Signature spurious, witness says

SYDNEY: A second handwriting witness gave evidence in the District Criminal Court yesterday at the trial of Mr Ian Sinclair, a former Cabinet Minister, that signatures on the 1975 annual returns of three funeral companies were spurious.

Mr James Buglio, of Balgowlah Heights, told the court there were 15 gross dissimilarities between the genuine signature of Mr George M. Sinclair and those on the annual company returns.

Mr George Sinclair was auditor and financial controller of the three funeral companies and the father of Mr Ian Sinclair. He died in January, 1976.

Mr Ian Sinclair has pleaded not guilty to three charges of forging and three of uttering, each with intent to defraud, and three of making false statements in the annual returns.

The funeral companies are Allan Walsh (Hornsby) Pty Ltd, Allan Walsh Pty Ltd of Chatswood and G. Beavan Pty Ltd of Bowral.

Last Tuesday a police handwriting witness, Detective-Sergeant Denis Wardrobe, gave evidence that the signatures of Mr George M. Sinclair on the three company returns were not genuine. He could not say who was the author of the signatures.

Mr Buglio, a private document examiner, said many facets of the spurious signatures were totally alien to the writer of the genuine signatures.

There was poor line quality caused by the lack of speed in writing and indications that the pen had been lifted from the paper and then carefully replaced.

Mr Jack Hiatt, QC, for the Crown,

asked Mr Buglio whether the characteristics of the spurious signatures could

have been caused by the writer being seriously ill or having drugs, medication

or alcohol.

Mr Buglio said that this was ” extremely remote ” and ” nigh on impossible “. One would expect some deterioration, but there would still be some writing habits.

“You would not expect that a sick person would have the visual activity nor muscular control to replace the pen when it had been lifted”, he said.

In reply to Mr Murray Gleeson, QC, for Mr Sinclair, he agreed he had not known when he gave evidence at committal proceedings in January that cheques

used as a comparison to the annual returns were signed about a week before the date they bore.

The trial will continue today.

5 — Forged signature alleged

On 12th April 1976 Ian Sinclair filed with the Corporate Affairs Commission Annual Returns for the year ended 31st December 1975 for Allan Walsh Chatswood, Allan Walsh Hornsby and G. Beavan.

These Returns were handwritten, all the writing on them being his writing with the exception of some signatures. The Returns contained information that each company held an Annual General Meeting on 31st December 1975 and that accounts were laid before each Annual General Meeting. In fact, no Annual General meeting of any of these companies was held on 31st December 1975 and no accounts could have been presented as none had been prepared. Ian Sinclair, at the time he filed these documents, was well aware of both these matters.

Each Return contains in it a certificate purporting to have been signed by George Sinclair as auditor of the company, certifying that the accounts for the year ended 30th June 1975 of each company had been audited.

When I took evidence from Mrs Dunkerley [ an employee of Mr George Sinclair ] she expressed doubts about the genuineness of the signature “George M. Sinclair” on the 1975 Annual Return of G. Beavan. I also showed the signatures on these documents to Miss Rene Jones who had worked for George Sinclair for forty-four years and who was familiar with his signature. She expressed doubt about these signatures, but was not certain.

I first asked Ian Sinclair about the signatures on the 1975 Annual Return of G. Beavan when I took evidence from him on 3rd July 1978. He identified for me his signatures on that document, and pointing then to the signature “George M. Sinclair” he said:

“That is my father’s signature, George Sinclair, Auditor. This is while he was ill, yes, that’s my signature.

Q. That’s your signature.

A. My signature as Director and my father’s as auditor. This was made up while my father was critically ill, and, I am afraid, only partly able to communicate.

Q. Can you recall when that document was prepared?

A. It would have been prepared at the time of my father’s serious illness

before his death.

Q. As I understand it, your father was seriously ill for some considerable time.

A. That’s right, but I mean this was in the last days. This was made up to 31st December. It was signed by him, this is certainly his signature here, George M. Sinclair, and it was prepared, it would have been before his death. In other words it was the beginning of January. It is a fairly faint hand at that stage”.

On 26th January 1979 I read out to Ian Sinclair what Mrs Dunkerley said about the signature on the G. Beaven Return for 1975, and he said, although I did not specifically ask him a question about this signature:

“My query is that I certainly had not signed my father’s signature on anything and I am concerned that there seems to be a suggestion with Exhibit 82 that it’s not his signature. I certainly didn’t put it there and I am at a loss to understand who would have put it there if my father didn’t put it there and that’s why I’m concerned”.

Later on the same day he said: “I certainly have not signed my father’s signature on anything at any time and if I ever have, and I didn’t in this instance, I’ve always put pp. I. Sinclair or I.S. or such. I haven’t on any of these documents for any of these companies”.

Since I commenced my Inquiry I have obtained possession of hundreds of cheques bearing the signature of George Sinclair, and I have seen his writing on numerous other documents. The three signatures, “George M. Sinclair”, on three Annual Returns appeared to me to be quite unlike the signature of George M. Sinclair found, for example, on the cheques in his personal account. On 26th July 1979 I showed these three original Annual Returns to Ian Sinclair, drawing his attention to the signatures purporting to be those of his father, and I asked him to tell me when those signatures were put on the documents. He told me that these documents were among papers left by his father at the time of his death, that his father had told him he had started to prepare the Annual returns and he wanted him to conclude them and file them.

Ian Sinclair told me that he had found these documents some time after the death of his father, i.e. after 20th January 1976.

When I asked him to point out to me the handwriting of his father on any portion of these documents he was unable to do so, and said that the signature was not exactly like his father’s normal signature but he presumed that they were signed before he died.

When I put to him that, apart from the signatures on these documents, all details were written by him, in his own handwriting, he agreed except that the ruling out of irrelevant portions of the forms was done by somebody else as, according to him, he did not have a ruler. He said that he had had discussions with his father about these companies and had believed that everything was in order, although he realised, in fact, no Annual General Meetings had been held and no accounts had been presented. He also agreed that what he was putting to me was that he had found three bland documents with the only writing on them being, in each case, the signature “George M. Sinclair”. He said that they weren’t just blank documents, however, as they were connected with papers relating to each of these three companies, and it was because of that that he was able to fill in the details on them.

There are in my custody files of George Sinclair relating to each of these three companies, Each file contains, amongst other things, in George Sinclair’s own handwriting information which was apparently included in the 1974 Annual Return of the company. Ian Sinclair told me that these documents were with a lot of other documents relating to these companies at his mother’s house. I asked him specifically whether he placed the signature “George M. Sinclair” on any of these documents and he denied doing this, claiming these signatures were on the documents when he found them and that the documents, apart from the signatures “George M. Sinclair” were, in each instance, blank.

When I put to him that he had lodged the documents without checking whether an audit had been carried out or an Annual General Meeting had been held, he told me that he presumed an audit had been carried out for each company be cause his father signed the form as auditor. He also said that his father’s signature varied from time to time and that he sometimes left things in blank. He again added that he knew the accounts had not been completed and an Annual General Meeting had not been held.

In the bundles of papers made available to me there was a file of George Sinclair’s containing a number of blank Annual Returns; none of these had been signed. The Annual Return of Sinclair Pastoral Company which was typed and signed by George Sinclair as auditor was filed on 15th January 1976, something which turned out to be of some significance.

I found it difficult to accept Ian Sinclair’s evidence that he had found three Annual Returns which were blank except for the signatures of his father and that he thereby felt en titled, because they were connected with documents to the companies, to complete them and file them. Although he knew that none of the companies had held an Annual General Meeting no accounts had been presented, and, obviously, despite his denials, that no accounts had been audited, he still lodged documents. Even if this explanation were true, it says little for his sense of responsibility as a director of these companies (as he believed himself to be) to file documents in such circumstances. I also found it difficult to reconcile this evidence with the evidence given by him on 3rd July 1978 that the 1975 G. Beavan Annual Return was prepared before the death of his father and that the signature “George M. Sinclair” was “certainly” the signature of his father.

Since I was not satisfied with these explanations, and the signature “George M. Sinclair” on these Annual Returns did not appear to me to be genuine, I arranged for Det Sgt Denis William Wardrobe, the Officer-in-Charge of the Document Examination Unit, Scientific Investigation Section of NSW Police Force, to examine these signatures and to compare them with signatures of George Sinclair on cheques signed by him. I also invited Det Sgt Wardrobe to compare the signatures with the signature “George M. Sinclair” appearing on the 1975 Annual return for Sinclair Pastoral Company. Det Sgt Wardrobe, after he had carried out his examination, told me that the signatures “George M. Sinclair” appearing on the Annual Returns of Allan Walsh Chatswood, Allan Walsh Hornsby and G. Beavan were not genuine signatures and bore the elements of forgery. He said that they lacked speed, were slowly written, shown by hesitancy, that the size of the letters was not constant, that they varied quite considerably, that they were written slowly and less skilfully than the signatures on each of the cheques, showing some similarity with the genuine signatures, and said that the only logical conclusions that he could find from the examination was that somebody has either had a genuine signature from which to copy or it was copied from memory by somebody who knew the signature of the person involved.

Amongst other signatures looked at by Det Sgt Wardrobe were signatures on cheques signed by George Sinclair within a few days of his death on 20th January 1976. In his opinion, none of those signatures showed any loss of fluency, despite the fact that they were written by a person close to death….

At the request of McGormly [ Mr Ian Sinclair’s counsel ] I permitted Ian Sinclair to have the signatures and documents examined by Det Sgt Wardrobe looked at by Mrs Patricia Schutz, a person who is a qualified handwriting expert. She examined these signatures, without being made aware of Det Sgt Wardrobe’s finding, and came to exactly the same conclusions as he did….

[ The documents ] were filed months after his father’s death and at a time when he realised that the affairs of these companies were in a mess. He obviously felt it necessary to file the documents himself; otherwise, he could have asked Mr Haylen, who was already at work trying to prepare accounts for these companies, to file them….

I do not accept Ian Sinclair’s explanation that, after his father’s death, he found three blank documents with three signatures purporting to be his father’s, although not looking like them, connected with three bundles of papers concerning the three companies. I also do not accept that these documents were completed before his father’s death and singed by his father. The circumstances of the matter, his unacceptable and inconsistent explanations, the lack of motive on the part of anyone else, including his father, to forge these signatures, coupled with his filling in and lodging documents he knew to be false, convinced me that these signatures were forgeries and that he was the author of them. It follows from this that I regard his denials to me as being false,, and deliberately so.

POLICE COURTS.

Charge against Constables.

In the Summons Division of the Central Police Court yesterday, before Mr. G.W. F. Addison, S.M., Andrew Travers and Thomas Scott, respectively, being constables of New South Wales Police Force, were proceeded against by Sub-Inspector Bell for misconduct, in having, on 16th March, used unnecessary violence to Patrick Maloney, a prisoner in their custody.

The cases were heard together.

Mr Carter Smith appeared for the defendants.

Sub-inspector Bell stated that he laid the informations against the respective defendants by instructions from the superintendent of Police.

He produced reports from defendants, a letter from Mr. Sleath, and one from Maloney.

The defendants were men of good character, efficient and good constables.

After the arrest Constable Travers applied to witness for a summons against Mr Sleath, M.L A.

If witness had acceded, the case would have been heard that day.

If witness had had his way, a summons would have issued, even though witness did receive a letter from Mr. Sleath.

Richard Sleath stated that on 16th March he was in Pitt street about 1 p.m., and saw the defendants opposite the Labour Bureau in a crowd.

They seemed to be engaged in a scuffle.

He saw Constable Travers next the wall with his right hand raised as if striking someone. There was a transit officer with the defendants.

Travers had the right and Scott the left arm of a man, and the transit officer pushed.

Just as witness got up the defendants seemed to stumble.

The prisoner, who was handcuffed, had blood on his face.

Witness saw Travers strike him about the face somewhere, and then catch him by the throat as if attempting to choke him.

Witness asked Travers to desist, but he threatened to tun witness in.

Witness walked to the police station with Travers.

When he threatened to run witness in Travers was so excited that froth came from his mouth. A few seconds later he said, ” Go away, or I’ll lock you up.”

Witness took Travers‘s number. He did not see the other defendant do anything, and had no complaint to make about him.

To Mr. Smith : He did not put his hand on Scott‘s shoulder, and did not remember the exact words used. Prisoner seemed to be resisting right through. Witness was not dragged out of the crowd by a man. He wrote a letter to the effect that Travers struck the man, but did not think he complained of both constables.

P. H. Stack, tram conductor, stated that he saw the defendants with a prisoner between them, and a transit officer behind.

Prisoner resisted all the time with all his force, using both legs and arms.

The man knocked one of the defendants down. Witness thought the constables exercised great patience.

He did not see either of them strike the prisoner. He saw Mr. Sleath rush into the crowd in a very excited manner, and put his face into the constable’s face. He also put his hand on the constable and followed him for some time. The man was not in any way ill-used.

To Mr. Smith : The man got twice as bad after Mr. Sleath came along, jumping and leaping more than ever. Mr. Sleath was most excited.

W. Connelly gave corroborative evidence.

Transit officer Edwin MAY stated that he saw prisoner struggling with Travers in Pitt-street. Scott came up afterwards. Prisoner who was handcuffed, made a blow at Travers, knocking his helmet off ; and witness jumped off the tram, and went to assist Travers.

Prisoner, resisted violently, and at one time they were all on the ground together.

Near the station a man came and said, ” Come, I won’t allow this.” Witness and a constable told him to go away or he’d get locked up.

Someone shouted, ” That’s Mr Sleath the member. ” Someone then took Mr. Sleath away.

There was no violence used to the prisoner, who next morning pleaded guilty to all the charges, and said that he was mad drunk at the time. Mr. Sleath appeared as if he had had drink, and was very excited.

For the defence Constable Andrew Travers stated that no unnecessary violence was used to the prisoner witness had in charge three-quarters of an hour before Constable Scott came up. After Mr. Sleath interfered the prisoner became more violent, and said, ” Old man, I’ll make them carry me. ”

Constable Thomas Scott gave similar evidence.

The case was dismissed.

CONSTABLE MAY.

We regret to learn that Senior Constable Edwin MAY, of Nambucca, is about to be discharged from the police force on the 30th inst., he having just returned from Sydney, where he was subjected to an examination of three doctors, who have certified him as being unfit for further police duty.

It is to be hoped that after 13 years of faithful police duty, during which time he distinguished himself in the arrests of several murderers and other noted defenders, that the Government will certainly reward this worthy officer in accordance with his merit, as he now has to start afresh in the world with only the use of one arm, the loss of the use of the other arm, through an injury received whilst doing his duty, being now the cause of his discharge from the service.

We think that the public throughout the electorate should certainly make some move in the matter to show that they appreciate the services of this noted police officer, as we think he is deserving of some recognition at their hands, moreover as he now is compelled to leave the service where he has devoted the best part of his life to the interests of the public of this colony.

Senior Constable E. May has proved himself to be a most fearless officer.

When station on the Bellinger River, as it is still in the memory of many, the clever arrest of the New Zealand armed murderer John Caffrey, who, we may say, the moments this notorious murderer arrived on the Bellinger, was speedily deprived of his leaded revolver and quietly arrested by this clever officer, who, for that arrest, was accorded great credit and praise by the public press throughout the whole of the colonies.

We wish him prosperity in whatever sphere of life he may now have to follow.

He is also a member of the Masonic Order and we trust that he will not be forgotten by them now that their assistance is needed.

FAMOUS CRIMES RECALLED.

There are many of the older residents of both the Bellinger and Nambucca who will remember Constable Edwin MAY, who for several years was stationed at Bellingen, and subsequently at Macksville, about 20 years since. Senior-Constable May has just retired from the force, and referring to the fact the “Evening News” becomes reminiscent, and says :—

First-class Constable Edwin MAY, who is about to retire from the N.S. Wales police force on pension, had, during his career as a trooper in the country districts, rather exciting experiences, and it was through his instrumentality that many offenders against law and order were brought to justice.

During an interview with an “Evening News” reporter, MAY said he was a native of London, and arrived in Queensland in 1866, when he was but a youth. He gravitated from the northern metropolis to “out back.” when he became a stockman on Mooloolman Station, then owned by Mr. Augustus Barton, where he was employed for about 5 years. During his spare time, when not engaged in rounding up cattle, his occupation was breaking in horses, at which he became an expert. Tiring of this life, however, he severed his connection with the station, and proceeded to the Mount Perry Copper Mine in the Burnett district, where he followed for a time the occupation of a miner.

After some experience in the mining business, he started on his own account in carrying copper from the mine at Maryborough, which at that time was not connected with the railway system, and he continued up to 1876 to follow the same business.

JOINING THE FORCE.

He then came to Sydney and joined the Mounted Police.

After being trained at the old Belmore Barracks he was transferred to the Maitland district as a trooper under Mr. Morrison, the then superintendent.

Five years later he was made a first-class constable, and was sent to the Macleay district, and put in charge of Boat Harbour station ( now Bellingen ).

In July, 1885, came Constable MAY‘s opportunity of showing to his superior officers what his capabilities were.

COFF’S HARBOUR TRAGEDY.

The particulars of a most revolting murder at Coffs Harbour — at that time a small settlement on the coast — was reported to the authorities.

The particulars given were that a young man named Mat Matteson, a young Russian Finn, was missing, and on inquiries being instituted no trace of his whereabouts could be ascertained.

Constable MAY was deputed to investigate the matter.

On reaching a hut where the missing man and a countryman of his named Matthew Friske resided, the latter explained that his mate had left, and indicated to MAY the direction in which he thought the missing man had gone.

MAY, however, made an examination of the hut’s contents, and discovered an American axe which had, in his opinion, something like bloodstains on it.

Friske, in answer to a question, said that the stains were only rust.

At the same time MAY noticed a shirt hanging up, having on it apparently what were bloodstains.

When Friske was asked how the stains came to be on the shirt, which he claimed to be his own, he replied that the stains must have remained on it since he killed a pig a couple of months previously.

A BASKETFUL OF BONES.

At the same time MAY noticed some trees burning a little distance away. He and others went to investigate.

On stirring up the ashes nearly a basketful of fragments of a skull, jaw, leg, ribs, and other portions of a human body were discovered. They were so much charred that they could scarcely bear touching, as they crumbled away at the least pressure.

Friske was arrested by MAY on suspicion of having committed the murder.

ANOTHER GRUESOME FIND.

Later on, a boy on his way home from school discovered the leg of a man lying on an old road, with a sack covering it.

MAY, on being informed of that, picked the limb up and discovered that it had been chopped off at the knee.

When MAY had Friske in custody, he had a rather trying time, as there was no lockup near Coff’s Harbour, so he had to handcuff the prisoner to himself all night.

MAY was, however, rewarded for his trouble, for on the day following upon Friske‘s arrest he described to MAY how he had killed Matteson with an axe, and cut the body up and burned it with the exception of the right leg, which he threw away in the bush.

An inquest was held by Mr. T. C. McKell, P.M., the then coroner, and now a stipendiary magistrate at Newcastle, who ordered the limb to be buried.

The instruction was carried out, and after a lapse of three weeks the Attorney-General ( the late Mr. W. B. Dalley ) ordered that the leg should be exhumed and conveyed to Grafton in spirits for production at the trial of Friske.

CONTRACTED BLOOD POISONING.

In carrying out that portion of his duties MAY nearly lost his life, as he contracted blood poisoning in his left arm and had to go into Grafton Hospital for treatment.

He remained in the institution for about four months, and had no fewer than 11 operations performed on him, which resulted in him losing, for a time, the use of his arm, which gradually grew better.

Friske was executed in the Grafton gaol in December, 1885.

GREAT BARRIER MURDER.

The next episode in Constable MAY‘s career was in connection with what was known as the New Zealand “Barrier Murder.”

In June, 1886, a man named Robert Taylor, a resident, of Tryphena Bay, N.Z., was found murdered.

Two men named John Caffery ( other article name him as McCaffery ) and Henry Albert Penn were supposed to be concerned in the affair.

It was said they stole a small vessel, the Sovereign of the Seas, in which they cleared out from N. Z., accompanied by a young woman and a dog.

After three months at sea it was found that they had scuttled the vessel near Trial Bay, ( NSW ) after they had landed provisions somewhere on the coast between the Hastings and Manning.

The fact was first brought to light through a board being washed ashore near Port Macquarie, having on it the letters “reign.”

This led the authorities to believe that it belonged to the missing ‘Sovereign,’ and the police were naturally put on their metal to get hold of the persons charged with the murder, as a good reward was offered for their arrest.

Naturally anxious to gain the reward, MAY disguised himself as a swagman, with “bluey” up, and started out to do the “Sherlock Holmes” trick.

When near Deep Creek he met a man carrying a swag, and from the description of the wanted man as furnished by the “Police Gazette,” MAY formed the opinion he had come across one of the men, viz., John Caffery.

From the information supplied, Caffery was supposed to be an individual of most dangerous tendencies. His age was about 36, and a powerfully built man. He could, it is said, swing a 200lb. bag of flour with ease, and was described as a man of unbridled passions.

To him Ned Kelly was the ideal of a hero, and it was known that he had expressed the intention of some day seizing a craft, and making for Australia to join or organise a band of bushrangers.

Having in view the characteristics of the wanted man, MAY was naturally careful in his procedure, more especially as it had been reported that Caffery was armed with a loaded revolver.

“I feigned to be looking for work,” MAY told the reporter, “and I asked him where I could get a job. He said there was no work the way he came, so he and I agreed to go together to the Clarence district as mates, where we would probably, get a job of canecutting.”

After crossing the Bellinger punt, MAY had a good survey of his companion, to endeavour to find out where he carried his revolver, and having ascertained this, he revealed his identity as a N.S.W. constable, and quickly placed the handcuffs on the man, who denied being identical with Caffery.

In his swag was found a six-chambered loaded revolver, as well as eleven spare cartridges.

A few days after Caffery was lodged in the lockup, and when shown a photograph purporting to be his, he admitted he was Caffery, and gave information where his late companion Penn was to be found camped on the beach near Trial Bay.

EXTRADITION OF THE MURDERERS.

Both Caffery and Penn were extradited to New Zealand, where they were placed upon trial, found guilty of the murder, and eventually hanged.

For his share in the matter MAY was promoted to the rank of senior-constable, and was given a substantial portion of the reward offered for the arrest of the murderers.

ABORIGINAL AND HIS GIN.

Another arrest was made by MAY under somewhat exciting circumstances of an aboriginal named Sandy, for murdering his gin.

Although a warrant had been in existence for some nine months, it was found difficult to locate the man.

MAY received information which led him to believe that he was at the blacks’ camp at the Bellinger River. On going there he found him among a mob of thirty aboriginals and took him into custody, but before he was able to get his prisoner from the camp MAY had to point his revolver to keep the others at bay, as they threatened to kill him with their tomahawks.

Sandy was subsequently brought to Sydney, where he was tried for the crime before the late Mr. Justice Windeyer, found guilty of manslaughter only, and sentenced to twelve months gaol.

A CITY TRANSIT OFFICER.

In 1889, when MAY was stationed at Nambucca River, the arm which was previously injured while in the execution of his duty, became very weak, and he was compelled to come to Sydney for medical advice.

After being examined by the Government doctors, he was certified as being unfit for further service, and discharged from the force.

That was very unfortunately for him, as the Inspector-General, Mr. Fosbery, told him that he intended to promote him to sergeant.

In 1891 the arm was well again, when Mr. Fosbery found him employment under the old Transit Commission, with which body he was connected for about nine years, until the present Traffic Act came into force.

REJOINED THE FORCE.

MAY was then allowed to re-enter the force as a first-class constable, and did traffic duty for about five years.

Through failing health he was transferred to the Newtown division, where he did station duty right up to the time he went on leave, the other day, prior to finally severing his connection with the force.

Reminiscences from Bygone Days.

Gloucester’s first police OFFICER.

Mr. Edwin MAY revisits Gloucester after Fifty Years.

Mr. Edwin MAY, father of the City Coroner, Mr. E. A. MAY, and who established the first police station in the Gloucester district, arrived at Gloucester on Wednesday last on a short visit.

In 1877 Mr. MAY was a constable stationed at Dungog, and was sent, with Constable David Cowan, of Stroud, up to Copeland to investigate the case of a man who had been killed there in a brawl.

Copeland was then known as Back Creek, Barrington, and there were about 1000 miners on the field.

FILLED MINISTER’S BOOTS WITH PORT WINE.

It continued to be called Back Creek until about two years after thee field was discovered, when Mr. Henry Copeland, member for the Northern Goldfields, visited the place. This was in 1878.

The miners gave him a wonderful reception and banquet, “filling him with champagne and even, his boots with Port wine.”

They then named the place Copeland in his honour, and Copeland it has remained to this day.

While here Mr. MAY received instructions to open a police station at Gloucester. This was in December 1877.

This first building was a hut on the site of the present Commercial Hotel.

He was appointed the Police Officer and acting Clerk of Petty Sessions. Mr. E. Sharpe was the first magistrate.

The following year 1878, a police station and court house were built at Copeland, the contractor being a man named Priddle.

EARLY GLOUCESTER.

At this time Gloucester had an hotel on the corner, where Phillips’ now stands, kept by a man named Harvey Robinson, who had married the widow of the previous licensee, Mr. Brown.

After Mr. MAY was here some months another hotel was established by George Gorton, who with a man, who was only known by the name of Long Jack, was drowned in the billabong opposite the town.

The first post office was near Street & Parish‘s store, and was kept by a man named Herkes.

Afterwards it was near McLean‘s blacksmith shop, the postmasters being Brideskirt and Studdart.

Mr. MAY remained in Gloucester till June 1880, when he was transferred to Maitland, and from thence to Bullahdelah in 1881, where he was promoted to first-class constable.

From there he went to Paterson and in 1884 to Boat Harbour — now Bellingen.

CAPTURED THREE MURDERERS

It was while in the North Coast district that Mr. MAY made a name for himself in the force by capturing, on different occasions, three men wanted for murder.

The first he laid by the heels was Matthew Frith, who was Wanted for the murder of his mate, Matthew Matterson near Coff’s Harbour in 1885.

Frith was sentenced to death by Judge Fawcett and paid the full penalty for his crime at Grafton Gaol, being the first execution at that place.

Mr. MAY remembers that the accused was defended by Mr. Gibson who was afterwards Judge Gibson, and who was killed in a motor accident.

On another occasion he arrested an aborigine for the murder of his gin, and despite the menaces of the whole tribe, brought his prisoner safely to the lock-up.

THE BARRIER ISLAND MURDER

But the most exciting episode of his career was the arrest of John McCaffrey, who with an accomplice, Henry Penn, murdered Robert Taylor at the Barrier Islands, New Zealand.

McCaffrey was the captain of the ketch, “Sovereign of the Seas,” which belonged to the Auckland firm of Henderson and Spraggin, and traded down along the New Zealand coast from Auckland, visiting the Barrier Islands.

McCaffrey had fallen in love with the daughter of a settler named Robert Taylor, but his attentions were unwelcome both to the daughter and the parents. He had said to the father and mother, “I will have Annie,” — which was the girl’s name.

Accompanied by Penn, who had with him a girl of 15 named Grace Graham, whom he had picked up in the streets of Auckland, McCaffrey visited the Barrier Island and went ashore in the dingy.

They went to Taylor‘s residence and the old man came to the door. Penn asked him for a pound of butter, when McCaffrey said, “We have come to get Annie,” — who was about 20 years of age.

The girl heard them and got away through a back window.

When McCaffrey found the girl was not there he gave Taylor five minutes to live if she was not found.

Penn then got hold of Taylor and forced him to his knees and McCaffrey blew his brains out with a revolver.

They afterwards got on board their boat and put out to sea and hoisted a black flag.

After three months at sea they came in sight of land, which they thought was America, but which proved to be the Queensland coast.

They travelled along south until they came off Sydney Heads, which McCaffrey recognised.

They then turned and went back north, and when between Trial Bay and Crescent Head — near the Macleay — they went ashore in the dingy and made a camp.

They then scuttled the vessel, which sank.

A fortnight after a gale came up and parts of the vessel were washed ashore at Port Macquarie, and recognised as parts of the “Sovereign of the Seas,” in which the New Zealand murderers had escaped.

All the police along the coast were instructed to keep a sharp look out for the fugitives.

Shortly after landing, the men quarrelled over the girl and decided to fight a duel on the beach with revolvers.

This was prevented by the girl who threatened McCaffrey with a loaded gun. McCaffrey then left them.

He made a swag out of a black rug and rolled it collar fashion. He came to the Macleay Heads and got across to the Nambucca side and walked on towards the Bellingen Heads.

At Deep Creek a contractor, George Moore, gave him a job for two or three days to paint the bridge. He then continued on his way towards Bellingen Heads.

Constable MAY decided that his best chance of coming in contact with the man, if he was in his district, was to disguise himself as a swagman.

Consequently the third day after he had received his instructions to keep a look-out for the wanted men, he packed his swag on an old pony and started away.

He went through Fernmount and crossed the punt at South Arm.

He met several people whom he knew, but in his disguise they did not recognise him.

He went on towards Deep Creek, and about five miles along the road he met a man carrying a swag collar fashion over his left shoulder.

Sergeant MAY said good day to him, and the man replied and said, “Are you looking for work? There is none the way I came, and I wouldn’t advise you to go that way.”

The man had a close cropped beard and was apparently about 35 years of age, and also had his ears pierced. In the description given of him, McCaffrey was wearing gold earrings, and was stated to carry a loaded revolver.

When he said there was no work, Constable MAY said, “Well I’ll go back, I can get work cane cutting on the Clarence. McCaffrey answered, “That’s where I’m making for, we’ll go mates if you like.” They shook hands on it, and Constable MAY said, “Take your swag off, and I’ll tie it on the old pony’.’ He said, “No, I’ll carry it. It is not heavy.”

Constable MAY said, “Please yourself.”

They walked side by side, the Constable being careful not to mention New Zealand, for he knew the man carried a loaded revolver, and would use it on the slightest suspicion.

They came to the punt, a hand one worked by a boy named Box.

McCaffrey then, for the first time, took his swag off, laying it down at his feet.

When the punt was half way over Constable MAY said, “I am a Constable and I am looking for a man of your description. I want to search you.” He put his hands up, but no weapon could be found. The Constable then picked up the swag and a fully loaded revolver rolled out. It had been in the fold of the swag and McCaffrey had had his right hand on the trigger the whole time they had been together.

As soon as it rolled out Constable MAY grabbed it, and handcuffed him.

McCaffrey said to him, “Had I known you were a Constable I would have shot you like a dog. I had intended to shoot you coming along the road, but I did not think you had enough on you to make it worth while. I had intended to shoot the police down one after another rather than they would take me, and then shoot my self.”

Constable MAY said to him, “Where is your mate, Penn?” McCaffrey said, “Penn is dead and the girl too. They were drowned, but I swam ashore.”

This was the first the police knew of a girl being with them.

Shortly after Constable McLennan, at Trial Bay, was telling Dr. Casement of the capture of McCaffrey and that Penn, and a girl with him, had been drowned, when the Constable’s son said, “Oh, there’s a man and a girl living on the beach.”

McLennan went down. They admitted their identity, and he arrested them.

The trio were eventually remanded to Auckland, where the girl turned Queen’s evidence and was acquitted and McCaffrey and Penn found guilty and hanged.

No one in New Zealand could be found to hang the men, so the New South Wales hangman, Howard — known as “Nosey Bob” — went over and did the job.

The girl, Grace Graham, returned to Sydney where, known to the police as Zara White and many other aliases, she led a life of crime, dying about 8 years ago in Long Bay gaol.

After attaining the rank of Senior Constable, Mr. MAY retired from the force on account of an injury to the arm, and from 1880 to 1900 was a member of the Transit Commission in Sydney, and when their duties were taken over by the police, again joined the force as a traffic officer, being last attached to the No. 5 Newtown Station, finally retiring in 1912.

Mr. MAY has now reached the age of 79 years, yet is wonderfully active and retains the same keenness of memory that characterised him in the heyday of his life.

MR. E. E. MAY.

Ex-Sergeant’s Death

Mr. Edwin Erskine MAY, retired police sergeant and father of Mr. E. A. MAY, S.M., ex-City Coroner, died on Saturday, aged 82.

He joined the police force at 21, and served in Sydney and at Dungog, Gloucester, Bulahdelah, Bellingen, and Macksville.

In 1885, when stationed at Bellingen ( then called Boat Harbour ) he arrested in one year three men charged with murder.

He was out of the force for eight years with a hand injury, but returned to spend 22 years in the traffic, police.

” Women In Blue ” to Lecture In Schools

Two young women who will soon be familiar figures to all school children in the district are Special Constables Vira Jenkins and Sue Elliott.

Special Constables Sue Elliott and Vira Jenkins make the acquaintance of some of the ‘props’ they will use daring their lectures to school children. The puppets include a policeman, a small girl and a villain. Posters, cut-out paper figures and miniature road signals are also part of their equipment.

They started work yesterday with the Newcastle school lecturing section of the police force and will assist Constables D. Pike and R. Mann in covering the 266 schools in the district.

While on duty the women wear the navy uniform and wide – brimmed hat designed for women police. They will travel to schools by bus or in the utility belonging to the section. Both are from Newcastle.

Miss Jenkins, who was a nurse before she joined the police force six years ago, will be living at home for the first time for years. She has been four years with the school lecturing section in Sydney.

Mrs. Elliott is a policeman’s widow. She joined up only two months ago and has been in Sydney to train for the work.

With her six-year-old son, she is now living at Lambton.

Traffic Duty

As well as lecturing at schools on road safety, snake bite, fire hazards ” and anything else affecting the safety of children, ” Miss Jenkins said, they will also do traffic duty at school crossings. ”

As soon as we have learnt our lines, we will ‘use puppets in our lectures, ” she said. ” We have to rig up a special stage and dress the puppets.

They have been used now in Sydney for some time and are immensely popular with the kiddies. ”

Miss Jenkins said there were now 36 women in the N.S.W. Police Force, 18 in uniform and 18 in plain clothes. This was the maximum number allowed and had been specified by an Act of Parliament.

ON MONDAY Constables D. Pike and R. Mann, of the Road Safety Control branch, gave a demonstration at Mayfield West School and Special Constables Vira Jenkins and Sue Elliott, who accompanied them, concentrated on the infants’ department where the children were taught road safety by means of nursery rhymes and poems.

Newcastle and District.

– DRESSMAKING

Stage 1:

TECHNICAL EDUCATION

Further Examination Results SYDNEY, Tuesday.

The balance of the results of the 1935 final examinations of the Technical Education Branch were made available to-day.

The letters, “A,” “B,” and “C” indicate the grade of pass in each subject. Then each subject. The letter “P” indicates a pass in early stages of subjects where the results are not graded. The passes are not given in order of merit. In the trades courses the pass shown is the grade award for all subjects embraced in the course.

Enrolments for the 1936 session will be accepted as from February 17.

Classes will reassemble on February 24.

The list includes the following northern passes –

– DRESSMAKING

Successful Newcastle District Pupils in Primary Final Examination

QUALIFIED FOR PROMOTION TO HIGHER SCHOOLS

OFFICIAL LISTS ISSUED HIGH PERCENTAGE OF PASSES

The result of the Primary Schools’ final examination issued to-day disclosed that the percentage of passes secured this year is very high.

DISAPPOINTMENT was expressed by some of the school teachers that children who passed very high in every subject but did not secure the necessary percentage of points in arithmetic failed to secure a pass.

The results of the bursary examination will not be made available for some time.

Results: —

UNGARIE MAN TRIED TO RESIST CONSTABLE

An Ungarie man had thrown himself to the ground several times in attempting to resist arrest, the West Wyalong Court of Petty Sessions was told on Friday.

Before the court was James Robert Fitzgerald of Ungarie, who pleaded guilty to two charges.

Fitzgerald was charged with resisting arrest on March 4, last Thursday, and using indecent language within the hearing of persons passing in Ethel Street, Ungarie.

The Police Prosecutor, Sgt. J. C. Wells, told Mr. W. Finlay S.M. that, at 9.30 p.m last Thursday night, Constable Kenneth Ronald Wark of Ungarie had spoken to Fitzgerald about language used in his home.

Apparently, the language was being used to his wife.

Attempting to arrest him, Fitzgerald had resisted, violently throwing himself to the ground on a number of occasions.

A civilian had to assist the officer and Fitzgerald was carried bodily to the car.

During the struggle, Fitzgerald had torn the constable’s coat at the seam and the coat now had blood and a grass stain on it.

Fitzgerald was last convicted at West Wyalong Court on January 6, 1954, for practically identical offences.

Mr. Finlay was told that Fitzgerald is a fettler by occupation, and he was now on transfer to Griffith.

Fitzgerald was fined £5 on each charge, and ordered to pay 10/- to Constable Wark as compensation for the damage to his clothes.

He was further ordered to enter a good behaviour bond of £30 for a period of two years.