The Argus at KellyGang 26/2/1879 (2)

From KellyGang
Jump to: navigation, search
(full text transcription)

see previous

Remand hearing continued

It was true he failed to obtain a writ of habeas but merely because of a flaw in the application, and to show how the Supreme Court Bench agreed with the justice of the cause, when Mr M’Farland, who appeared, asked when his Honour would re hear his application, Mr Justice Barry said that it was only common justice to the man to have the writ returned as Boon as possible. The application for a writ of habeas had been refused on purely technical grounds he supposed M'Elroy had been discharged merely to baffle him but the same application could and would be made for other of the prisoners. He would ask the Court whether it was not exceeding its jurisdiction in again remanding the accused without evidence. He would ask the Court to refuse the application for a further remand as regarded Quinn. He was serving a sentence for assault in Beechworth gaol both before and at the time of the Stringy Bark murders, therefore he could not be charged as an accomplice. When leaving the gaol, so strong were his convictions that he had said to the governor.

'Whats the use of letting, me out?' the police are sure to run me in again.’ If there was an exceptional case amongst the whole lot this was one. The prisoner had now been eight weeks in gaol, and no evidence had been brought against him, and an application for a remand was unreasonable. It was the general custom when a first remand was applied for for the prosecuting constable to bring forward some sort of evidence, but even that form had not been gone through in these cases. He would specially draw Mr Foster’s attention to the fact that on the 11th of January when he first remanded the men, he (Mr Zincke) objected, and Mr Foster thought some evidence should be called, and remanded them on the supposition that the following week the police would be prepared with some evidence. Where, then, were Mr Sadleir’s pledges, he would ask, had not they been broken and set aside'. He would not characterise the whole proceedings, but simply, as before, denounce them. Everyone of the men, he believed, had an action for damages against the Crown

Mr Foster said, if he thought evidence was obtainable and was not produced he would have no hesitation in refusing the application. The question in his mind, however, was, is there a difficulty in getting evidence. It was to him a matter of great regret that evidence had not been produced ere this, but under the circumstances, and knowing the state of the country and feeling that society must be protected, he considered a remand necessary

The prisoner was remanded for eight days

Quinn -" For how many more eight days, I wonder'?

The remaining eight men were then remanded until Tuesday. When Isaiah Wright was remanded he tried to speak, but was properly and promptly stopped by Mr Foster, who refused to hear him. When leaving the box, however, with a savage look at the Bench, he said, " If ever I get out of this I’ll1 make my name a terror to you”

Mr Purnell said, "Surely, your worship, that is sufficient to keep this man in gaol”

end

.1. , .2. ,


 ! The text has been retyped from a microfiche copy of the original.

We have taken care to reproduce this document but areas of the original text may been damaged.

We also apologise for any typographical errors.