmith’s tools, one bottle of old tom, and also some mail bags. The camp had not been long made. They were getting ready for supper when we came up to them; we sewed the body up in some blankets, and while we were doing this I saw two of the bushrangers returning and we fired upon them, when they went back to the scrub, and as it was getting dark we could see no more of them. When we got to the police station found a silver watch (Flaville Brothers,) two gold rings, (one horse shoe pattern and the other a Chinese ring), and four £1 notes and £1 11s. in silver, in a leather clasp purse, and a meerschaum pipe. I brought the body this morning to Braidwood.

Posted on by AJFPhelan56 1

Bushranging: A Female Perspective

Bushranger history has long been the province of male authors and historians, even as far back as 1818 with the infamous pamphlet Michael Howe: The Last and Worst of the Van Diemen’s Land Bushrangers by T. E. Wells being perhaps the first dedicated text on the subject. However, in recent years we have seen a new guard forming that is being largely driven by female authors and historians, whose unique perspectives on both an emotional and intellectual level have challenged long held beliefs and, in many cases, set the record straight by digging up information that has long been forgotten or ignored by their predecessors. The first signs of this shift in the 1970s when Margaret Carnegie wrote the first biography of Daniel Morgan, Morgan: The Bold Bushranger. It went beyond the oft-repeated hyperbole about how nasty Morgan was and returned to the source material with a fresh pair of eyes to sift through it all and get to the truth of the man rather than the infamous legend. Similarly, Dagmar Balcarek’s contributions in subsequent decades infused many bushranger stories with more feminine sensibilities and helped inject some life into what was seen at the time as stale and boring by many.

Here we will showcase some of the more notable individuals who are, at present, making a big impact on our understanding of some of the most notorious men (and women) in Australian history.

Carol Baxter

Captain Thunderbolt & His Lady by Carol Baxter (2011)

Carol Baxter is one of the most notable female historians where bushranging is concerned. Her biography of Frederick Wordsworth Ward and Mary Ann Bugg is the most definitive account to date, locking in place an understanding of the story derived from recorded facts rather than folklore and hearsay. This refusal to accept many of the long held assumptions and oral traditions has seen her looked down upon in some quarters, but respected by others. Baxter describes her situation succinctly on the website for her book:

I soon realised that the role of mediator had become my own. As a professional researcher, genealogist and historian, I had no personal connection to either Fred or Mary Ann and no pre-conceived ideas, prejudices or agendas. All I sought was the truth. And the truth was most surprising. Many of the well-known Thunderbolt and Mary Ann stories proved to be wrong. Utterly and unquestionably wrong. They were myths propagated by the ignorant and perpetuated by the gullible, and are still being voiced today – vociferously – by those with a personal, political or financial agenda.

Carol Baxter

Baxter’s background in genealogy has given her a knack for sniffing out information that is often overlooked or forgotten. Rather than regurgitating the same old stories about Thunderbolt that have done the pub circuit for 150 years, Baxter made an effort to find the truth of who the historical Ward and Bugg were. The result is a new understanding of these fascinating historical figures that has redefined how they are portrayed.

Jane Smith

Not all librarians have a knack for writing, but in the case of Jane Smith it is certainly true. A desire to write children’s books cane to Smith after working with children in a library setting, resulting in her series of children’s non-fiction books on Australian bushrangers. Since then she has written a historical fiction series (Tommy Bell Bushranger Boy), and the definitive biography of Captain Starlight.

Captain Starlight
The Strange but True Story of a Bushranger, Imposter and Murderer
By Jane Smith (2015)

While most historians and authors have been more inclined to write about the Kellys, Ben Hall or Frank Gardiner, Smith’s decision to chronicle the life of the notorious Frank Pearson has gifted bushranger enthusiasts a detailed account of a frequently forgotten figure. The ability to put her resources to use in nailing down the narrative of a renowned conman, notable for his use of aliases, demonstrates her formidable prowess as a historian.

It is also important that so much of her work is aimed at younger audiences, as it reflects a desire to ensure these stories are kept alive into the future, which is essentially the purpose of historians and authors.  In an interview with A Guide to Australian Bushranging, Smith explained what keeps her so engaged with researching and writing about bushrangers, and history in a broader sense:

I really enjoy history; I enjoy learning about how things were in the past and marvelling at the differences and similarities compared with life today. I think that knowing something of history is really important if you want to be a well-rounded human who can make informed decisions. When I was at school, however, I found history lessons boring. It seemed to me that history just meant memorising names and dates – and yet it’s so much more than that!

Jane Smith

Judy Lawson

One of the most important things a historian must do is ask questions. In the case of Judy Lawson, her journey of exploration is a series of questions that started from one key query: did Tommy Clarke really murder the special constables in the Jingera Ranges?

The Clarke Bushrangers: A Clash of Cultures by Judy Lawson

This question resulted in her book The Clarke Bushrangers: A Clash of Cultures, which explores the crimes attributed to the Clarke bushrangers and the cultural context in which they arose. The discussion around the police murders raises more questions than answers, leaving the conclusion open for the reader to interpret rather than the author feeding their opinion as fact. By providing an alternative viewpoint on the crimes, Lawson has challenged the deeply held assumptions that have made the Clarkes a taboo subject in the Braidwood district for 150+ years.

The second edition of her book goes further, examining many of the other crimes attributed to the Clarkes and their associates in the same way, bringing readers to reassess their views. Ultimately, this was all born from encountering a depiction of events that contradicted the information that she had come upon herself independently. This assumption of guilt, combined with the assumption that the crimes were the result of some innate criminality, or simply the product of work-shy laggards who simply didn’t want to follow the rules proved irksome, and were motivations to set the record straight.

Today we can sit back in our climate controlled houses, complaining about our increasing weight while planning our next overseas trip and say well if they had lived an honest life they would not have had those dreadful things happen. But is that the answer? Can the events of the 1860s in Braidwood be attributed only the the fact that the boys were seen as dishonest? They were not in this class alone.

Judy Lawson, The Clarke Bushrangers: A Clash of Cultures

This assumption of guilt where many bushrangers are concerned has been all too common, but authors like Lawson are working hard to turn the tide.

Georgina Stones

Followers of A Guide to Australian Bushranging will be familiar with Georgina Stones, who has frequently contributed to the website and social media. Her work on Joe Byrne sheds light on parts of his story that had been overlooked or completely ignored by other historians, and has allowed Byrne’s story to be studied in much the same level of detail as Ned Kelly’s. Her ongoing project, An Outlaw’s Journal, is a mixture of her historical research and short stories based on, or inspired by, the recorded history. While this has, in some corners, attracted some level of controversy, Stones’ work does not shy away from some of the more taboo or risque aspects of Joe’s life and times. In her research she has uncovered some aspects of Joe’s early life not otherwise talked about such as his role as a witness in the murder case of Ah Suey, and his relationship to Ellen Salisbury.

An Outlaw’s Journal by Georgina Stones

Since then, Stones has also begun a second project titled Michael Howe: Governor of the Woods, which operates in much the same way as An Outlaw’s Journal. Her research has quickly redefined the way Howe is viewed, and is proving to be invaluable in learning the stories of his gang members, and the men that hunted them. Though the research is ongoing, the impact this has on our understanding of the early Tasmanian bushrangers is profound, and she has plans to release a book later this year.

Michael Howe: Governor of the Ranges by Georgina Stones

Stones’ interest is firmly on peeling away the myths to uncover the forgotten histories of the bushrangers, but she is the first to admit that her age and gender play a significant role in how her work is perceived. During a live stream on A Guide to Australian Bushranging’s Facebook page she explained:

Sometimes I don’t think that we’re taken seriously for our work and I think we’re dismissed. I mean, I honestly believe sometimes that if I was a man perhaps some of my work might be taken a bit more seriously and I mightn’t be sometimes spoken down to as often as sometimes I am, which is a bit upsetting but true. I think people assume we are soft on these men, like because we’re females we’re just doe-eyed, but I don’t think that’s true. I think a lot of the time people like Judy Lawson and Carol Baxter, the reason why they’ve been able to kind of shine a new light is because as females we can kind of… understand things a bit different and deeply than maybe what men sometimes do.

Georgina Stones
Posted on by AJFPhelan56 0

Spotlight: The Execution Of The Clarke Brothers As It Was Reported

Mount Alexander Mail (Vic. : 1854 – 1917), Wednesday 26 June 1867, page 3

LATEST INTELLIGENCE

[PER GREVILLE AND CO., REUTER’S AGENTS.]

(BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH. )

Sydney, June 25.

The convicted bushrangers, Thomas and John Clarke were executed at 9 o’clock this morning. The scaffold was erected in the yard of Darlinghurst Gaol. There were only about the usual number of officials and spectators present, and nothing special marked the ceremony.

The men bad been most assiduously attended by their spiritual advisers, and a subdued and quiet manner, with expressions of penitence for their crimes, marked their last moments. In both instances death was almost instantaneous on the fall of the drop. Their relatives and friends were in attendance, and (having previously obtained permission from the authorities) their bodies have since been removed for interment.

Queenslander (Brisbane, Qld. : 1866 – 1939), Saturday 6 July 1867, page 9

EXECUTION OF THE BROTHERS CLARKE.

THOMAS and JOHN CLARKE were executed together within the precincts of Darlinghurst Gaol, on Tuesday, June 25, a few minutes past 9 o’clock, in the presence of about one hundred and seventy spectators, and a large detachment of city police. The execution was conducted in a very prompt and brief manner. The procession was formed exactly at 9 o’clock. Thomas Clarke was accompanied by the Rev. Father John Dwyer, and John Clarke by the Rev. Father O’Farrell. The prayers said by the clergymen were in a low tone. Both prisoners walked with their heads bowed down, and with their eyes partially closed. They looked very careworn and much dejected. They paid no attention to the presence of so many spectators, upon whom they did not so much as cast one look. Their minds seemed to be fully absorbed in meditation and prayer. On arriving at the foot of the gallows they both knelt briefly in prayer. The Rev. Father Dwyer then proceeded up the ladder to the scaffold, followed by Thomas and John Clarke, and the Rev. Father O’Farrell. The prisoners, especially John, manifested slight trepidation. John was placed to the left of his brother. When the rope was adjusted on John’s neck he looked momentarily at his brother, whose eyes remained closed. The rope was then adjusted round Thomas’ neck. A few more prayers — very brief, were said, when the Rev. Father Dwyer took Thomas’ left and John’s right hand, bid them farewell, and left them. The Rev. Father O’Farrell held the cross to each of their lips, and both kissed it—their eyes being closed. Both clergymen having departed, the hangman placed a white cap over each of the culprits’ faces, and drew the bolt. Both fell suddenly to a depth of nine feet — their necks were dislocated — and they died instantly without a struggle, and without any perceptible muscular spasm.

Drs. Aaron and Evans, and a surgeon from one of Her Majesty’s vessels, after the bodies had been suspended for about twenty minutes, pronounced life to be extinct; they were taken down, placed in shells, and given over to their sisters for interment.

Since their conviction they had been attended upon unremittingly by the Sisters of Mercy, by the Rev. Father Dwyer and Father O’Farrell; very early yesterday morning by the Rev. Prior Sheridan; and their demeanor throughout was apparently most penitent.

On Monday afternoon they were visited for the last time by their two sisters. Tears on both sides flowed thick and fast. The parting scene was affectionate and distressing. The prisoners, however, soon regained their composure. The authorities also allowed them to be visited by their uncle, Michael Nowlan O’Con-nell, who is now awaiting trial for being accessory to the murder of Carroll and party at Jinden, and also for harboring tho outlaw Thomas Clarke — now no more. The parting scene was here also of a very sad description.

There are some facts in connection with these two executed criminals deserving of notice. It is well known that their solicitor, Mr. Joseph Leary, spared no personal effort in defending them, and in endeavoring to procure a mitigation of their sentence. He procured two very eminent counsel at their trial; and when sentence was passed, moved the full Court in arrest of judgment. Failing in this he went personally on Thursday and had an interview with the Governor, in the presence of His Excellency’s private secretary, and pleaded ably for mercy, especially for John Clarke. Feeling that it would be necessary to submit his case in writing he drew up an elaborate statement, which His Excellency placed specially before the Executive Council on Monday. There was a full meeting of the Council — the further report of the Chief Justice, and the opinion of the Attorney-General and the Solicitor-General being considered with Mr. Leary’s statement. The result of a most anxious deliberation, however, was that the two criminals should be left to their fate.

When this decision had been arrived at and communicated to the prisoners, on Monday evening, they were visited for the last time by Mr. Leary. After some conversation, Thomas Clarke said, ” We should like to make a statement to you.” Mr. Leary replied, “It is useless now for you to make any statement to me; I have done all I can; you have but a few hours to live ; direct your thoughts to One who is just, and before whom you have soon to appear ; that is now my advice.” Thomas Clarke said, ” We have given up all hope, and are prepared to die ; but, for myself, I wish to declare solemnly that I am innocent of murdering either Carroll or his party.” Mr. Leary said, “Don’t tell me anything more about it.” John Clarke said, ” I can solemnly assure you that I am also innocent of murdering either one or the other of those detectives.” Thomas Clarke said, “You know, sir, we have written to the Colonial Secretary, and told him we were innocent of murdering Carroll’s party, and we told him we could prove that at the time they were murdered we were forty miles away from the place; we told him that Mrs. St. Germains, her daughter, her son-in-law (who had been a member of the police force some time since), and another person whom we named, could prove that at the time the detectives were murdered we were at her place. Mrs. St. Germains said to me, a few days after the report of the murder, ‘Well, Tom, they accuse you of a great many crimes, but they cannot say you murdered the detectives.’ These four people are in a position to prove that they saw us during the day, and at the hour, forty miles from the scene of the murder.” They then, in bidding adieu to Mr. Leary, warmly thanked him for the pains he had taken, and requested that he would be so good as to convey certain words to their mother, and that he would strongly advise their sisters and other relatives in the Braidwood district to lead an honest and a good life.

It will be difficult for the public to disbelieve that the Clarkes murdered Carroll and his party; but as they both, almost at the last moment, when there was no chance of a reprieve, voluntarily and persistently protested their innocence of these foul murders, it is but right that it should be recorded. They made no public confession of other crimes. — Empire.

Posted on by AJFPhelan56 0

The Nerrigundah Raid

William Fletcher had a respectable trade before he joined Tommy Clarke and Pat O’Connell in bushranging, though he had recently been in trouble after getting drunk at the races and attempting to try out one of the horses. It was April 1865 and the bushrangers had long been operating in the Braidwood district, but had decided to branch out. They set their sights on the Gulph goldfields and Nerrigundah, a mining boom town, but they needed someone who knew the area to scout for them, which it appears Fletcher was willing and able to do.

On 9 April, the gang set to work. They picked a spot on the road out of Nerrigundah near Deep Creek to bail up passers-by and waited. The identities of the members of the gang that day are, as in most crimes attributed to the Clarkes, debatable. What is most likely, based on witness reports, is that Tommy and John Clarke, their uncles Pat and Tom O’Connell (referred to more commonly by the Anglicised ‘Connell’), William Fletcher. There was also a man named “Joe”, who was identified as a man named Joe Bishop, but he had not worked with the gang before and was not known to have done so later on. Some have speculated that Bill Berriman’s brother Joseph was the mystery man, partly because one of the witnesses claimed Bill Berriman was present, although he may have mistaken Pat O’Connell for Berriman. For the sake of this retelling, we will be working on the assumption that Pat was mistaken for Bill Berriman, and we will refer to the other man simply as Joe.

The bushrangers disguised themselves with cloth masks and cloaks as other bushrangers had taken to doing in recent crimes. Pat O’Connell wore a blue mask and cloak, some of the others wore red masks and grey cloaks. Tommy Clarke seemed to prefer a blue coat and a blackened face. While most of the bushrangers wore disguises, it does not appear from witness accounts that Fletcher was disguised. The cloak and mask combination helped stymie efforts to identify the offenders, as evidenced by the subsequent confusion as to the identities of the bushrangers that struck at Nerrigundah.

The first robbery of the day was of a small group of Chinese men who were then kept under guard in the bush as more victims were added. Marian Groves, the innkeeper at Deep Creek, was bailed up but not robbed as she was carrying no valuables. A mailboy named Griffith was robbed, the bushrangers taking £50 in half-notes from the mail. It was typical of the time for cash bills to be sent in halves at separate times due to highway robbery, as half a note was valueless without its pair.

Robert Jones of the Golden Fleece Hotel in Nerrigundah was also bailed up, as was a store owner named Donald Sutherland. Jones was obviously familiar with members of the gang as Tommy Clarke addressed him as “Bob”.

The biggest haul came when John Emmott was riding on horseback to his father’s store, the Bee Hive in Moruya, when he found his path blocked by Tommy Clarke. As he tried to turn back he was cut off by the other bushrangers. He plunged his hand into his coat to grab the gold nuggets he was carrying, intent on throwing them into the scrub. The gang opened fire, and Emmott’s horse was shot dead. A bullet went through the back of Emmott’s thigh, passing straight through. The unlucky traveller found himself pinned under the dead horse and bleeding freely from his wound. He was robbed and ordered to join the other prisoners. When he tried to explain he could not walk he was struck with the butt of a pistol. However, Tom O’Connell took pity on Emmott and reprimanded his rough accomplice, then helped Emmott rest before fetching him water.

The prisoners were then taken to the pub in Deep Creek where they were kept under guard. A group consisting of the two Clarkes, Pat O’Connell and William Fletcher headed to Nerrigundah, where they hoped to steal gold from Pollock’s store. Pollock was a gold buyer, and since gold escorts no longer took the gold from the diggings after Ben Hall’s gang had attempted to rob the Araluen escort in 1865, he kept it in a safe in his store for when he made his trips to Sydney every four weeks. Of particular interest to the gang was that Sgt. Nelson Hitch, the head of the local police, was absent to give evidence in a stock theft case in Moruya. The only other policeman they knew of was Constable Miles O’Grady, who was bedridden with ‘Colonial Fever’, which was likely a euphemism for Cholera. It seemed like the perfect opportunity to strike it rich.

The Town and Country Journal, 29/10/1902

Despite the confusion, it is very likely that the party that entered Nerrigundah around 6:00pm consisted of Tommy Clarke, Pat O’Connell, William Fletcher and John Clarke. It is possible that Tom O’Connell was acting as a scout on the outskirts of town, explaining his apparent absence from Deep Creek and his absence from the events that were unfolding in Nerrigundah.

The gang set about rounding up prisoners and lodging them in Willis’ London Tavern. It was estimated that forty people had already been imprisoned there without violence when two of the bushrangers, probably Tommy and Pat, decided to tackle Pollock’s store, which was across the road.

When they entered the store, Mrs. Pollock was tending to a handful of customers. Immediately they were bailed up and Clarke demanded the key to the safe. Reluctantly it was given over and the bushrangers plundered the store, taking silver-mounted meerschaum pipes, clothes and boots. As they escorted their new prisoners to the London Tavern, Mrs. Pollock snatched the key from Tommy’s hand and threw it into the street. As it was already dark, being almost 8:00pm, and there were no street lamps, it could not be found. In his fury, Clarke was said to have slapped Mrs. Pollock and told her that if she were a man he’d have killed her for such an act. The new prisoners were added to the collective and Tommy searched in the street with a candle for the key but without success.

The World’s News, 21/03/1934

As this was unfolding, a messenger had slipped away down a side street and notified Constable Smyth of what was taking place. Smyth was new to the town, having only been in Nerrigundah for four days prior, and only having graduated to a full constable on the first of the month. It seems that Fletcher had not been updated about the new copper, and thus had not been able to relay that information to the gang. Unsure how to proceed, Smyth suggested that the messenger find Constable O’Grady and notify him.

Upon hearing the news, O’Grady hauled himself out of his sick bed, dressed in his uniform and armed himself. Despite being in a terrible state from his fever, or woozy from the laudanum that would have been given to him to treat it, he headed out to meet Smyth. As he passed the Golden Fleece Hotel, Mrs. Jones begged O’Grady not to proceed as he was in no state to confront bushrangers. O’Grady replied, “I must do my duty.” As noble a statement as that was, the reality was that O’Grady could barely walk in a straight line but Smyth was not in a position to confront a gang of armed bushrangers alone.

The last of the prisoners were being rounded up at the London Tavern when Fletcher bailed up the local butcher, Robert Drew. When ordered to fork out his money, Drew scrunched up the £40 in notes he had in his pocket and threw it over the heads of the gang. There was a commotion as Drew was roughed up and forced inside while Tommy looked for what had been thrown.

It was just after 8:00pm when O’Grady and Smyth made their way down the main drag of Nerrigundah towards the London Tavern. O’Grady staggered and stumbled along, very unsteady on his feet. Upon seeing the lights on in the tavern, the police knew where they were headed.

William Fletcher was standing outside when O’Grady spotted him, Pat O’Connell next to him just inside the door. Without a word, O’Grady raised his rifle and fired at who he assumed was one of the bushrangers. The bullet struck Fletcher in the right arm, passing through the flesh and punching into his ribcage and lodging in his chest. He collapsed, fatally wounded. A second later, Smyth fired and the bullet lodged in the door jamb next to Pat’s head.

The Illustrated Sydney News, 16/05/1866

The bushrangers rushed into the street and fired at the troopers; one appeared to kneel for a better shot or to check on his fallen confederate. All were armed with pistols. Immediately the crowd inside the tavern spilled out into the street to see what was happening. Down the road, upon hearing the gunshots, Mrs. Jones doused the lights in the Golden Fleece. Not seeing a way they could fire effectively with such a big crowd of civilians in the firing line, the police hared down a side street. Several more shots were exchanged until a rifle bullet struck O’Grady in the back, piercing his kidney and pushing out of his navel. It was too dark to see who the rifleman was.

Smyth took O’Grady’s revolver and ran all the way back to the police barracks, while O’Grady struggled to the Golden Fleece. When Mrs. Jones opened the door, O’Grady explained that he was shot and collapsed into her arms. Meanwhile, the surviving bushrangers mounted up and fled, leaving Fletcher behind. An hour after Fletcher had been shot, he expired. O’Grady was carried by a group of miners back to the barracks where he died about three hours later.

Smyth attempted to form a posse, but only one man volunteered and he changed his mind when he saw that nobody else was willing. It wasn’t until Sgt. Hitch got back and found out what had happened that men were willing to volunteer to track the bushranger’s down.

The bushrangers had returned to Deep Creek, where they drank and gathered supplies. A Chinese man was roughed up, and another made an escape as the gang were loading up their packhorses. One of the gang made a move to raid the store across the creek when a cry rang out for the gang to mount up, “The Gulph people are upon us!” The gang took off along an old bridle track as an army of enraged Chinese miners descended upon the pub with their lanterns lighting the way.

By some accounts, Hitch’s posse managed to cut the gang off at a creek, laying in ambush until they arrived to water their horses. The posse opened fire and the gang retreated without their packhorse. With no ammunition left, and having not been able to capture the bushrangers, the posse returned home with what could be retrieved from the horse.

The inquests on Fletcher and O’Grady were held the following day, a verdict of justifiable homicide was lodged in the case of Fletcher. Tommy Clarke and Pat O’Connell were found culpable in O’Grady’s death. O’Grady was buried in the local cemetery then later transferred to the cemetery in Moruya. A monument was subsequently erected in Nerrigundah to his memory. As for Fletcher, he was buried without a coffin or a marker in the bush outside Nerrigundah.

Soon after this the recently legislated Felon’s Apprehension Act was implemented to declare Tommy Clarke and Pat O’Connell outlaws.

The Town and Country Journal, 29/10/1902
Posted on by AJFPhelan56 0

The Clarke Bushrangers: A Clash of Cultures, First Edition (Review)

It always astounds that so few books have been published about the Clarkes. Of course, this likely has to do with the fact that for the longest time it was a taboo and much of the story has been lost as subsequent generations disappeared, a phenomena not suffered by Ned Kelly or Ben Hall. So it is with much excitement that one approaches a tome that tries to shed new light in the dark corners of this complex and intriguing story.

Judy Lawson’s book, may appear slim and a quick and breezy read but it is quite deceptive in this regard. In reality it is a heavily immersive and detailed exploration of the Clarkes and the various murders attributed to them that warrants careful reading. Lawson has clearly done her homework and conveys in easy to follow language and structure her impressive research that combines the recorded history with the socio-political climate of 1860s Australia. The bookncontaons several useful diagrams and lists to allow readers to keep track of people and places but if you’re expecting a wealth of pretty pictures you will be disappointed – though the writing more than makes up for it. It is clear from the outset that Lawson’s angle is quite different than what has gone before, stating her mission statement clearly on the cover: “Innocent Until Proven Guilty”.

Without going into too much detail (that’s what the book is for) Lawson breaks down the Jinden murders as well as the deaths of Miles O’Grady, Billy Noonang, Pat O’Connell, Jim Dornan and Bill Scott – all deaths that were attributed to Thomas Clarke and his gang in some respect. Each incident is presented without judgement and with all available information from witness accounts and testimony from various trials and commissions pertaining to the events to allow the reader to draw their own conclusions that may indeed be counter to the accepted narrative. Previous works have been written with the author’s judgement firmly in place, usually declaring that the Clarkes were guilty as sin. What Lawson achieves is providing a potent counter to this assessment. Many questions still hang over the deaths of the special constables: was it the bushrangers or their harbourers that pulled the triggers? Were the local police involved? None of the questions have simple answers but this book brings us closer than perhaps ever before to seeing a miscarriage of justice in the case of the Clarke brothers being hanged. By presenting each potential scenario and breaking it down to discuss what is and isn’t feasible it allows readers, especially those unfamiliar with the stories, to really understand the complexities of each case.

Lawson also discusses the Irish culture, including the roles of men and women, and emphasises the way that tension between English Protestants and Irish Catholics formed a key aspect of the Clarke outbreak. By describing historical conflict and ideological differences that contributed to the treatment of families like the Clarkes we see a dimension of the story that is not often factored into most retellings. The way that these conflicts as well as the division between upper and lower class people manifested in laws and the prevailing culture in New South Wales during the 19th century are incredibly important in understanding what may have pushed the Clarkes and their ilk into a lawless lifestyle. By looking at the larger context of this infamous outbreak of bushranging we get a feel for how situations like this resulted in similar stories in other colonies such as the Kellys in Victoria and the Kenniffs in Queensland. Lawson also highlights the unfortunate reality that the charge that sent Tommy and Johnny Clarke to the gallows was not the one that they were tried for, that there was a bigger motivation behind it and that the execution was a foregone conclusion as in the cases of Ned Kelly and Paddy Kenniff. A big part of the taboo of the Clarke story seems to stem from the concerted effort local police made to demonise their enemies. Without a means of recourse to the various accusations the bushrangers were not able to explain their own situation (and there was certainly more to it than simple disregard for law and order as evidenced by their wide syndicate of supporters and harbourers).

Lawson herself possesses a Bachelor of Arts, having studied geography and history for three years before becoming a science teacher in various states, territories and abroad. Her passion for the Clarke story has led to her researching and documenting it for almost four decades in the pursuit of truth and removing the stigma of the story on descendents and the broader community. Lawson discovered that she is in fact a descendant of the O’Connells in her thirties due in large part to her father refusing to talk about it, such was the potency of the taboo. This motivation and passion is evident in every drop of ink in this book and is a must-read for anyone who is interested in the Clarke story, a tale with so many twists, turns and mysteries it easily rivals that of the Kellys. Her aim is not to hold the bushrangers up as heroes or deny any wrongdoing, but merely to ask the questions that need to be answered and find whatever information possible to answer them.

A second edition of Judy Lawson’s book is now available, and you can procure a copy at this link: https://www.braidwoodbushrangers.com/bushranger-news

Posted on by AJFPhelan56 4