August Gabriel, 1886
below also see: August Gabriel, 1887
The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 22 Jul 1886 1
POLICE.
———◦———
…
In the BALMAIN POLICE COURT, before Mr Addison, SM, Theresa Crosby, a girl 16 years of age, was charged with having used indecent language in Darling-street. The accused pleaded guilty, and was fined 20s, with the alternative of 14 days’ imprisonment. Michael Tancred, for having been drunk and disorderly in Darling-street, was fined 10s; in default, four days’ imprisonment. The same defendant, for having used obscene language in Darling-street, was further fined 20s, with the alternative of 14 days’ imprisonment. A Frenchman named August Gabriel was fined 40s, with the alternative of 14 days’ imprisonment, for having, in Beattie-street, worked a horse with a sore back.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Balmain Observer and Western Suburbs Advertiser, Sat 24 Jul 1886 2
BALMAIN POLICE COURT.
————
MONDAY JULY 10.
(Before Mr Addison, SM.)
…
WEDNESDAY, JULY 21.
(Before Mr Addison, SM.)
The abnormally small amount of disorder that characterises this orderly borough was illustrated by this morning’s charge sheet,
…
August Gabriel was charged with cruelty to a horse by working it with a sore back. Pleaded guilty, but alleged that it had happened in the course of a day’s work without his knowledge, the horse’s back having been alright when he started with him in the morning. Fined 40s and 4s 10d costs or 14 days.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 29 Jul 1886 3
POLICE.
———◦———
…
Mr TK Abbott, SM, presided in the Summons Division.
…
August Gabriel was fined £2, or 14 days, for working a horse while in an unfit condition.
August Gabriel, 1887
The Sydney Morning Herald, Fri 23 Dec 1887 4
POLICE.
———◦———
…
Captain Fisher, DSM. Presided in the Charge Court of the WATER POLICE COURT.
…
August Gabriel, a middle-aged Frenchman, was charged with indecency in Fullerton-street, Woollahra, on the 12th instant. The case was adjourned till to-day for the attendance of an interpreter for the prisoner.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Evening News, Sat 24 Dec 1887 5
THE GABRIEL CASE.
————
AN ELOQUENT APPEAL.
————
THE LASH ORDERED.
————
August Gabriel, the Frenchman who has been twice remanded on a charge of wilfully and grossly misbehaving himself in Fullerton-street, Woollahra, on the 12th instant, was brought before the full bench at the Water Police Court on Friday afternoon. Messrs Marsh and Addison, SMs, and Mr Fisher, DSM, and the French Vice-Consul, [Marquis de Rostaing 6], occupied the bench.
The constable’s evidence as to the arrest having been read over and confirmed, the prosecutrix was called.
She is a respectable looking little girl, and gave her evidence clearly and decisively.
The prisoner, on oath, said he lived at Leichhardt. Never been in Woollahra. Had never seen the two men, Hill and Jamieson, before. Was with his wife on the day in question. Was sentenced to six months at Redfern for a similar offence a few days ago. Had no witnesses in court who could speak as to his character.
Annie Smith had been living with prisoner. Was in Balmain all day on the 12th instant. Prisoner was not in Woollahra or Paddington on that day.
An application was drawn for Annie Smith’s evidence to be withdrawn, but Inspector Bremner, conducting the case, strongly objected.
Mr Richards made an appeal on behalf of a mitigation of sentence, contending that it was a matter of mania, and was to be treated rather in a lunatic asylum than with the lash, and that the lash did more harm than good. He asked them not to commit a legislative mistake by whipping a lunatic and madman. Give the man any length of imprisonment, but don’t whip him. He entreated the Bench not to inflict the lash.
The Bench having conferred together for a few minutes,
Mr Marsh said the Bench had fully considered the case, and Mr Richards’ able appeal; and found that they could not in the duty of the public, imprison him. They were obliged to carry out the law, and have him whipped. (Prisoner here burst into tears, and was completely cowed.) The order of the Court was that he should be detained in custody for ninety-six hours, and at 12 o’clock on the 26th instant be privately whipped by receiving fifteen lashes; his Worship adding that it was only in consequence of the eloquent appeal made by Mr Richards that he had not given him thirty lashes.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Sat 24 Dec 1887 7
POLICE.
———◦———
…
Captain Fisher, DSM, presided in the Charge Division of the WATER POLICE COURT.
…
August Gabriel, an elderly Frenchman was charged with wilful and obscene exposure in Fullerton-street, Woollahra. The decision of the Bench was that the prisoner should be detained in custody in Woolloomooloo lockup for 96 hours, and that at noon on Monday next he receive 15 lashes.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Tue 27 Dec 1887 8
NEWS OF THE DAY.
———◦———
…
It had been arranged for a man named August Gabriel to have received 15 lashes at the Woolloomooloo lockup at noon yesterday, for wilful indecency in Woollahra. The prisoner, who is an elderly, dissipated-looking Frenchman, and who is believed by the detectives to be an escaped convict from New Caledonia, was in readiness for his flagellation shortly before midday, but, an injunction having been applied for, the punishment was at the last moment deferred, pending the result of an appeal, which cannot be determined before the end of January next. The accused, who has been three times arrested upon charges of stabbing, and also in connection with the proprietorship of houses of ill-repute, appeared to dread the lash greatly, and until the result of his application was made known to him by an interpreter he paced his cell in an extremely depressed and nervous manner.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Maitland Mercury and Hunter River General Advertiser, Thu 29 Dec 1887 9
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS.
————
…
It had been arranged (says Tuesday’s Herald), for a man named August Gabriel to have received 15 lashes at the Woolloomooloo lockup at noon yesterday, for wilful indecency at Woollahra. The prisoner, who is an elderly dissipated-looking Frenchman, and who is believed by the detectives to be an escaped convict from New Caledonia, was in readiness for his flagellation shortly before mid-day, but, an injunction having been applied for, the punishment was at the last moment deferred, pending the result of an appeal, which cannot be determined before the end of January next. The accused, who has been three times arrested upon charges of stabbing, and also in connection with the proprietorship of houses of ill-repute, appeared to dread the lash greatly, and until the result of his application was made known to him by an interpreter he paced his cell in an extremely depressed and nervous manner.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Fri 17 Feb 1888 10
QUARTER SESSIONS.
THURSDAY.
(Before Mr District Court Judge FORBES.)
The Court re-opened at 10 o’clock for the hearing of appeals against magistrates’ decisions.
…
GABRIEL v. REGINA.
In this case, Auguste Gabriel, a Frenchman, appealed against a decision of Messrs Marsh, Addison, and Fisher, stipendiary magistrates, which was given at the Water Police Court on the 22nd December last, by which he was ordered to be imprisoned for 96 hours and to receive 15 lashes for indecent exposure. Mr G Wallace appeared for the appellant, and Mr Fitzhardinge for the Crown. The ground of appeal, as stated by the appellant’s advocate, was that the flogging should have been inflicted within the 96 hours, which it had not been; and that the conviction was bad because it did not show at what hour the 96 hours’ imprisonment began. Mr Fitzhardinge said that the depositions would show that this person Gabriel, a Frenchman, and a very old boy indeed, had been convicted at the Redfern Police Court for exposure, for which he received a sentence of six months’ imprisonment under the 448th section of the Act. That was on a Tuesday, and on the following Friday the accused was prosecuted and convicted at the Water Police Court on another similar charge, and sentenced to 96 hours’ imprisonment and 15 lashes. Against that conviction of whipping the defendant had now appealed. He (Mr Fitzhardinge) submitted that there was nothing to be argued. His Honor said that he could see no reason why the conviction should be set aside, and he therefore dismissed the appeal with costs, £5 5s.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Sat 18 Feb 1888 11
NEWS OF THE DAY.
———◦———
…
The appeal of August Gabriel against his sentence to be flogged, which was heard at the Quarter Sessions on Thursday, has excited a great deal of interest both publicly and in official circles, the question being, could the prisoner be whipped? Briefly summed up, the case was as follows:—There were originally two charges against Gabriel, both for indecent exposure. In the one case he was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment, and in the other case he was ordered to be detained in custody for 96 hours, and at 12 o’clock on the 28th December to receive 15 strokes of the lash. Against the latter conviction he appealed. At the Quarter Sessions Mr Wallace, who appeared for the appellant, contended in the first place that, as the conviction was for imprisonment for a certain number of hours, the time of the day should be stated on the face of the conviction. He further urged that the whipping was required under the Act to be inflicted within 96 hours of the time of the conviction, so that it was now impossible for the sentence to be carried out, even if the Judges sustained the conviction. Mr Fitzhardinge, on the other hand, urged that the fact of the prisoner having appealed stayed the time of sentence, and, referring to section 441 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act , drew the attention of the Court to the fact that it was required, in the case of an affirmance of a conviction appealed against, the offender should be adjudged to be punished according to the conviction. The chairman held that there was nothing in the point raised by Mr
Wallace, and ordered the conviction to be affirmed. The interesting point now comes in. At the conclusion of the judgement his Honor said that he “dismissed the appeal and sustained the conviction.” He did not follow the words of the Act, which are: “The offender shall be punished according to the conviction.” The difficulty was submitted by the Attorney-General for solution yesterday, the result being that he intimated that he sees reasons why the punishment should not be inflicted. Consequently, the flogging will not be carried into effect. Mr Simpson declines to explain the reason for his decision.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Maitland Mercury and Hunter River General Advertiser, Tue 21 Feb 1888 12
A Novel Point of Law.
————
The appeal of August Gabriel against his sentence to be flogged, which was heard at the Quarter Sessions on Thursday, has excited a great deal of interest both publicly and in official circles (said the Herald.) The question is, can the prisoner be flogged? We may briefly sum up the points in his case as follows:—There were originally two charges against the prisoner, both for indecent exposure. In the one case he was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment, and in the other case he was ordered to be detained in custody for 96 hours, and at 12 o’clock on the 26th December to receive 15 strokes of the lash. Against the latter conviction he appealed. At Quarter Sessions on Thursday Mr Wallace, who appeared for the appellant, admitted that as far as the evidence went there were ample grounds to justify a conviction, but he contended in the first place that, as the conviction was for imprisonment for a certain number of hours, the time of the days should be stated on the face of the conviction. He further urged that such punishment was required under the Act to be inflicted within 96 hours of the time of the conviction, so that it was now impossible for the sentence to be carried out, even if the Judges sustained the conviction. Mr Fitzhardinge, on the other hand urged that the fact of the prisoner having appealed stayed the time of the sentence, and, referring to section 441 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act , drew the attention of the Court to the fact that it was required, in the case of an affirmance of a conviction appealed against, the offender should be judged to be punished according to the conviction. The chairman held that there was nothing in the point raised by Mr Wallace, and ordered the conviction to be affirmed. In the course of the adjournment of the appeal his Honor expressed himself as not favourable to flogging. He stated that with that, however, he had nothing to do, as the magistrates, and not himself, had ordered the flogging. The interesting point now comes in. At the conclusion of the judgement his Honor said that he “dismissed the appeal and sustained the conviction.” He did not follow the words of the Act, which are: “the offender shall be punished according to the conviction.” A difficulty therefore arises, and the police authorities are now somewhat perplexed as to what they shall do in this case. In the meantime the hapless prisoner is awaiting in durance vile the words which shall release him from the lash or compel him to undergo the dread sentence in its entirety. It is said that if the police decided to have the prisoner flogged a writ of habeas corpus will have to be issued to get the prisoner from the gaol to be conveyed to the lockup to receive punishment.—The difficulty was submitted to the Attorney-General for solution on Friday, the result being that he intimated that he sees reasons why the punishment should not be inflicted. Consequently, the flogging will not be carried into effect. Mr Simpson declines to explain the reason for his decision.
1 The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 22 Jul 1886, p. 4. Emphasis added.
2 Balmain Observer and Western Suburbs Advertiser, Sat 24 Jul 1886, p. 2.
3 The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 29 Jul 1886, p. 4.
4 The Sydney Morning Herald, Fri 23 Dec 1887, p. 4.
5 Evening News, (Sydney, NSW), Sat 24 Dec 1887, p. 6. Emphasis added.
6 Freeman’s Journal, (Syd, NSW), Sat 1 Sep 1888, p. 17.
7 The Sydney Morning Herald, Sat 24 Dec 1887, p. 6.
8 The Sydney Morning Herald, Tue 27 Dec 1887, pp. 4, 5.
9 The Maitland Mercury and Hunter River General Advertiser, Thu 29 Dec 1887, p. 5.
10 The Sydney Morning Herald, Fri 17 Feb 1888, p. 4.
11 The Sydney Morning Herald, Sat 18 Feb 1888, p. 13.
12 The Maitland Mercury and Hunter River General Advertiser, Tue 21 Feb 1888, p. 4.