Evening News, Tue 16 Feb 1886 1
THE LASH AGAIN.
————
GROSS INDECENCY.
————
Newcastle, Monday.
The man, William Lewis, an American seaman, was brought up in the police court to-day on charges of indecent assault and indecent exposure. The charges were fully proved against him in two cases of a most aggravated character. The prisoner pleaded guilty, and declined to excuse himself in any way. For the indecent assault he was sentenced to three months’ imprisonment in Maitland Gaol. In passing sentence for the wilful exposure Mr Mair (with whom was sitting Mr Ludlow), said that in this case the Bench had a disagreeable duty to perform. It was impossible to pass over such conduct without severe action being taken. The accused was sentenced to be imprisoned in the lockup for seventy-two hours, and to receive fifteen strokes of the cat on the bare back. The prisoner, who seemed quite unconcerned, was then removed. The flogger for the district lives in Tamworth, and has been telegraphed for.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Maitland Mercury and Hunter River General Advertiser, Tue 16 Feb 1886 2
NEWCASTLE.
(Newcastle Herald of Friday.)
…
(From the Herald of yesterday.)
…
A gross case of alleged indecency came under the cognizance of the police authorities on Sunday evening. About 7 o’clock two ladies were walking in the reserve; and when they were going through one of the gates a man standing outside caught hold of one of them in a highly indecent and improper manner. A report of the affair was forwarded to the police barracks, when two constables were promptly despatched in search of the offender, and as they were proceeding through the second reserve they were met by a lady and a young girl about 15 years of age, who complained that a man with his clothes disarranged had accosted them and had behaved in a most disgusting fashion. A few moments afterwards the fellow was run to earth in the upper reserve, and brought to the police station, where he gave the name of William Lewis, his age is 20 years, and his calling that of a seaman. He was fully identified. He was placed in the cell, where another prisoner was lying asleep. Shortly afterwards a scene ensued, which resulted in Lewis’s receiving a thoroughly well-deserved thrashing at the hands of his indignant fellow-confinee.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Maitland Mercury and Hunter River General Advertiser, Thu 18 Feb 1886 3
DISTRICT NEWS.
————
(FROM OUR VARIOUS CORRESPONDENTS.)
…
NEWCASTLE.
(Newcastle Herald of Tuesday.)
William Lewis, who was arrested for acts of gross indecency to ladies in the reserve on Saturday afternoon, was brought before Messrs Mair and Ludlow, at the Police Court yesterday, on the charges of indecent assault and wilful exposure, to which he pleaded guilty. In the first case two young ladies proved the impudent and improper conduct of the prisoner towards one of them, and the accused was sentenced to three months’ imprisonment, with hard labour. The second case was equally clear against the prisoner. Mr Mair said the prisoner had been guilty of a most serious offence. In such a case the Bench had a disagreeable duty to perform, but it was impossible to overlook such conduct. The accused was then sentenced to 72 hours’ imprisonment in the lock-up, and to receive 15 lashes on the bare back for the indecent exposure, the whipping to be administered in the lock-up yard.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Thu 18 Feb 1886 4
THE LASH IN NEWCASTLE.
———◦———
FLOGGING AT THE LOCK-UP YARD.
————
YESTERDAY the punishment of the lash was administered in the Newcastle lock-up yard, the unfortunate delinquent who received the castigation being a prisoner named William Lewis, who had been sentenced on Monday last to 72 hours’ imprisonment and fifteen strokes on the bare back for gross and indecent exposure. Prior to the infliction of the punishment, the prisoner was seen by Dr Richard Harris, and it was decided the whipping could take place at the appointed time. Inspector Thorpe, Dr Harris, and a body of police were present, as well as representatives from the Press. Inspector Thorpe read to the prisoner the warrant of conviction, and the authority to carry out the punishment awarded by the court.
Lewis presented a miserably haggard and emaciated appearance, and seemed somewhat eccentric. He addressed those present as follows:—“Friends: About five years ago I received an injury to my head on board a man-of-war; and since that, whenever I take a glass of liquor, I don’t know what I am doing.”
Inspector Thorpe put the question to the doctor as to whether Lewis was sane, and receiving an affirmative reply, the officer ordered the flagellator to do his duty.
The prisoner was then stripped to the waist, when it was seen he was a man of most wretched physique. He was woefully thin, and it was evident that he was scarcely possessed of sufficient stamina to undergo the ordeal of punishment without completely breaking down; and so the event proved. He was securely strapped to an oblong frame slightly leaning to the wall with his hands and feet extended. The flagellator, a burly, brawny armed warder from Tamworth Gaol then produced the “cat,” a formidable instrument composed of strips of leather, with a series of knots at the end of each, and fastened to a wooden handle. One of the constables was told off to count the number of strokes. At the signal from the Inspector, the warder swung his “cat,” and delivered the first stroke with fearful effect. The lash as it descended made a whirring sound. The effect upon the unfortunate culprit was electrical and he cried out “Oh, oh! don’t be too hard please!” in agony, while the mark upon his back was as plain as though he had been branded. At the second, third, and fourth strokes he continued to cry for mercy, but soon after he seemed to fall into a state of semi-stupor, and his cries were not so loud. At the seventh stroke the prisoner showed signs of fainting, and the doctor stayed the castigator’s hand just as the eighth blow was about to fall. The culprit was then released by the doctor’s advice, who declared that Lewis had been punished enough, and that to give him more would be dangerous.
The unhappy man was then given a drink of water, which he greedily drank, after which he put on his shirt and coat. Inspector Thorpe then told Lewis that the doctor, in mercy, had spared him the rest of his punishment, and he hoped that what Lewis had undergone would be a lesson to him for the remainder of his life. The prisoner said that it would indeed be a lesson to him, and he was taken back to his cell..
A large number of people assembled round the lock-up door, and we understand that quite a shoal of applications were made by morbidly-inclined persons to be allowed to witness the ghastly spectacle of a human creature flogged. These applications were very properly refused.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 18 Feb 1886 5
COUNTRY NEWS.
———◦———
(By Telegraph.)
(FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENTS.)
———
…
Newcastle, Wednesday.
Forged banknotes are in circulation here. One has been passed upon the Commercial Bank to-day, and the teller in another bank yesterday took a forged £5 note.
Wm Lewis, who was sentenced to receive 15 lashes for indecency, had part of his punishment inflicted to-day by the public flagellator, but he only received seven lashes. Dr R Harris then stopped the flogging, as the prisoner was unable to endure more.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Australian Town and Country Journal, Sat 20 Feb 1886 6
NEWCASTLE.
February 17.
FLOGGING.—William Lewis, the young seaman who behaved so badly in the reserve in the presence of some ladies the other day, received the flogging awarded him Wednesday. As might have been expected, he was cowardly when his own feelings were hit. He broke down at the seventh lash, and was removed by order of the doctor. He was to receive 15 lashes in all.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Maitland Mercury and Hunter River General Advertiser, Sat 20 Feb 1886 7
DISTRICT NEWS.
————
(FFROM OUR VARIOUS CORRESPONDENTS.)
———
…
NEWCASTLE.
(Herald of Thursday.)
On Wednesday afternoon a man named Reuben Perry, working on a building in High-street, fell from the parapet to the ground, a distance of 50 feet. He was picked up in an unconscious state, and on being taken to the hospital was found to have sustained a fracture of one of the small bones of the spine, and a wound on the head, together with several bruises on the lower part of the body.
On Wednesday, Henry Coslett was committed for trial on the charge of wilfully and maliciously attempting to set fire to the dwelling house of William Cleary. He was seen by a Mrs Jackson in Cleary’s back yard, kneeling down with a lighted match in his hand looking under Cleary’s house. Some short time after, the Clearys smelled something burning, and looking for the cause found some rags and paper burning underneath the house. Mrs Cleary had heard the accused on a previous occasion say to Mrs Connelly, wife of the landlord, “I will make it cost you a hundred or two; I will burn your —— shanties down.” After the fire the prisoner said children might have caused it. He also stated that he could only account for the fire by supposing that he had dropped a match as he was lighting his pipe.
On Wednesday William Lewis, the man who was sentenced to receive a flogging for gross and indecent exposure, underwent part of the punishment in the lock-up yard. A warder from Tamworth gaol wielded the “cat.” The prisoner was a man of wretched physique. He was to have received fifteen shrikes, but on receiving the seventh he showed signs of fainting, and Dr Harris declared that to punish him more would be dangerous, and the flogging was stopped.
1 Evening News, (Sydney, NSW), Tue 16 Feb 1886, p. 6.
2 The Maitland Mercury and Hunter River General Advertiser, Tue 16 Feb 1886, p. 7.
3 The Maitland Mercury and Hunter River General Advertiser, Thu 18 Feb 1886, p. 3.
4 Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Thu 18 Feb 1886, p. 4.
5 The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 18 Feb 1886, p. 8.
6 Australian Town and Country Journal, Sat 20 Feb 1886, p. 381.
7 The Maitland Mercury and Hunter River General Advertiser, Sat 20 Feb 1886, p. 11. Emphasis added.