technical error in the drawing, and the property was sold to H . N . Simson. On behalf of the defendants it was contended that the sale was bona-fide, and the jury acquitted them.
The First Breach of Promise.—17TH November, 1841.
In this case the defendant was a Sergeant O'Neil, a swell member of the police force, and the keeper of the lock-up at Melbourne. The plaintiff was a Miss O'Gorman, the sister-in-law of another limb of the constabulary. Damages were laid at £300, against which was pleaded the general issue, and a plea of special matter as to the loose and immoral character of the plaintiff. Counsel for plaintiff, Mr. Barry; for defendant, the Hon. Mr. Murray. The plaintiff resided with her sister, a Mrs. Morgan, a constable's wife; and the defendant was a lodger in the house of his comrade. Thus the parties were constantly brought together, and a mutual attachment was contracted. The question was in due time "popped," the gay and gallant sergeant was accepted, and the preliminaries of the marriage expedited. Father Geoghegan Roman Catholic pastor, was engaged to tie the nuptial knot. The services of a Miss Britton were secured for the interesting office of bridesmaid; and even a man-cook was got in to prepare the hymeneal repast. The day was named and came, the bride and her handmaiden were in readiness, and they came; the bridal feast was well under weigh; but the principal figure in the domestic drama did not appear, and an adjournment sine die was unavoidable. On being called to account for his backsliding, O'Neil had the unmanliness to declare that he could not think of marrying without a fortune, and would not take less than £50; and so to raise this sum Mrs. Morgan disposed of some cows and bedding. O'Neil again backed out unless the dower was increased to £100; and, being urged to be a man to his word, vowed "he would hang by the hair of his head first." His conduct was the more disgraceful as it was proved that by the promise of marriage the girl had been seduced. Evidence was given as to the defendant's means; he was reputedly worth about £400, and had been heard to declare "that through his watchhouse perquisites he sometimes cleared as much as £30 in a week." For the defence it was alleged that the plaintiff was of improper character, and that Morgan (who had some time previously retired from the police) had kept disreputable houses both in Little Bourke Street and Geelong. The summing up was favourable to the plaintiff, to whom the Assessors awarded £100 damages.
Murder of an Aborigine.—21ST December, 1841.
Sandford George Bolden, a gentleman, and personal friend of Judge Willis, who had been out on bail, surrendered to take his trial for having, on the 23rd of October, shot at, with intent to kill and murder, a certain aboriginal native known as Totkeire. The prosecution had been instituted at the request of Mr. G. A. Sievewright, the Assistant-Protector of Aborigines for the Port Fairy district, and was conducted by the Crown Prosecutor, Mr. Barry appearing for the defence. The theory sought to be established on behalf of the Crown was that the prisoner, a station-holder near Port Fairy, was out riding with his brother and two stockmen mustering cattle, when they met with the deceased, a black woman, and a black child. The prisoner charged the blackfellow and shot him in the stomach. Finding himself wounded, the blackfellow made for a waterhole and jumped in, whilst the prisoner, after giving instructions to his companions to secure the aborigine if he attempted to escape out of the water, went back to the homestead for some ammunition. As the prisoner was returning he fired a second time and killed him, and rolling from a log the body disappeared in the water. There was no positive evidence of the death; but the Assistant-Protector swore that the blackfellow was missing since the occurrence. The defence was that the aborigines in the neighbourhood of the station were both troublesome and thievish, and some short time previously had speared several of the prisoner's cattle. On the day in question, the aborigine alleged to have been killed, in company with a lubra and picannini, made his appearance on the station; and as the blackfellow was armed with a spear, a couple of clubs, and a shield, there was reason to apprehend mischief. The prisoner ordered them off, when the blackfellow both pointed a spear and aimed a blow at him, which was only averted by the prisoner quickly swerving round with his horse, and then it was that the first pistol was discharged. When prisoner fired the second shot it was averred that the blackfellow was in the act of assaulting a stockman. It was further submitted that there was no felonious shooting, and that it was
