William Augustus Sthrowzki, 1920 – Bestiality
Below also see: Sthrowzki v. Sthrowzki, 1920 – Divorce,
Sthrowzki v. Sthrowzki 1921 – Divorce,
William Augustus Sthrowzki, 1922,
William Augustus Sthrowzki, 1923
William Ellis Johnson, 1926,
Sthrowzki v. Sthrowzki, 1928 – Divorce
The Inverell Times, Tue 10 Feb 1920 1
QUARTER SESSIONS
———(○)———
Monday, February 9.
————
The usual Court of Quarter Sessions commenced in the Inverell Police Court yesterday morning. His Honor, Acting Judge Curtis presided. Mr CC Loxton occupied a seat on the Bench as Deputy Sheriff. The legal fraternity was represented by Messrs RJ Browning and James Young (barristers), and Messrs JA Boyd, AF Avern, SJS Butler, VP Wiltshire, and Nicholls (of Dawson, Waldron and Glover, Sydney), solicitors.
Before the business commenced Mr Browning congratulated His Honor on his elevation to the Bench. He assured His Honor that the Bar had every confidence in his appointment and would lend every possible assistance.
Mr JA Boyd, on behalf of the lower profession, also offered his congratulations. He felt sure that His Honor would administer his duties with credit to himself and deal out even-handed justice.
His Honor made a suitable response, in the course of which he urged upon the legal profession to expedite the business before the Court.
JURORS EXCUSED.
Messrs JA Warner, EA Dorn, Geo Campbell, SH Harston, HJ Bourke and JW Archibald were excused for non-attendance as jurors.
…
———(○)———
ALLEGED BESTIALITY.
————
The first case called on was one of alleged bestiality in which a young Pole, named William Augustus Schrowski [aka Sthrowzki], was charged with having committed an unnatural offence at Nullamanna on 20th October.
He pleaded not guilty.
Mr Young, instructed by Messrs Avern and McIntyre, appeared for the accused, and Mr RJ Browning (Crown Prosecutor) for the Crown.
The following jury was empanelled: Jas Doust, R McKenzie, AC Fraser, JE Asher, WC Thomas, AA McLean, A Wilson, J O’Shannessy, W Nash, AJ Munsie, HI Cooper and WH Scott.
Accused challenged four jurors, and the Crown requested one juror to stand aside.
A request by Mr Young to permit accused’s wife to remain in Court was refused. His Honor remarking that all decent-minded persons should leave the Court.
The Crown Prosecutor insinuated that the wife, being of pre-possessing appearances, had been brought into the Court to enlist the sympathy of the jury.
After briefly outlining the case the evidence was entered upon.
Sergeant Moroney deposed that on 20th October last he received a telephone message from Nullamanna. In consequence of that report a constable was sent to the locality. Later the accused and the officer arrived on a motor cycle. The accused stated that he arrived in Inverell on the previous Saturday, where he met Mr AF Campbell, and engaged to work at Pindari. He accordingly proceeded on his cycle to Pindari on the following Monday. Accused denied seeing a little girl on the road, but admitted having to chase some sheep off the road. He, however, contended that he had never been more than 10 yards away from his machine. Later that night witness brought in Lily Chandler, Alec Chandler, and their father. The accused and four other men were stood side by side in the police office and the children asked to identify the man they saw in the paddock. Lily at once picked out the accused as the man, but the boy at first placed his hand on one of the other men; but then said, “No, that is not the man; it is this one” (pointing to the accused). The other men were dismissed, and the girl asked to repeat what she had told the constable. She then said on the morning in question she noticed a man chasing ewes in a paddock. He caught one and took it behind a cluster of stones. She called a dog, and sang out “Daddy.” The man than let the sheep go; ran down the creek to where a red motor cycle was standing, and rode away. The boy, Alec Campbell, [sic] was next asked what he knew of the affair. The boy said that he was in his father’s garden when he saw the accused ride by on a motor cycle. A violin was in the side-car. He saw the accused get off his cycle and chase sheep. When his father went out with a gun the man ran away and jumped on his motor. The accused was then asked what he had to say, and he replied: “The whole thing is a mystery to me.” The accused was subsequently examined by Dr Kinross.
James R Chandler, farmer, residing at Nullamanna, stated that on the 20th October he was shearing. About 7.30 am he proceeded to get a horse, when he observed the accused go past on a motor cycle with a side-car attached. Witness noted a violin-case in the side-car. On arrival home that night his eldest girl gave him certain information in consequence of which he rang up the police.
To Mr Young: The motor cycle was travelling very slowly. It was the first time he had seen the accused, but he could swear he was the same man. He could not say if he had a cap or hat on.
Mr Young: You have had to chastise your second oldest son?
Witness: No.
Did you say so at the police court hearing?—I didn’t know the meaning of the word chastise. I didn’t flog him, but spoke strictly to him about his not telling the truth.
You gave him a tongue-flogging:—No I didn’t swear at him (laughter).
Lily May Chandler, a young girl, said she resided with her father at Nullamanna. She was the eldest child and looked after the house. Occasionally she shepherded sheep. On the Monday morning in question she noticed a man come along the road on a motor cycle in the direction of Pindari. The cyclist stopped on the other side of the creek and dismounted. A few minutes later she observed the man chasing sheep. She was then on the bank of the creek, having gone to look after the sheep. The cyclist, whom she identified as the accused, caught a pet ewe. Witness then described the alleged occurrence. On perceiving witness the accused let the sheep go and chased her. She ran towards home and called out to her brother, who was digging in the garden. The nearest the accused got to her was about 15 yards. When she called out the accused stopped and made for his bicycle.
To Mr Young: She did not see the accused catch the sheep and carry it behind a rock, although she had told the police that story.
To His Honor: She was not quite 15 years. She had left school about six months. She was not in the habit of walking out with boys.
Alexander James Chandler, aged 10 years, brother of the previous witness, stated that he was working in the garden on the morning in question. The accused rode along in the direction of Pindari and got off after crossing the creek. Upon entering the paddock the accused took after a curly Lincoln. The man and the sheep disappeared from view and witness walked into the house. The next thing he heard was his sister calling out to him. He ran and saw the accused chasing his sister, whereupon he ran inside and got a gun. Upon seeing witness with a gun he turned and made for his cycle.
To Mr Young: He had been reprimanded for not telling the truth on a couple of occasions.
Verdict of Not Guilty.
This concluded the Crown case, and Mr Young, without calling any evidence for the defence, addressed the jury, strongly contending that there was no case at all against his client.
His Honor spoke briefly and lucidly. He reminded the jury that it was unwise for a jury to convict an accused solely on the evidence of a girl of tender years..
After a short retirement, the jury returned into court with a verdict of not guilty, and the accused was discharged.
Sthrowzki v. Sthrowzki, 1920
Sthrowzki v. Sthrowzki divorce papers 1920 2
1
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
|
STHROWZKI v. STHROWZKI |
AFFIDAVIT |
deponent:– Myra Sthrowzki.
Sworn the 17th day of March 1921.
EG MADDOCKS COHEN.
Photo: Peter de Waal
1a
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. ---- of 1921.
In the matter of the application of Myra Sthrowzski for a remission of fees in her suit against William Augustus Sthrowzski for a divorce.
On this seventeenth day of March one thousand nine hundred and twenty one MYRA STHROWZSKI of William Street, Redfern near Sydney in the State of New South Wales, Married woman, being duly sworn makes oath and says as follows:–
1. I am desirous of suing for a divorce on the ground of desertion for three years and upwards.
2. I am in receipt of the sum of 25/- per week as a domestic and pay the sum of seven shillings and six pence per week for a furnished room, and out of the remainder I have to provide myself with clothing.
3. I have no other means and no property except and small quantity of wearing apparel.
[Signed] M Sthrowzski
Sworn by the Darlinghurst on the day
first mentioned at Sydney
Before me
[Signed] Aaron Wolper, JP
A Justice of the Peace for the State of New South Wales.
2
EG MADDOX COHEN
Solicitors.
Stephen Court,
77 & 79 Elizabeth Street,
Near King Street Over Commercial Bank
Sydney 22nd March 1921.
To the Registrar,
Divorce Registry,
Sydney.
Dear Sir,
Sthrowzski v Sthrowzski.
In this matter I am charging the Petitioner a fee of seven pounds for taking these proceedings and should the costs of service not exceed the usual amount I will not charge the Petitioner any further costs other than those which she may receive from the Respondent.
Yours truly
EG Maddocks Cohen.
Mn: Hearing be suspended [Initial illegible] 23/3/1921
3
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
|
STHROWZKI v. STHROWZKI |
PETITION |
EG MADDOCKS COHEN.
3a
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
To the Honourable Alexander Gordon, Judge of the Matrimonial Causes Court.
IN RE MYRA STHROWZSKI (formerly Myra Rope) of William Street, Redfern near Sydney in the State of New South Wales,
and
WILLIAM AUGUSTUS STHROWZSKI of 18 Josephine Street, Moore Park near Sydney in the State of New South Wales, Musician.
The twenty second day of March one thousand nine hundred and twenty one.
THE PETITION OF MYRA STHROWZSKI
SHOWETH:–
1. That your Petitioner was on the third day of June one thousand nine hundred and thirteen lawfully married to William Augustus Sthrowzski at Redfern near Sydney in the State of New South Wales.
2. That your Petitioner was born at Sydney in the State of New South Wales, and is at the time of the institution of this suit and has been for three years and upwards prior to the institution of this suit domiciled in the State of New South Wales, That your Petitioner’s said husband was born in Poland and is at the time of the institution of this suit and has been for three years and upwards prior to the institution of this suit domiciled in the State of New South Wales.
3. That your Petitioner and her said husband have had issue of their said marriage one child viz:– Phyllis May Doris Sthrowzski aged seven years.
4. That your Petitioner’s said Husband has without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted your Petitioner and without any such cause or excuse left her continuously so deserted for three years and upwards.
YOUR PETITIONER THEREFORE HUMBLY PRAYS
1. That your Honor will be pleased to decree that the marriage of your Petitioner with her said Husband be dissolved.
2. That your Petitioner may have the custody of the issue of the said marriage.
3. And that your Petitioner may have such further or other relief in the premises as to you Honor may seem meet.
[Signed] M Sthrowzski
PETITIONER.
NOTE:– This Petition is filed by Edward George Maddocks Cohen of 79 Elizabeth Street, Sydney in the State of New South Wales, the Solicitor for Myra Sthrowzski of Redfern near Sydney in the State of New South Wales, the abovenamed Petitioner.
4
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
|
STHROWZKI v. STHROWZKI |
AFFIDAVIT |
Deponent:– Myra Sthrowzki.
Sworn the 22nd day of March 1921.
EG MADDOCKS COHEN.
4a
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. ---- of 1921.
BETWEEN
MYRA STHROWZSKI
Petitioner
and
WILLIAM AUGUST STHROWZSKI
Respondent
On this twenty second day of March one thousand nine hundred and twenty one MYRA STHROWZSKI of Redfern near Sydney in the State of New South Wales, Married woman, being duly sworn makes oath and says as follows:–
1. I am the abovenamed Petitioner and was on the third day of June one thousand nine hundred and thirteen lawfully married to William Augustus Sthrowzski at Redfern near Sydney in the State of New South Wales.
2. I was born at Sydney in the State of New South Wales, and am at the time of the institution of this suit and have been for three years and upwards prior to the institution of this suit domiciled in the State of New South Wales: That you Petitioner’s said Husband was born in Poland and is at the time of the institution of this suit and has been for three years and upwards prior to the institution of this suit domiciled in the State of New South Wales.
3. I and my husband have had issue of our said marriage one child:– viz Phyllis May Doria Sthrowzski aged seven years.
4. My said Husband has without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted me and without any such cause or excuse left me continuously so deserted during three years and upwards.
5. I deny all collusion or connivance with my said Husband or with any other person or persons whomsoever
[Signed] M Sthrowzski
Sworn by the Deponent on the day first before
mentioned at Sydney
Before me
A Justice of the Peace for the State of New South Wales.
[Signed] David Perriman, JP
5
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
|
STHROWZKI v. STHROWZKI |
Affidavit of service |
Deponent:– David Jack Craig.
Sworn the 12th day of April 1921
EG MADDOCKS COHEN.
5a
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
BETWEEN
MYRA STHROWZSKI
Petitioner
and
WILLIAM AUGUSTUS STHROWZSKI
Respondent
On this twelfth day of April one thousand nine hundred and twenty one DAVID JACK CRAIG of 79 Elizabeth Street, Sydney in the State of New South Wales, Law Clerk, being duly sworn makes oath and says as follows:–
1. I did on the twenty fourth day of March last past duly serve the abovenamed Respondent, with a true copy of the Petition having been duly certified as correct in the office of the Registrar of this Honourable Court by FC Baylis, Chief Clerk in Divorce and sealed on each page with the impress seal of this Honourable Court and having a citation duly endorsed thereon addressed to the said Respondent and commanding him within fourteen days after service thereof, inclusive of the day of such service to cause an appearance to be entered for him in the said Court, which citation was signed for the Registrar by the said FC Bayles, Chief Clerk in Divorce, by handing the same to him personally at 18 Josephine Street, Moore Park near Sydney.
2. At the time of such service the said Respondent admitted to me that his name was William Augustus Sthrowzski and that the abovenamed Petitioner with [sic] his lawful wife.
3. The said copy Petition had also endorsed upon it the address of Edward George Maddocks Cohen the Petitioner’s Solicitor of 79 Elizabeth Street, Sydney in the State of New South Wales, which address is within two miles of the General Post Office, Sydney.
4. I have this day made search in the book kept in the office of the Registrar of this Honorable Court and find that no appearance has been filed by or on behalf of the abovenamed Respondent, although the time for such appearance has expired.
[Signed] DJ Craig
Sworn by the Deponent on the day first before mentioned
at Sydney Before me
A Commissioner for affidavits.
[Signed] FC Bayles
6
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
|
STHROWZKI v. STHROWZKI |
Draft |
EG MADDOCKS COHEN.
6a
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
MYRA STHROWZSKI
against
WILLIAM AUGUSTUS STHROWZSKI
QUESTIONS FOR THE JUDGE.
1. Whether Myra Sthrowzski the Petitioner was married to William Augustus Sthrowzski the Respondent on the 3rd of June, 1913?
2. Whether the Respondent has without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted the Petitioner and without any such cause or excuse left her continuous so deserted during three years and upwards?
Registrar
Settled
[Initials illegible]
Deputy Registrar
22/4/1921
Issues to be tried at Sydney at present sittings.
[Initials illegible]
22/4/1921
7
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
|
STHROWZKI v. STHROWZKI |
PRAECIPE FOR TRIAL. |
EG MADDOCKS COHEN.
7a
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
BETWEEN
MYRA STHROWZSKI
Petitioner
and
WILLIAM AUGUSTUS STHROWZSKI
Respondent
Set this case down for trial at the present sittings of this Honourable court.
Dated this twenty third day of April 1921.
[Signed] EG Maddocks Cohen
Solicitor for the Petitioner,
79 Elizabeth Street,
Sydney.
8
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
|
STHROWZKI v. STHROWZKI |
PRAECIPE FOR TRIAL. |
Coram Gordon J.
22/6/21
EG MADDOCKS COHEN.
8a
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
MYRA STHROWZSKI
against
WILLIAM AUGUSTUS STHROWZSKI
QUESTIONS FOR THE JUDGE.
1. Whether Myra Sthrowzski the Petitioner was married to William Augustus Sthrowzski the Respondent on the 3rd of June 1913?
2. Whether the Respondent has without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted the Petitioner and without any such cause or excuse left her continuously so deserted during three years and upwards?
[Signed] Arthur G Saddington
Registrar.
9
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
BETWEEN MYRA STHROWZSKI
Petitioner
and
WILLIAM AUGUSTUS STHROWZSKI
Respondent
The twenty second day of June one thousand nine hundred and twenty one.
THIS CAUSE coming on to be heard this day and the issues to be tried before the Honourable Alexander Gordon, Judge of the Matrimonial Causes Division of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, WHEREUPON AND UPON READING the Petition, and issues herein, the affidavit of David Jack Craig sworn on the twelfth day of April last past of service of the Petition and citation on the Respondent, and of search and no appearance, AND UPON HEARING oral evidence of the Petitioner, and of Mrs Frost, called on behalf of the Petitioner AND UPON HEARING Mr Maddocks Cohen the Solicitor for the Petitioner, and no one appearing for or on behalf of the Respondent, His Honor found the first and second issues in favour of the Petitioner that is to say:–
1. Whether Myra Sthrowzski the Petitioner was married to William Augustus Sthrowzski the Respondent on the 3rd of June 1913?
2. Whether the Respondent had without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted the Petitioner and without any such cause or excuse left her continuously so deserted during three years and upwards?
WHEREFOR THIS COURT DOTH ORDER AND DECREE that the marriage of the Petitioner Myra Sthrowzski, with the Respondent William Augustus Sthrowzski, be dissolved, unless within six months from the date of the service of a copy of this decree upon the Crown Solicitor any person shall shew cause why this decree should not be made absolute, or the Crown Solicitor shall under the direction of the Attorney General, by leave
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
of this Honourable Court, intervene, or unless it should otherwise appear that this decree should not be made absolute AND THIS COURT DOTH FURTHER ORDER that the Petitioner do have the custody of Phyllis May Doris Sthrowzski, the issue of the said marriage AND THIS COURT DOTH FURTHER ORDER that the Petitioner’s costs of and incidental to this suit be taxed by the proper officer of this Honourable Court, and that the Respondent do pay into Court the said costs as so taxed within fourteen days after service upon him of a copy of the Certificate of taxation, and that such costs unless otherwise ordered be paid out to the Petitioner, or to Mr EG Maddocks Cohen her Solicitor, after this decree shall have been made absolute.
[Initialled] FCB
BY THE COURT
[Signed] WS Hazleton
DEPUTY REGISTRAR
10
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
|
STHROWZKI v. STHROWZKI |
DECREE NISI. |
To the within named Petitioner and Respondent.
TAKE NOTICE that if you marry again before this decree shall have been made absolute you will be guilty of bigamy.
SECTION 28 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1899 provides that the Respective parties to a suit for dissolution of marriage may marry again as if the marriage had been dissolved by death where but not before:–
(a) The time limited for appealing against a decree Absolute and no appeal has been presented or –
(b) Any such appeal is dismissed or –
(c) In the result of any appeal the marriage is declared to be dissolved.
[Signed] WS Hazleton
DEPUTY REGISTRAR
EG MADDOCKS COHEN.
10a
Wherefore this Court doth order and decree that the marriage of the petitioner Myra Sthrowzski to the Respondent William Augustus Sthrowzki be dissolved, unless within six months from the date of the service of a copy of this decree upon the Crown Solicitor any person shall show cause why this decree should not be made absolute, of the Crown Solicitor shall under the direction of the Attorney General by leave of this Court intervene, or unless it should otherwise appear that this decree should not be made absolute. And this Court doth further order that the Petitioner have the custody of the child Doris, the issue of the said marriage.
[Initialled] FCB
By the Court
[Signed] Arthur G Saddington
Deputy Registrar.
11
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
|
STHROWZKI v. STHROWZKI |
Affidavit of service |
deponent:– David Jack Craig.
Sworn the 6th day of January 1921
EG MADDOCKS COHEN.
11a
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
BETWEEN
MYRA STHROWZSKI
Petitioner
and
WILLIAM AUGUSTUS STHROWZSKI
Respondent
On this sixth day of January one thousand nine hundred and twenty two DAVID JACK CRAIG of 79 Elizabeth Street, Sydney, in the State of New South Wales, Law clerk, being duly sworn makes oath and says as follows:–
1. I did on the sixth day of July one thousand nine hundred and twenty one duly serve the Crown Solicitor with a copy of the Decree Nisi herein, by leaving the same with a clerk in his office. I did at the same time and place shew to the said Clerk the Original Decree Nisi herein.
[Signed] DJ Craig
Sworn by the Deponent on the day first before mentioned
at Sydney before me
A JUSTICE OF THE PEACE FOR THE
STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES.
[Signature illegible] JP
12
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
|
STHROWZKI v. STHROWZKI |
REQUEST. |
EG MADDOCKS COHEN.
12a
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction }
No. 277 of 1921.
BETWEEN
MYRA STHROWZSKI
PETITIONER
and
WILLIAM AUGUSTUS STHROWZSKI.
RESPONDENT.
I hereby request that the Decree Nisi made in the above suit on the Twenty Second day of June one thousand nine hundred and twenty one be made absolute, the period of six months having now expired.
DATED the 11th day of January. AD 1922.
[Signed] M Sthrowzski
PETITIONER
13
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction.
No. 277 of 1921.
|
STHROWZKI v. STHROWZKI |
Certificate of |
| Decree Nisi served | 6/7/1921 |
| Period expires | 6/1/1922 |
| Cor[um] Ferguson J | 8/2/1922 |
D[ecree] Ab[solute] With custody of the child
[Initialled] FCB
EG MADDOCKS COHEN.
13a
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction }
No. 277 of 1921.
BETWEEN
MYRA STHROWZSKI
Petitioner
and
WILLIAM AUGUSTUS STHROWZSKI
Respondent.
IN pursuance of the 22nd Section of the “Matrimonial Causes Act, 1899,” and on the request in writing by the Petitioner, I hereby submit the name of this suit to the Court for confirmation of the Decree Nisi herein, and I hereby certify that no matter in opposition to the final Decree herein is now pending.
Dated this 7th day of February 1922.
[Signed] AD Wood
Deputy Registrar.
14
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction }
No. 277 of 1921.
|
STHROWZKI v. STHROWZKI |
DECREE ABSOLUTE. |
EG MADDOCKS COHEN.
14a
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 277 of 1921.
BETWEEN MYRA STHROWZSKI
Petitioner
and
WILLIAM AUGUSTUS STHROWZSKI
Respondent
certificate. Photo: Peter de Waal
The eighth day of February one thousand nine hundred and twenty two.
UPON READING the Decree Nisi herein dated the twenty second day of June one thousand nine hundred and twenty one, the affidavit of David Jack Craig sworn on the sixth day of January last past, of service of a copy of the Decree Nisi on the Crown Solicitor, the request in writing of the Petitioner that the said Decree Nisi be made absolute AND the Certificate of the Registrar of this Honourable Court that no matter in opposition to the final decree is now pending, and all filed herein.
THIS COURT DOTH ORDER AND DECREE
That the Decree Nisi aforesaid for the dissolution of marriage between Myra Sthrowzski and abovenamed Petitioner and William Augustus Sthrowzski the abovenamed Respondent be and the same is hereby made absolute, and dissolved accordingly. AND THIS COURT DOTH FURTHER ORDER that the Petitioner do have the sole and permanent custody of Phyllis May Doris Sthrowzski, the issue of the said marriage.
BY THE COURT
[Signed] HD Wood
DEPUTY REGISTRAR.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 23 Jun 1921 3
IN DIVORCE.
(Before Mr Justice Gordon.)
…
Sthrowzki v. Sthrowzki
The petitioner in this suit, Myra Sthrowzki (formerly Rope), sought a divorce from William Augustus Sthrowzki, on the ground of desertion. The parties were married in June, 1913, at Redfern, in a registry office. Mr Maddocks Cohen appeared for the petitioner. A decree nisi was pronounced, returnable in six months.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 9 Feb 1922 4
IN DIVORCE.
(Before Mr Justice Ferguson.)
DECREES ABSOLUTE.
Decrees absolute were pronounced, and the marriages dissolved in the following suits:—
…
Myra Sthrowzki v. William Augustus Sthrowzki.
William Augustus Sthrowzki, 1922
Chronicle, Sat 4 Nov 1922 5
AN ABDUCTION CASE.
————
A WIFE'S STRANGE STORY.
At the Newtown (Sydney) Police Court William Augustus Sthrowzki (28), was charged with taking away Ruth Phyllis Skardon (18), against the will of her mother, and with having married her knowing her to be under 21. The accused pleaded not guilty.
Phyllis Ruth Skardon informed the magistrate that she would give evidence against her husband. She then stated that she met the defendant in September, and he took her for a motor drive. Later she met him at his garage, when he said they would go to the Registrar-General’s office with friends of his. All signed the proper names except a man named Bainbridge, who signed Skardon, and said he was her brother. She married him because he told her she would have to. A spiritualist had also told her she was in a certain condition, and this played on her mind. The defendant took her violin and pawned it to get money for the marriage.
The defendant, who reserved his defence, was committed for trial, bail being allowed.
William Augustus Sthrowzki, 1923
Evening News, Fri 16 Mar 1923 6
STHROWZKI
————
SIX MONTHS HARD
————
MARRIED A JUNIOR
————
Gaol is too good for him. He should be flogged—The girl’s mother.
At Darlinghurst Sessions, to-day, William Augustus Sthrowzki (28) was convicted of having married Ruth Phyllis Skardon (18) of Dennis-street, Newtown, without her mother’s consent.
The Crown alleged that Sthrowzki influenced the girl to tell the registrar that she was 22, that she was an orphan, and came from Scotland.
During the mother’s cross-examination by Mr Maddocks Cohen, he asked, “I suppose you would like to see this man sent to gaol?”
Mrs Skardon: Gaol is too good for him. He should be flogged.
Mr Maddocks Cohen: I suppose you would have him sent to Hell, if you could?—My daughter is not the first young girl he has interfered with. Several young girls have called at my house and made statements against him.
Mr Maddocks Cohen: You ought not to have said that,
Judge Rolin: On the contrary, Mr Maddocks Cohen, you invited the remark, and you must put up with it.
Mr Maddocks Cohen asked for leniency on the ground that as the young wife’s love seemed to have turned to hate, the man should be released, so that he could institute proceedings for restitution of conjugal rights,, by which means the girl might obtain her freedom.
Detective Edwards stated that while Sthrowzki was on bail awaiting trial, he was associating with girls of 16 to 18 years. His moral character was most doubtful. In 1912 he was fined £8 for theft.
In passing sentence of six months’ hard labor, Judge Rolin said it was not surprising that Mrs Skardon should bear Sthrowzki ill-will, considering that he was a divorced man, and a man of mature age, who had robbed her of her daughter,
On a further charge of having abducted the girl, Sthrowzki was remanded for trial at the next sessions.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Sat 17 Mar 1923 7
QUARTER SESSIONS.
…
(Before Judge Rolin.)
Mr TS Crawford, Crown Prosecutor.
…
MARRIAGE WITHOUT CONSENT.
William Augustus Sthrowzki, who had been convicted of marrying a girl, [Ruth Sharon ], under the age of 21 years without having previously obtained a written consent, was sentenced to six months’ hard labour.
“For an offence of this kind,” said his Honor when passing sentence, “the accused has rendered himself liable to a fine of £500 or penal servitude for five years, or both. The jury’s rider to the effect that the accused had married the girl with honorable intentions was certainly to the credit of the accused. But this was not a case in which two young people had been misled by passion, but was instead a case in which a man of mature years misled a girl of 18 and married her against the wishes of her mother. Accused was the author of the wrong, and it was not surprising that the girl’s mother should have an animus against a man with a record such as that of accused. The mother certainly had no wish to see her daughter married to a convicted thief. Besides, the accused was a married man recently divorced.”
Accused was further charged with taking away Phyllis Ruth Skardon, a female under the age of 21 years, out of the possession and against the will of Lucy Skardon, with intent to marry the girl. Sthrowzki pleaded not guilty and was remanded.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The West Australian, Sat 17 Mar 1923 8
MARRYING WITHOUT CONSENT.
A HUSBAND PUNISHED.
————
Sydney, March 16.
At the Darlinghurst Quarter Sessions to-day Judge Rolin imposed a sentence of six months’ hard labour upon William Augustus Sthrowzki, who had been convicted of marrying a girl under the age of 21 years without having previously obtained written consent. “For an offence of this kind,” said his Honour, when passing sentence, “the accused has rendered himself liable to a fine of £500 or penal servitude for five years, or both. This was no case in which two young people had been misled by passion but a case in which a man of mature years had married a girl of 18 years and married her against the wish of her mother.”
Accused was further charged with having taken Phyllis Ruth Shardon [sic], a female under the age of 21, out of the possession and against the will of Lucy Shardon [sic], with the intention of marrying her. Sthrowzki pleaded not guilty and was remanded.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Advertiser, Sat 14 Apr 1923 9
AN UNUSUAL CHARGE.
———
MARRIAGE OF GIRL UNDER 21.
Sydney, April 13.
A charge seldom heard in the courts was preferred against Frederick Bainbridge (22), at the Police Court to-day. He was charged with having abetted and assisted William Sthrowzki in the commission of the offence of marrying Ruth Shardon, a girl under the age of 21 years, without consent. He was remanded.
Mr Cohen, for the defence, asked that light bail be granted. The marriage, Mr Cohen said, was performed by the Registrar, and the man who had married the girl had received a sentence of six months. Bainbridge’s part in the affair was that of a witness. The bail was fixed at £30.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Advertiser, Sat 28 Apr 1923 10
MARRIED WITHOUT
CONSENT.
A CHARGE OF ABETTING.
Melbourne [sic], April 27.
At the Central Police Court to-day Frederick Bainbridge was charged with having abetted and assisted William Augustus Sthrowzki in the commission of the offence of marrying Ruth Skardon [sic], under the age of 21, without consent.
Evidence was given that when the marriage of Sthrowzki and Skardon was proposed the accused suggested that he should pass as the girl’s brother before the registrar, to whom he was introduced as Frederick Skardon.
The accused who had an epileptic fit in court, stated with difficulty that he did not know he had committed an office.
He was committed for trial.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Evening News, Wed 9 May 1923 11
STHROWZKI
————
WEEPS IN COURT
————
ABDUSCTION CHARGE
————
William Augustus Sthrowzki, 28, who was sentenced to six months’ hard labor in March for having married Phyllis Ruth Skardon, knowing her to be under 21, was to-day charged at Darlinghurst Sessions with having taken the girl from the custody of her parents.
Mr Maddocks Cohen, for the defence, submitted that as Sthrowzki had been punished for the major offence, he could not be tried for the minor; and further, that as the girl had gone to him of her own free will, there was no case to go to the jury.
Judge Beeby held that the two offences were separate; and that there was evidence of Sthrowzki having created in the girl’s mind a readiness to go to him. It was for the jury to decide if that evidence could be believed.
During a statement from the dock, Sthrowzki, who said he acted for the best by marrying the girl when she told him she was in trouble, was much affected, and frequently paused to wipe tears from his eyes.
The jury retired at 1 pm.
After two hours consideration, a verdict of not guilty was returned, and Sthrowzki was remanded to his former custody.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 10 May 1923 12
QUARTER SESSIONS.
(Before Judge Beeby.)
Mr WC Coyle, KC, Crown Prosecutor.
ABDUCTION CHARGE FAILS.
William Augustus Sthrowzki was charged with having, on September 28, 1922, abducted Phyllis Ruth Skardon, aged 18 years and 6 months, against the will of her mother, with intent to marry her. The girl stated that Sthrowzki, by falsely representing her condition, induced her to marry him. The defence was that the girl was a willing party to the marriage.
The accused was found not guilty, and was remanded to his former custody, he having been sentenced for a breach of the Marriage Act .
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
William Augustus Sthrowzki, Gaol photo sheet 13
![SRNSW: NRS2467, [3/6108], State Penitentiary photographic description book, 5 Sep 1922-24 Mar 1923, No. 19271, p. 456.](../../images/trials/1920-Sthrowzki-6108-gaol-photo-19271-William-Augustus-Sthrowzki.jpg "SRNSW: NRS2467, [3/6108], State Penitentiary photographic description book, 5 Sep 1922-24 Mar 1923, No. 19271, p. 456.") |
Gaol Photo Sheet - Transcribed Details
No. 19271
Date when Portrait was taken: 17-3-1923
Name: William Augustus Sthrowzki
|
Native place: Poland Year of birth: 30-1-1895 Arrived Ship: unknown Trade or occupation Religion: R. C. Education, degree of: R & W Height: 5' 9⅜" Weight On committal: 163 Colour of hair: Brown Colour of eyes: Grey |
Marks or special features: Small scar centre forehead, mole left thumbMarks or special features: Ship clasped hands & flowers outside left forearm. Dagger through heart and ribbon with DEATH BEFORE DISHONOR thereon outside right forearm |
|
(No. of previous Portrait ... ) CONVICTIONS |
|||||
|
Where and When |
Offence. |
Sentence |
|||
|
Glebe PC Sydney Q.S. |
16 15 |
5 3 |
1912 1923 |
Stealing Wilfully marrying a female under |
£3 or 6 weeks H.L. Imprisonment 6 months H.L |
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 28 Jun 1923 14
QUARTER SESSIONS.
(Before Judge Cohen.)
Crown Prosecutor, Mr WT Coyle, KC.
…
FALSE STATEMENT.
Frederick Astarita Bainbridge, 15 who pleaded guilty to making the false statement that his name was Frederick Skardon in a register of marriages, was sentenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour in Bathurst Gaol for six months.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Frederick Astarita Bainbridge, Gaol photo sheet 16
![SRNSW: NRS2467, [3/6109], State Penitentiary photographic description book, 17 Mar 1923-11 Aug 1923, No. 19482, p. –.](../../images/trials/1920-Sthrowzki-6109-gaol-photo-19482-Frederick-Astaria-Bainbridge.jpg "SRNSW: NRS2467, [3/6109], State Penitentiary photographic description book, 17 Mar 1923-11 Aug 1923, No. 19482, p. –.") |
Gaol Photo Sheet - Transcribed Details
No. 19482
Date when Portrait was taken: 28-6-1923
Name: Frederick Astarita Bainbridge
|
Native place: Scotland Year of birth: 29-8-1901 Arrived Ship: unknown Trade or occupation Religion: R. C. Education, degree of: R & W Height: 5' 5⅝" Weight On committal: 147 Colour of hair: Fair Colour of eyes: Grey |
Marks or special features: Gold tooth centre of upper jaw. Female bust & leaf outside left forearm. Thistle, dagger, flower & leaves outside right forearm. Two scars on back of head, scars on right side of abdomen, on left hip & on inside & outside right calf. |
|
(No. of previous Portrait ... ) CONVICTIONS |
|||||
|
Where and When |
Offence. |
Sentence |
|||
|
Albury PC Central PC Sydney Q.S Central PC |
22 27 26 10 |
1 4 6 9 |
1923 1923 1923 1923 |
Stealing Stealing Wilfully make a false statement for Stealing |
£5 or 21 days HL 3 months H.L. 6 months H.L. 3 months HL. |
William Ellis Johnson, 1926
Truth, Sun 31 Jan 1926 17
WHEN BILL JOHNSON
WENT INTO TRAINING
———◦———
ALLEGED CONFIDENCE YARN
WITH A BOXING FLAVOR.
One of the reasons for the failure of many confidence schemes is that the instigator does not pay strict attention to detail.
Mrs Esther Morgan, of Paddington, detailed to an interested court audience during the week her adventures with a man who posed, so she alleged, as Al King, the featherweight champion boxer. She said that he trained assiduously for a fictitious fight and restricted his diet to raw steak, eggs, sherry and toast.
William Ellis Johnson was the name of the man accused by Mrs Morgan of the deception, and he gave a complete denial to the charge. With Solicitor Penny on his side William fought nobly and well, and half way through the contest the referee, Magistrate Peisley, stopped the contest and awarded the verdict to Bill.
Mrs Morgan, in her complaint, stated that she was induced to part with £62, although the amount mentioned in the charge was only £40. The story of how she came to be separated from so much good money was tersely set out in her complaint.
This was to the effect that Johnson had represented to her that he was Al King, the champion featherweight boxer, and that he was being trained by that genial handler of pugs, Les O’Donnell, for a fight at Lithgow on December 19 of last year.
Therein, alleged the lady, lay the first part of the false pretence.
Johnson, who is a big-built sort of man, came into court with perfect sang froid. Mr Johnson was quite at his ease, and many friends of his were present to lend him their support.
TRUCULENT TRAINER
The gong for the opening round was sounded by Police Prosecutor Leonard, who called the first witness, William Leslie (“Les”) O’Donnell. The big massage and glove expert was more uncomfortable in the court than ever he had been in the ring.
He denied that he knew Johnson.
Did Les know Al King? Yes, he did, but the man in the dock was not the gentleman. Al King was a featherweight boxer, and, as far as Les knew, the only Al King.
When asked if he had ever trained Johnson, Les sent such a look of withering scorn at the prosecutor that the sergeant doubtless regretted the question.
The answer, said William Leslie O’Donnell, was plainly emphatically and absolutely in the negative.
Asked had he ever promised to pay any money over to two detectives on Johnson’s behalf, Les declaimed any connection with such a preposterous notion. That was the end of his examination, and it was a much-relieved Leslie who vacated the witness-box and made for the door.
There bounded into the box soon afterward a gentleman with the puzzling cognomen of William Augustus Sthrowzki. As soon as this man from modern Moscow got set he made haste to declaim any responsibility for any of Lenin’s little tricks. His name, he assured the court, in Sydney at all events, was plain Bill Woods. Having delivered himself Woods beamed contentedly on the gathering.
He knew Johnson, he averred, but had always understood that worthy’s name was Al King, and that he was a featherweight boxer. He had taken William to a party at Mrs Morgan’s place on September 24 last year, and had introduced him to the hostess as King. Mr Woods said further that while he was present no conversation took place between Johnson and Mrs Morgan in regard to a fight.
AFTER THE PARTY
A ripple of interest ran through the court when Mrs Morgan was called.
She detailed her introduction to Johnson, as so nobly set out by Woods. He told her that he was Al King, the champion featherweight boxer, and that he was to fight at Lithgow on December 19. He asked her would she stick to him financially, and, being a hard-headed business woman, she replied that, provided there was sufficient monetary inducement, she would have no objection to backing him.
The first time he put the “nips” in Johnson, according to Mrs Morgan’s evidence, showed that he was by no means backward. He wanted £3/3/- to join Les O’Donnell’s school, £2/10/- for an extra pair of trousers, which, unfortunately, he had damaged during an unseemly combat with a “roughneck,” and £1 to encase his feet in decent leather. She parted up without a quiver, and felt that she was doing a noble service in the cause made holy by the late lamented Marquis of Queensbury.
Mrs Morgan stated that he told her two “demons” were after him.
The names of these unfeeling creatures were Martin and Nelson, said Mrs Morgan, and they wanted money from him under threat of arrest and the cancellation of the fight.
Mrs Morgan, continuing, said she paid over the money, Johnson telling her that it was to be given to Les O’Donnell, who was conducting the negotiations. In November Johnson, said Mrs Morgan, told her that the detectives were not yet satisfied, and that he wanted £12 more to satisfy them. She said she gave him £12, and three weeks later a further £45.
RAW STEAK AND EGGS
During this time, said the lady, Johnson had been doing himself well at her place. He gave all the outward appearances of a man in the strictest training. He ate two pounds of raw steak in a day, partook of eggs and dry toast, and favoured dry sherry and milk as his liquid refreshments. He had informed her the fight was for £75 aside, and two days before the contest was to come off he put the nips in, she stated, for the fifth, and last time. He asked her for £7/17/-, the amount, he said, necessary to make up his share of the wager, and also to pay his fare to Lithgow. She gave him this amount. “I left myself,” she plaintively averred, “with just 1/3.”
Johnson, said Mrs Morgan, asked her to come to the station with him and see that he got his ticket. His mentor, O’Donnell, so she says he told her had departed per motor car for Lithgow. She accompanied him to the station and saw him board the train.
“I did not see him again,” said the lady, “until he was arrested.”
Mrs Morgan said further that she was a married woman, and added proudly that she did not drink.
The lady froze Mr Penny when he asked his next question. Replying to it she answered “No sir. When I was introduced to Johnson his figure and charm certainly did not attract me.”
Mrs Morgan admitted that before December 19 she discovered that Johnson was a married man, but that did not make her jealous. “I never got jealous,” she said stiffly.
Magistrate Peisley intimated that no good purpose would be served by further cross-examination. The police then asked Mrs Morgan how much in money Johnson owed her, and the lady exclaimed £62 12s.
The Magistrate intimated that no prima facie case had been made out, and discharged Johnson.
Sthrowzki v. Sthrowzki, 1928
The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 14 Jun 1928 18
IN DIVORCE.
(Before Mr Justice Owen.)
DECREES ABSOLUTE.
In the following suits the decrees nisi previously granted were made absolute:—
…
Phyllis Ruth Sthrowzki v William Augustus Sthrowzki,
1 The Inverell Times, Tue 10 Feb 1920, p. 4. Emphasis added.
2 SRNSW: NRS13495, [13/13062], Divorce and matrimonial cause case papers, No. 277, 1921.
3 The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 23 Jun 1921, p. 6.
4 The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 9 Feb 1922, p. 6.
5 Chronicle, Sat 4 Nov 1922 p. 38.
6 Evening News, (Sydney, NSW), Fri 16 Mar 1923, p. 8. Emphasis in original and added.
7 The Sydney Morning Herald, Sat 17 Mar 1923, p. 11.
8 The West Australian, Sat 17 Mar 1923, p. 10.
9 The Advertiser, Sat 14 Apr 1923, p. 13.
10 The Advertiser, Sat 28 Apr 1923, p. 15.
11 Evening News, (Sydney, NSW), Wed 9 May 1923, p. 7.
12 The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 10 May 1923, p. 6.
13 SRNSW: NRS2467, [3/6108], State Penitentiary photographic description book, 5 Sep 1922-24 Mar 1923, No. 19271, p. 456.
14 The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 28 Jun 1923, p. 6.
15 The digital WWI service record of Frederick Astarita Bainbridge can be viewed at: www.naa.gov.au
16 SRNSW: NRS2467, [3/6109], State Penitentiary photographic description book, 17 Mar 1923-11 Aug 1923, No. 19482, p. –. Emphasis added.
17 Truth, (Syd, NSW), Sun 31 Jan 1926, p. 13. Emphasis in original and added. Note: the same article appears in the following week’s newspaper. See Truth, (Syd, NSW), Sun 7 Feb 1926, p. 6.
18 The Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 14 Jun 1928, p. 8.