The Cumberland Argus and Fruitgrowers’ Advocate, Sat 20 Feb 1915 1
LIVERPOOL COURT.
———◦———
Monday, February 15.
(Before Messrs TB Clegg, PM, and
JR Fergerson, JP.)
————
…
COMMITTED FOR TRIAL.
David Haggart, an infantry sergeant in the forces now undergoing training at the Liverpool manoeuvre area, was brought up on a charge of attempted assault on a youth, a member of the orderly staff, at the camp on Saturday night. After evidence, accused was committed for trial.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Daily Telegraph, Fri 5 Mar 1915 2
CRIMINAL.
——
…
CONVICTED.
——
David Haggart, a young man, was convicted on a serious charge, [indecent assault on Leo Stone], alleged to have been committed at Moorebank on February 13. Mr ER Abigail was for prisoner, who was a sergeant in the camp for the Expeditionary Forces at Liverpool. The jury recommended prisoner to mercy on account of previous good character and his service to the Empire and humanity generally.
The prisoner wore a number of decorations, showing that he had seen service in South Africa and China, and he said he had been a member of the Coronation Contingent. In 1906 he was in the Royal Navy on the China station, and whilst in Hongkong Harbor a cyclone caused the wreck of a passenger boat with 700 passengers on board. Haggart jumped from his own ship with a lifeline, and after three attempts carried the line aboard the vessel, and everyone was saved as a result of his efforts.
Prisoner was remanded for sentence.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Fri 5 Mar 1915 3
QUARTER SESSIONS.
(Before Judge Docker and juries.)
Mr Herbert Harris Crown Prosecutor.
…
FOUND GUILTY.
David Haggart pleaded not guilty to having committed a serious offence at Liverpool on February 13.
It was stated in evidence as to character that Haggart had spent 15 years in the Royal navy. He had won the China, South African, and King’s Coronation medals, and had been awarded the Royal Humane Society’s Medal (first class) for going overboard from his vessel during a cyclone in Hongkong Harbour in 1906, and, after three attempts, carrying a life line aboard a wrecked steamer whereby 700 lives were saved.
The jury returned a verdict of guilty, but with a strong recommendation to mercy on the grounds of accused’s previous good conduct and his services to the Empire and humanity generally.
Haggart was remanded for sentence.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Daily Telegraph, Wed 10 Mar 1915 4
CRIMINAL.
——
…
HONOR OF THE ARMY.
David Haggart, who had been convicted before Judge Docker, on a serious charge, and who had been recommended to mercy on account of previous good character and “his services to the Empire and humanity generally,” was brought up for sentence. The prisoner, who was a member of the Expeditionary Force encamped at Liverpool, was stated to have had long service in the Navy, and while his ship was lying in Hongkong Harbour, a cyclone threatened the lives of some 700 persons in a passenger boat. Owing to Haggart’s effort in getting a line to the ship the passengers were saved.
His Honor said the offence was a very serious one, and it was made more serious by the fact that prisoner came before the Court in the King’s uniform. The verdict of the jury seemed to be reasonable under the circumstances. There was a previous conviction against prisoner for stealing, and if that had been known to the military authorities it would have prevented his being accepted as a recruit. It was a fortunate thing that this affair had come to light before prisoner had gone to the front, because if he had gone there he might have done what they complained of concerning the German soldiers. There was plenty of wine to be obtained in Belgium and France, and if prisoner had reached the front and partaken of it, it appeared highly probable to his Honor that he would have committed offences against women equally abominable with those committed by the German soldiers. The name of the British army had been saved, as far as prisoner was concerned. They had only read in that morning’s papers accounts of the horrible atrocities committed by German soldiers, and officers, too. The authorities did not look to men like prisoner to uphold the honor of the British army, although the German authorities were releasing their criminals on condition that they went to the front. It might be said of some people that they would serve their country better in their deaths than in their lives, but that was not the principle upon which Britishers sought to proceed.
His Honor referred to the appearance of prisoner, at the trial in the uniform of the King’s military forces. Some remarks his Honor had made after the trial regarding the impropriety of persons appearing in the courts in military uniform seemed, he said, to have created a good deal of discussion and misconception. He was then referring to what he believed to be the invariable rule of the English courts, that military witnesses, or any other persons concerned in the courts, should not appear in military uniform. The reason was a very simple one. The uniform was the outward symbol of the King’s military power. It was of the greatest importance to citizens generally for the civil courts to be in no way dominated or influenced by the military power. That was the simple reason for it. His Honor added that he was rather amused to see the suggestion made that the slackening in recruiting was due to his remarks. What really degraded the King’s uniform was for persons accused of serious offences to appear in that uniform for their defence.
Haggart was sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Wed 10 Mar 1915 5
CURRENT NEWS.
———◦———
…
Some remarks made by Judge Docker at the Sydney Quarter Sessions the other day were interpreted in some quarters to mean that he considered it a disgrace for the King’s uniform to be seen in a civil court. His Honor amplified his remarks yesterday. He said that they had given rise to discussion and misconception. He had referred to what he had believed to be the rule in the English courts. This was that military witnesses or other persons concerned should not appear in military uniform. The reason was simple. A uniform was the outward symbol of the King’s military power, and it was of the utmost importance that the civil courts should be in no way dominated or influenced by it. That was the simple reason for it. To object to witnesses coming to court in uniform was not slighting either the King or the country. He thought it should have rather the opposite tendency. What really degraded the King’s uniform was for a person accused of a serious offence to come into court arrayed in uniform to enter into a defence. In doing so the prisoner before the court had degraded the King’s uniform, as shown by the verdict of the jury.
David Haggart, a member of the Military Expeditionary Force, camped at Liverpool, who had seen long service in the navy, was brought up for sentence by Judge Docker at the Quarter Sessions yesterday. A jury had found him guilty of an offence, and recommended him to mercy because of his previous good character and his services to the Empire and humanity generally. The Judge said that the offence was a very serious one. It was made more serious by the fact that Haggart came before the court in the King’s uniform. There was a previous conviction against him for stealing, and if it had been known to the military authorities he would not have been accepted as a soldier. It was fortunate that this affair had come to light before Haggart had gone to the front, because if he had gone there he might have done what they complained of concerning the German soldiers. There was plenty of wine to be obtained there, and if Haggart had gone to the front, and partaken of it, it appeared highly probable that he would have committed offences against women equally abominable with those committed by the German soldiers. The name of the British army had been saved so far as the prisoner was concerned. They had read accounts of the horrible atrocities committed by the German soldiers and officers. They did not look to men like the prisoner to uphold the honour of the British army. The Germans were releasing their criminals on condition that they fought, but he trusted that the British army would not require a procedure of that kind. It might be said of some people that they would serve their country better in their deaths than in their lives, but that was not the principle upon which Britishers sought to proceed. Haggart was sentenced to a year’s imprisonment.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Wed 10 Mar 1915 6
QUARTER SESSIONS.
(Before Judge Docker and juries.)
…
SOLDIER SENTENCED.
A report of the case in which David Haggart was sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment appears elsewhere.
…
IN THE RANKS.
———◦———
DANGER OF UNDESIRABLES.
——
JUDGE'S COMMENTS.
——
Judge Docker, in sentencing David Hoggart [sic] (36), a butcher in the expeditionary forces, at the Quarter Sessions yesterday, made some remarks with regard to undesirable men proceeding to the front, and deprecated accused soldiers being allowed to stand their trials while wearing his Majesty’s uniform.
Haggart was convicted on Thursday last of a serious offence, and was recommended by the jury to mercy on account of his previous good character and services rendered to the Empire. He had served, it was stated, with distinction in the navy, and had been instrumental while stationed at Hongkong Harbour in saving a steamer and 700 passengers, which were imperilled by a cyclone.
His Honor said it was a remarkable fact that accused appeared in Court in the uniform of the King’s military forces. Remarks mad by him with regard to the impropriety of persons appearing in the Court in military uniform seemed, his Honor said, to have caused a good deal of discussion, and a good deal of misconception. “I refer to what I believe to be an invariable rule in the English Courts, where military witnesses or other persons concerned do not appear in military uniform,” his Honor continued, “The reason for it is very simple. The uniform is an outward symbols of the King’s military power, and it is of the greatest importance for citizens generally that the civil Courts shall be in no way dominated or influenced by military power. I was rather amused to see that one of the writers went so far as to suggest that a slackening of recruiting had been caused by my remarks. Of course, that is simply ridiculous. It is degrading to the King’s uniform for persons accused of serious offences to appear in uniform, for the purposes of their defence. You, accused, are a person who has degraded the uniform.
“It is a fortunate thing, I think that this affair was discovered before you left for the front. You might have done precisely the same things the German soldiers have done, and of which we complain so strongly. There is plenty of wine to be obtained in Belgium and France, and many of the German soldiers, after heavy drinking have committed abominable offences against women. Had you gone to the front and obtained drink, it is highly probable that you would have acted in the same manner. The good name of the British Army has been saved from that, as far as you are concerned, and we do not want men such as you at the front. For that reason the military authorities have refused to accept men convicted of criminal offences.”
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Queanbeyan Age and Queanbeyan Observer, Tue 16 Mar 1915 7
CURRENT TOPICS.
————
…
SOLDIER SENTENCED.
———◦———
DAVID HAGGART, a member of the military expeditionary forces, who had seen long service in the navy, and whose bravery was responsible for saving 700 lives in Hong-kong, has been sentenced to a years in jail at Grafton for a serious offence. Judge Docker said it was fortunate the affair had come to light before Haggart went to the front, otherwise he might have done what they complained of concerning the German soldiers. It appeared highly probably he would have committed offences equally abominable with those of the Germans. They did not look to men like the prisoner to uphold the honor of the British army, whose honor had been saved, as far as the prisoner was concerned.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
David Haggart, Gaol photo sheet 8
![SRNSW: NRS2467, [3/6088], State Penitentiary photographic description book, 31 Dec 1914-8 Apr 1915, No. 14180, p. –.](../../images/trials/1915-Haggart-6088-gaol-photo-14180.jpg "SRNSW: NRS2467, [3/6088], State Penitentiary photographic description book, 31 Dec 1914-8 Apr 1915, No. 14180, p. –.") |
Gaol Photo Sheet - Transcribed Details
No. 14180
Date when Portrait was taken: 5-3-1915
Name: David Haggart
|
Native place: North Wales Year of birth: 7-6-1878 Arrived Ship: Nairnshire Trade or occupation Religion: C of E Education, degree of: R & W Height: 5' 4¾" Weight On committal: 152 Colour of hair: Reddish brown Colour of eyes: Blue |
Marks or special features: Peacock on branch on outside left upper arm, anchor star, flag and pig on back of left hand. Prince of Wales feathers, Japanese girl and leaves on right forearm. Clasped hands on back of right hand. Both arms profusely tattooed mole on right cheek. Two moles on left cheek. Royal Coat of arms & flowers on chest. Two stars on each shoulder |
|
(No. of previous Portrait ... ) CONVICTIONS |
|||||
|
Where and When |
Offence. |
Sentence |
|||
|
Balmain PC Sydney Q.S |
1 4 |
7 3 |
1914 1915 |
Stealing Indecent assault on a male person |
£5 or 2 months HL 12 months HL Grafton Gaol |
1 The Cumberland Argus and Fruitgrowers’ Advocate (Parramatta), Sat 20 Feb 1915, p. 10.
2 The Daily Telegraph, Fri 5 Mar 1915, p. 5.
3 The Sydney Morning Herald, Fri 5 Mar 1915, p. 4.
4 The Daily Telegraph, Wed 10 Mar 1915, p. 12.
5 Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Wed 10 Mar 1915, p. 4.
6 The Sydney Morning Herald, Wed 10 Mar 1915, pp. 9, 11.
7 Queanbeyan Age and Queanbeyan Observer, Tue 16 Mar 1915, p. 4.
8 SRNSW: NRS2467, [3/6088], State Penitentiary photographic description book, 31 Dec 1914-8 Apr 1915, No. 14180, p. –.