Sunday, June 17, 2012

Bendigo, and some family news

Fee and I rode to Bendigo this weekend on the W650.  The bike was, as usual, in fine form, purring along like an old Trumpie as I tested its rev range.  We had a great time on Saturday through the single-lane twists and turns of the Burke and Wills Track.  At Redesdale we stopped for tea.

Poor Fee was dressed in literally half a dozen layers, including my very manly armoured jacket.  Just after this photo was taken a dozen older riders pulled in and bailed us up for ten minutes - people are in love with my bike; which is fine with me...I am too!

Today we spent the day in wandering the suburbs of Bendigo then returned to Melbourne via Maldon and Castlemaine.  Fee had not seen Maldon before.  I took her to Tarrengower Tower, which she did not enjoy climbing

to look over Maldon

and the spectacular 360 degree view.  Mind you, it was also very, very cold so we did not quite relish 'the moment' as we might have on a different day.

We stayed with my aunty and her husband.  My aunty has been researching our family tree, and has found three newspaper articles about my great-grandfather and great-grandmother in my mother's father's line: Frederick and Nellie.  I have the scans of the newspaper but they are hard to read.  Here is a transcription:

From 1905 -


Before Hooper and Yager, J.P.’s, at the Fitzroy court on Wednesday, Frederick J. Clarke was proceeded against for having driven a motor-car at a greater speed than allowed by the local by-law.

Constable Exe**** said:- On August 2* the defendant drove a motor-car along Queen’s-parade, Clifton Hill, at a speed of 12 miles an hour.  The by-law sets the maximum speed for motor-cars at eight miles an hour. 

The defendant was fined */* **** *** ******. 

From 1933-


Mother Sent to Gaol

Nellie Clarke, aged 37 years, David street, Carlton, was charged at the Carlton Court with having, on September 20th, caused her child Raymond, aged seven months to be neglected, such neglect appearing likely to result in causing bodily suffering or permanent injury to the health of the child. She was also charged with having used indecent language in a public place and with having assaulted Plain clothes Constable F. J. Adam in the execution of his duty.

Constable Adam said that on September 30 he saw Mrs. Clarke lying very drunk on a bed. The child was being nursed by a drunk** man.  Mrs Beattie, an inspector for the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, took the baby and Mrs. Clarke followed her and witness to the street. She used indecent language and threw rubbish in witness's face. She kicked skin off his legs, split his lip, and threw a brick at him.

A previous sentence of imprisonment for two months for having neglected a child at Fitzroy was admitted by Mrs. Clarke.  She was fined£2, with 7/6 cost, on the charge of indecent  language, and £2 for having assulted Constable Adam. In each case default Was imprisonment for 14 days. On the charge of neglect she was sentenced to Imprisonment for three months.    

From 1940-


Domestic Quarrel

After a woman had given evidence in the Criminal Court yesterday, in a case in which her husband had been charged with having assaulted her, occasioning actual bodily harm, the Jury, at the direction of Mr Justice Gavan Duffy, brought in a verdict of not guilty and theman was discharged.

The accused was Frederick James Clarke, of Greensborough.  The doctor who treated Mrs Clarke stated that her injuries required 30 stitches.

Mr Book, KC., in opening the Crown case, said that the wife had received her injuries in a brawl with her husband.   After some words she attacked him with a toasting fork.  The wife received severe injuries about the head and neck, and cuts behind the left ear.  Under a mattress in a bedroom at the house, two pocket knives were found and there was blood on one of them.  There was also blood on the handle of a bread knife.

Mrs Clarke said that her husband came home about 2.30 pm.  She said, “You drunken --- where have you been?” He replied, “Shut up or I will choke you.” She ran at him with a toasting fork, and lunged at him.  He picked up a knife to defend himself.  She denied that 30stitches had been inserted in her wounds, and said that the stitches numbered only a dozen and one.

When another witness entered the witness-box His Honour said that he did not wish to hear any more evidence.  In addressing the Jury he said that some-times wives were difficult creatures both at home and abroad.  The jury would have observed that the wife did not want to say anything that would reflect on her husband In the circumstances the best thing would be to find the accused not guilty.

Without leaving the box the foreman announced that that was the unanimous verdict of the Jury.

In discharging the accused His Honour said that he should go home and treat his wife better after the way she had treated him in the witness box.

No comments:

Post a Comment