Below also see: Bertie Claude Williams, 1927
Bertie Claude Williams, 1945
Molong Express and Western District Advertiser, Sat 25 Oct 1913 1
LOCAL AND DISTRICT.
…
Bertie Claud Williams was charged at the Children’s Court, Molong, on Wednesday last, before Mr Marriott, PM, with an alleged serious offence. He was committed for trial at the Orange Quarter Sessions on November 26th. Bail was allowed in one surety of £80, and himself in a like amount.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Molong Argus, Fri 28 Nov 1913 2
ORANGE QUARTER SESSIONS.
———◦———
A MOLONG CASE.
On Thursday, before his Honor Judge Scholes, Bertie Claude Williams was charged that he did at Molong on September 28th, indecently assaulted Louisa Alice Brooklyn Farr, a girl under the age of 16 years, to wit 8 years and 8 months.
The accused, who was defended by Mr J Carlos, instructed by Mr PFA Kinna, pleaded not guilty.
Jury—John Mackie, JE Floyd, WP Martin, JW Torpy, WJ Nancarrow, J Farrell, H Davis, JM Oliver, WC Bowman, C Gander, T Perrottet, C Blunt.
The accused challenged four jurymen.
Sergeant McCurley: I am stationed at Molong; on Sunday, September 28th, I was told something; I went to Mr Farr’s residence about one mile and a half from Molong; saw Mrs Farr and her two children, and had a conversation with them; I then went to Brook’s hotel, where I saw the accused; said to him, “Where were you this evening?” he replied, “I went to the cemetery with two other men;” I then went away and returned again in about an hour; the accused was then in bed; said to him, “Where did you go to after you came home from the cemetery this afternoon?” He said, “I went for a walk round the hospital hill; I said, “Did you see anyone?” he said, “Yes, I spoke to a man named Peacock who said, “Did you see Farr’s two little girls?”, he said he did not know them; I said one of Farr’s little girls has been assaulted this evening, and the description she gives tallies with you; he said he was not the man; I then brought the accused to Farr’s house and both of the children identified the accused; the accused said to Louisa, “How do you know me?” Louisa said, “You are the man who was down in the bush with me this afternoon,” and also that she knew him by his straw hat and black tie.” The accused was dressed exactly as the child described him to me; I then arrested the accused, and he made no reply to the charge; next morning with Mr Farr I went to the bush and saw on the grass the impression of a body; outside the fence I saw boot tracks; I took a pair of accused boots with me, and I measured them and they corresponded with accused’s boots; also saw tracks about 100 yards further towards Molong, and measured them, with the same result.
To Mr Carlos: The accused told me the truth about everything he had done on the Sunday afternoon, with the exception of meeting the Farr girls. As far as I could see the accused acted as an innocent man. The usual way for having a man identified is to place the accused person amongst a number of others. There are at present a lot of boys rabbiting in the vicinity where the alleged offence was committed. The accused’s mother lives out past the hospital, and to go there he would have to pass the place where I measured the boot tracks the second time. I have not got a good memory. I cannot remember what I said in the police court.
To his Honor: When I first saw the girls they described the man as a small man, with a straw hat, black band, brown coat, white shirt, black tie and trousers and shiny boots.
A Juryman: Do you think a child of eight years would be able to describe a man’s full dress?
His Honor: That is a question for you, gentlemen, no matter what the witness says.
Constable Bane stated: I am stationed at Molong. The witness corroborated the evidence given by the Sergeant.
To Mr Carlos: Louisa Farr described the clothes the accused was dressed in without being asked any questions.
Louisa Farr was next called and was questioned by his Honor, who decided not to allow her to be sworn, but to accept her statement. The witness stated: I do not know the day of the week. I do not go to school or Sunday school. I only know Sunday. I do not know any other day in the week.
The accused [Bertie Claude Williams] stood up and the witness identified him as the man who assaulted her in the bush. (The witness described the assault). Continuing, the witness said the clothes and boots produced are the ones the accused was wearing at the time he assaulted me on the Sunday evening. My brother and sister went with me to the bush, and before accused assaulted me he sent them away.
To Mr Carlos: I have never seen a man wearing a straw hat or black tie or turned-up boots before. I have never been to church in my life. The sergeant told me that the accused wore a straw hat, black tie, and turned-up boots. Constable Bane told me to remember the boots were shiny.
To his Honor: The Sergeant never told me to say the accused wore a straw hat, black tie, and turned up boots. I told him.
Sergeant McCurley, recalled, denied telling the previous witness what the accused wore.
Louisa Farr stated: I am the mother of Alice Farr; on Sunday, September, 28th, in the evening, I sent the children out to play; they returned in about half-an-hour and the two little girls had a penny each; I asked them where they got the pennies from; they told me they got them from a man in the bush; Louisa then described to me the way the man had assaulted her; my husband was present at the time; he went down to the bush, but could not see no one; I had never seen the accused until the Sergeant brought him to the house.
Edward Evers stated: On Sunday, September 28th, I went to the cemetery with accused; I left him at the cemetery cleaning a grave.
John Peacock stated: I am a railway ganger, and I reside at Molong; know where Mr Farr lives; on Sunday, September 28th, I saw accused near the railway crossing; he was coming from the direction of Farr’s house; did not notice how he was dressed; he was going in the direction of Molong.
To Mr Carlos: I do not know where accused’s mother lives.
The deposition of Dr McLennan, taken at the Children’s Court, Molong, was read and tendered as evidence.
Sergeant McCurley, recalled, stated: Farr’s residence is about a mile in a parallel direction from the cemetery.
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr Carlos contended that there was no case for the jury, and only the child’s evidence against the accused’s. the law required corroboration of material evidence, and the case should be withdrawn from the jury.
The Crown Prosecutor contended that the evidence with respect to the clothes worn by the accused was sufficient corroboration.
His Honor held that there was a sufficient case to submit to the jury.
The jury decided to hear the defence.
Bertie Claude Williams stated: On September 28th I went to the cemetery with a man named Evers to attend to a grave. After attending to the grave I went to my mother’s place, which is on the Molong road. When I got near the house I could see my mother was out and I returned to Molong by the Norah Creek road. On that day I was not within half a mile of Farr’s house, and I had never seen the girl in my life till the Sunday night. The tracks seen by the constable were not my tracks, and I never assaulted the child.
To the Crown Prosecutor: I was not out with a girl that afternoon. I have not had any trouble with any girl, and no girl has had a youngster by me. I am a laborer, and when in work stay at Brook’s Hotel. The boots are not mine. I was breaking them in for Mr Brook. I have been about Molong for 24 years.
This concluded the evidence.
The jury retired, and brought in a verdict of not guilty, and accused was thereupon discharged.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Molong Express and Western District Advertiser, Sat 29 Nov 1913 3
ALLEGED INDECENT ASSAULT.
———:◦:———
At the Orange Quarter Sessions on Thursday before His Honor Judge Scholes, Bertie Claude Williams was charged that he did at Molong on September 28th, indecently assaulted Louisa Alice Brooklyn Farr, a girl under the age of 16 years, to wit, eight years and eight months.
The accused, who was defended by Mr J Carlos, instructed by Mr PFA Kinna, pleaded not guilty.
The following jurymen were empannelled [sic]—John Mackie, JE Floyd, WP Martin, JW Torpy, WJ Nancarrow, J Farrell, H Davis, JM Oliver, WC Bowman, C Gander, T Perrottet, C Blunt.
The accused challenged four jurymen.
Sergeant McCurley stated—I am stationed at Molong; on Sunday, September 28th, I was told something; I went to Mr Farr’s residence about one mile and a half from Molong; I saw Mrs Farr and her two children, and had a conversation with them; then went to Brook’s Hotel, where I saw the accused; said to him, “Where were you this evening?” he replied, “I went to the cemetery with two other men.” I then went away and returned again in about an hour; the accused was then in bed; I said to him, “Where did you go to after you came home from the cemetery this afternoon?” He said, “I went for a walk round the hospital hill;” I said, “Did you see anyone?” he said, “Yes, I spoke to a man named Peacock;” I said, “Did you see Farr’s two little girls?”, he said he did not know them; I said one of Farr’s little girls has been assaulted this evening, and the description she gives tallies with you; he said he was not the man; I then brought the accused to Farr’s house, and both children identified the accused; the accused said to Louisa, “How do you know me?” Louisa said, “You are the man who was down in the bush with me this afternoon,” and also that she knew him by his straw hat and black tie;” the accused was dressed exactly as the child described him to me; I then arrested the accused, and he made no reply to the charge; next morning with Mr Farr I went to the bush and saw on the grass the impression of a body; outside the fence I saw boot tracks; I took a pair of accused’s boots with me, and they corresponded with accused’s boots; I also saw tracks about 100 yards further towards Molong, and measured them, with the same result.
To Mr Carlos—The accused told me the truth about everything he had done on the Sunday afternoon, with the exception of meeting the Farr girls; as far as I could see the accused acted as an innocent man; the usual way for having a man identified is to place the accused person amongst a number of others; there are at present a number of boys rabbiting in the vicinity where the alleged offence was committed; the accused’s mother lives out past the hospital and to go there he would have to pass the place where I measured the boot tracks the second time; I have not got a good memory; I do not remember what I said to the police court.
To his Honor—When I first saw the girls they described the man as a small man, with a straw hat, black band, brown coat, white shirt, black tie and trousers and shiny boots.
A Juryman—Do you think a child of 8 years would be able to describe a man’s full dress?
His Honor—That is a question for you, gentlemen, no matter what the witness says.
Constable Bane stated—I am stationed at Molong. The witness corroborated the evidence of the Sergeant.
To Mr Carlos—Louisa Farr described the clothes the accused was dressed in without being asked any questions.
Louisa Farr was next called and was questioned by his Honor, who decided not to allow her to be sworn, but to accept her statement. The witness stated—I do not know the day of the week; I don’t go to school or Sunday school; I only know Sunday; I don’t know any other day in the week.
The accused [Bertie Claude Williams] stood up and the witness identified him as the man who assaulted her in the bush. The witness described the assault. Continuing, the witness said the clothes and boots produced are the ones the accused was wearing at the time he assaulted me on the Sunday evening; my brother and sister went with me to the bush, and before accused assaulted me he sent them away.
To Mr Carlos—I have never seen a man wearing a straw hat or black tie or turned-up boots before; I have never been to church in my life; the sergeant told me that the accused wore a straw hat, black tie, and turned-up boots; Constable Bane told me to remember the boots were shiny.
To his Honor—The sergeant never told me to say the accused wore a straw hat, black tie, and turned-up boots; I told him.
Sergeant McCurley, recalled, denied telling the previous witness what the accused wore.
Louisa Farr stated—I am the mother of Alice Farr; on Sunday, September, 28th, in the evening, I sent the children out to play; they returned in about half-an-hour and the two little girls had a penny each; I asked them where they got the pennies from, and they told me they got them from a man in the bush. Louisa then described to me the way the man had assaulted her; my husband was present at the time, he went down to the bush, but could not see anyone; I had never seen the accused until the sergeant brought him to the house.
Edward Evers stated—On Sunday, September 28th, I went to the cemetery with accused; I left him at the cemetery cleaning a grave.
John Peacock stated—I am a railway ganger, and I reside at Molong; I know where Mr Farr lives; on Sunday, September 28th, I saw the accused near the railway crossing, coming from the direction of Farr’s house; I did not notice how he was dressed; he was going in the direction of Molong.
To Mr Carlos—I do not know where the accused’s mother lives.
The deposition of Dr McLennan, taken at the Children’s Court, Molong, was read and tendered as evidence.
Sergeant McCurley, recalled, stated—Farr’s residence is about a mile in a parallel direction from the cemetery.
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr Carlos contended that there was no case for the jury, and only the child’s evidence against the accused. The law required corroboration of material evidence, and the case should be withdrawn from the jury.
The Crown Prosecutor contended that the evidence of the boot tracks and the child’s evidence with respect to the clothes worn by the accused was sufficient corroboration.
His Honor held that there was a sufficient case to submit to the jury.
The jury decided to hear the defence.
Bertie Claude Williams stated—On September 28th I went to the cemetery with a man named Evers to attend to a grave. After attending to the grave I went to my mother’s place, which is on the Molong road. When I got near the house I could see my mother was out and I returned to Molong by the Norah Creek road. On that day I was not within half-a-mile of Farr’s house, and I had never seen the girl in my life till the Sunday night. The tracks seen by the constable were not my tracks, and I never assaulted the child.
To the Crown Prosecutor—I was not out with a girl that afternoon; I have not had any trouble with any girl and no girl has had a youngster by me; I am a laborer, and when in work stay at Brook’s Hotel; the boots are not mine; I was breaking them in for Mr Brook; I have been about Molong for 24 years.
This concluded the evidence.
The jury retired and brought in a verdict of not guilty, and accused was discharged.
Bertie Claude Williams, 1927
The National Advocate, Thu 9 Dec 1926 4
IN A NUTSHELL
———◦———
NEWS AND NOTES.
————
…
A sensational arrest of a well-known Molong young man took place last week, for an alleged serious offence. On Wednesday last, at the Police Court, the accused was brought before Mr AH Stilwell, JP, and charged with an unnatural offence. After formal evidence had been given by the police, the accused was remanded for eight days. Bail was allowed—self in £100, and a surety in £100, or two in £50 each.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Leader and Orange Stock and Station News, Fri 11 Feb 1927 5
ORANGE QUARTER SESSIONS.
———◦———
Wednesday.
———
(Before His Honor Judge Armstrong).
…
MOLONG ASSAULT CASE.
———◦———
Bertie Claude Williams appeared at the Orange Sessions, on Wednesday charged with indecent assault on a boy, [Noel Vivian Morris], at Molong. He pleaded not guilty.
The following jury was empanelled:—Edward Michael St George, William B Pascoe, Henry Francis Glasson, Ernest Thomas Hicks, George Allen Wells, John Joseph Ryan, William Thomas Spurway, John William Hutchison, John Frederick Auberson, Alfred Ernest Roweth, Leslie George King, George Langham.
The accused exercised his right of challenge four times, the Crown not at all.
Mr Stacey prosecuted for the Crown. Mr WP Kelly appeared for the accused.
In opening the case, the Crown Prosecutor said that two girls had told of the alleged offence, which they stated they saw while the accused and the boy were at The Rocks. One of the girls was suffering from concussion and could not attend, but he could tender her deposition from the lower court. He said that accused had admitted, in a statement, having taken the boy out for a ride on his motor-cycle on the afternoon.
Constable William E[van] Bailey, of Molong, gave evidence to the effect of having seen the accused at Mullaveen Station and of having brought him to the Molong station. He there wrote out a statement.
To Mr Kelly: He denied that he was up at The Rocks, but said he was on the public road.
Mr Kelly showed witness a photo and he said that it indicated the locality.
Continuing under cross-examination, witness stated that anyone going along the road would have a clear view of The Rocks.
Jessie McKinnon deposed that on Sunday, November 28, in company with her sister, she was out along the Orange road. She knew the accused by sight. She saw him near The Rocks with a small boy, whom she also knew. She then described the alleged offence.
To Mr Kelly: The motor-cycle was on the Orange-Molong Road, but it did not attract her attention. Anyone could see the accused and the boy quite plainly from the road. She was 17 years of age. She had worked in Dr Mollison’s surgery until about Christmas time.
The evidence given by Bertha McKinnon in the lower court was then read.
This concluded the Crown case.
The defendant [Bertie Claude Williams] then entered the witness box. He gave evidence that he was a laborer, residing at Molong. He had lived there all his life and was 37 years of age. He had been to the war 6 and produced his certificate of discharge. On November 28, 1926, he went out on a motor-cycle with the boy. Going out along the Molong Road he met a man also on a motor-cycle. After assisting him to mend a puncture, he proceeded to Erambie Bridge and there stopped to let his engine cool. He had a smoke and the boy sat on the roadway. On the return, he stopped on the road near The Rocks, which were situated half a mile from Molong. There were houses close by. It was a lie that he went up to The Rocks. He never left his bike and only stopped there to have a smoke. Anyone on The Rocks could be easily seen from the roadway. He would never think of such a thing as indecently assaulting a boy.
To the Crown Prosecutor: The houses were 500 or 600 yards away from The Rocks.
The jury retired at 5.5. Shortly afterwards they returned to court and the foreman asked whether there was any doctor’s certificate.
His Honor: It was not mentioned at all.
The Foreman: Was there any statement of the boy from the lower court.
His Honor: No evidence of his was offered here today.
At 5.35 the jury returned with a verdict of not guilty, and Williams was discharged.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Molong Express and Western District Advertiser, Sat 12 Feb 1927 7
MOLONG MAN CHARGED WITH
ASSAULT.
———◦———
CHARGE NOT PROVEN.
————
Bertie Claude Williams appeared before Judge Armstrong and a jury on Wednesday afternoon charged with assaulting a male person, to wit, a boy 14 years of age. The court was crowded all through the proceedings, which were of an unsavoury nature.
Mr Kelly defended.
Accused challenged three jurymen.
Constable Bailey, of Molong, deposed to having arrested the accused at Mullengeen and secured a statement from him in which he said he went for a ride on his motor cycle, accompanied by Noel Morris. They went about two miles, he said, and stopped to cool his engine, and when on the return journey, near the rocks on the Orange road, he stopped again to cool the engine. Witness said he received certain information from two women and when he communicated what they had said to Williams, he replied, “I was not up in the rocks; they would swear your life away.”
Witness informed Mr Kelly that the rocks were near the silos. The boy had been subpoenaed to appear as a witness.
Jessie McKinnon, a young woman residing with her parents, said, on Sunday afternoon, 28th November, she was walking along the Orange road with her sister and were going to the weir. She had known the accused about five months. As witness was walking along the road she saw the accused and a boy up amongst the rocks. Witness then detailed what she saw.
Examined by Mr Kelly, the witness said anybody passing along the road could the man and the boy. A motor cycle was on the road. She had them under view for five minutes. When she went up to the weir five boys whom she did not know were swimming there. They wore costumes. She sat on the bank watching them for an hour.
Similar evidence given by Bertha McKinnon, at the lower court, was read over. (This witness was unable to attend owing to an injury, a fractured skull.)
Williams, giving evidence in a clear voice, said he was 37 years of age and had resided at Molong all his life, excepting for the two years that he was away at the war. He detailed a run he had on his motor cycle on Sunday afternoon, accompanied by Noel Morris. They had a rest on the Orange road, near Erambie bridge, in order to cool the engine. On the return journey they pulled up at the rocks, a few hundred yards from Molong, and stayed on the roadside for about ten minutes within the view of everyone. The girls’ statement that they had seen him and the boy up in the rocks was untrue, as he had not left the road. It was untrue to say he had interfered with the boy.
Addressing the jury, Mr Kelly said the accused was charged with the most revolting crime in the criminal calendar, and it was remarkable that the victim of the alleged offence, a boy of 14 years, was not called to give evidence in support of the charge. There was a very good reason for not producing the boy, he said, because he would not support the allegations of the girls. He criticised the action of the Crown in not calling the boy, as he always understood that it was the duty of the Crown to hold the scales of justice fairly, and to produce all evidence, whether it was in favour of the accused person or not. He asked the jury not to believe the girls’ story and to give the accused, who had an unblemished character, the benefit of the doubt.
The CP remarked that the ordinary man could not understand why these offences were committed; they were evidently carried out whilst under some mad impulse. He also said that if the boy’s evidence would favour the accused, there was nothing to prevent Mr Kelly calling him.
The judge, in summing up, asked that jury was there any reason why the girls should concoct such a story.
The jury returned into court and asked if there was a doctor’s certificate available and could they have access to the boy’s statement.
His Honor said there was no need for a doctor’s certificate and neither side had seen fit to call the boy.
A little later the jury recorded a verdict of not guilty.
Bertie Claude Williams, 1945
Molong Express and Western District Advertiser, Fri 9 Feb 1945 8
OBITUARY.
———◦———
BC (TIBBY) WILLIAMS.
————
Image: NSW State Library collection. Reproduction: Peter de Waal
The death occurred at Manly District Hospital of Tuesday of Mr Bertie Claude (”Tibby”) Williams, who was a well-known Molong resident for many years. He was 57
The funeral took place to the C of E Portion of Western Districts cemetery on Wednesday.
The late Mr Williams had suffered a long time. Before leaving Molong, 12 months or so ago, he had been a patient in Molong District Hospital for about eight months. He then went to the War Veterans’ Home at Narrabeen, and subsequently was a patient in Sydney hospitals. He was in the Manly Hospital a month before he died.
“Tibby” Williams was born at Molong. He was a son of the late Mrs R Ward, and engaged in various pursuits until he enlisted for service in the Great War. He was attached to the 13th Machine Gun Battalion.
Before his illness became pronounced, he was employed as a baker’s carter by the late Mr A Ross, of Molong, and in recent years had looked after farming and grazing properties for Mr AB Carmichael in this district.
Molong RSSAILA sub-branch sent a wreath for the funeral.
1 Molong Express and Western District Advertiser, (NSW), Sat 25 Oct 1913, p. 9.
2 Molong Argus, (NSW), Fri 28 Nov 1913, p. 4. Emphasis added.
3 Molong Express and Western District Advertiser, (NSW), Sat 29 Nov 1913, p. 8. Emphasis added.
4 The National Advocate, Thu 9 Dec 1926, p. 1.
5 The Leader and Orange Stock and Station News, Fri 11 Feb 1927, p. 9. Emphasis added.
6 To view the digitised WWI service record (service No. 4866, barcode 1805744) of Bertie Claude Williams go to: www.naa.gov.au
7 Molong Express and Western District Advertiser, (NSW), Sat 12 Feb 1927, p. 14.
8 Molong Express and Western District Advertiser, (NSW), Fri 9 Feb 1945, p. 4. Emphasis in original article.