Court reportings fron Tasmanian Newspapers
In 2008 the National Library of Australia began making available digitised copies of the nation's major newspapers. Searching by keyword, and in my case "William Barlow" produced an amazing array of articles in the Hobart Mercury and Courier, these are the ones that involved some aspect of the law!
| 4th Feb 1854 | Court appearance as a witness in a trial as reported in The Colonial Times Hobart |
| 15th Sept 1856 | Court appearance Barlow v Tregar as reported by The Colonial Times Hobart |
| Wed 2nd Feb 1859 | Court appearance Barlow v Reynolds as reported by The Hobart Town Daily Mercury |
| Sat 4 June 1859 | Court appearance Barlow v Hollinsdale as reported by The Hobart Town Mercury |
| Dec 1865 | Court appearance Barlow v Graham as reported by The Hobart Mercury |
| Fri 12 Nov 1875 | Court appearance Barlow v Moran as reported by The Hobart Mercury |
If you want to read the transcripts they are published below!
Monday 15 September 1856
From "The Colonial Times" Hobart
Indefinite Service.- Mr. Wm Barlow, of New Town, on Saturday prosecuted a German named Frederick Tregar, for absenting himself from his service on the 31st August, without leave. In reply to the bench, Mr. Barlow said he hired the man for an undefined period at £26 a year, on the 28th April ; he had not paid him all his wages and owed him £6. There being some difficulty in the case the accused undertook to go back to his service for three weeks, and the complaint was withdrawn.
Wednesday 2 February 1859
From "The Hobart Town Daily Mercury" Hobart
Nonpayment of Rural Police Rates.
Reynolds v Barlow.-This was a claim by Mr Reynolds against Mr. William Barlow of New Town, for £7 10s. levied under the Rural Police Act. Defendant did not appear, and a distress warrant was ordered to issue.
Saturday 4 June 1859
From "The Hobart Town Daily Mercury" Hobart
BARLOW v HOLLINSDALE.
For the plaintiff, (Barlow) Mr. Crisp ; for the defendant (Hollinsdale) Mr. Pitt.
This was an action for £28 4s balance of account for fruit supplied to the defendant.
The defendant pleaded that he was only indebted £23 Os. 6d., that he had overpaid £5 14s and that he had been over charged for some peaches. He had paid £23 Os. 6d. into Court.
Mr. Hollinsdale stated that on the 9th of December he purchased some 'strawberries from the plaintiff, for which he paid cash. He made cash purchases also on the 10th and 11th. On the latter day witness saw Mr. Barlow's son, and told him he had made arrangements to take all his father's strawberries. On the 10th of January witness received a bill for £23, which he paid, but he subsequently discovered that the three first items for strawberries had been paid for. Mr. Barlow admitted that the first item had been paid for, but disputed the other two. Witness afterwards received some apricots which were worthless. They remained in the shop till they became a nuisance, when they were thrown away.
By Mr. Crisp: Young Mr. Barlow delivered the fruit, and was paid for by witness himself.
John Short, in the service of Mr. Hollinsdale, deposed to tho delivery of some apricots which the defendant rejected on account of their smallness. They were ultimately thrown away as useless.
For the plaintiff, Mr. Crisp called William Barlow, the son, who stated that the fruit delivered on the 10th and 11th of December was not paid for. Witness delivered the fruit himself.
Mr. Pitt addressed the Jury, and pointed out that Mr. Hollinsdale had distinctly affirmed that he had paid for the three first deliveries ; he also directed attention to some items and errors in the plaintiffs account, and although young Mr. Barlow had flatly contradicted Mr. Hollinsdale, as to the payment of two lots of strawberries, yet could the Jury suppose that Mr. Hollinsdale would positively assert that he had paid the money if he had not? Tho presumption was that Mr. Barlow, Junr., had made a mistake, and he, Mr. Pitt, submitted that the defendant was entitled to a verdict.
The Jury retired, and after an absence of about a quarter of an hour, returned into Court with a verdict for the plaintiff for the amount paid into Court, namely £23 Os. 6d.
December 1865
From "The Hobart Mercury" Hobart
By far the biggest court case was in 1865 when William took his grievances to the Supreme Court. Over five days a trial took place and each day was reported in "The Mercury".
BARLOW v. GRAHAM
For the plaintiff Mr. Dobson, with him Mr. Adams.
For defendant, the Attorney-General (Graves attorney).
At the instance of the Attorney-General all witnesses were ordered to leave the Court till called for.
"Mr. Adams opened the pleadings. William Barlow was plaintiff and John Alexander Graham, defendant. The declaration stated that the plaintiff being the master of a public school at Swansea in Tasmania under the control and management of certain persons known as the Board of Education, the defendant falsely and maliciously wrote and published of the plaintiff as such schoolmaster the words following:
Notice. In consequence of having received numerous complaints of attempted overdues of Mr. Barlow for school fees (meaning thereby -charges wrongfully attempted to be made by the plaintiff as such master for school fees in excess of what he was entitled to charge in accordance with the rules of the said Board...."
I am transcribing all of the trial (five days) but to summarise, William as the plaintiff won his case and was awarded 100 pound damages.
Friday 12 November 1875
From "The Hobart Mercury" Hobart
GLENORCHY GENERAL SESSIONS, TUESDAY, 11TH NOVEMBER, 1875.
Before His Worship the Warden and Mr. E.Nicholas JP
MORAN V. BARLOW
Julia Moran (plaintiff) summoned William Barlow (defendant) to show cause why he should not pay the sum of 10s., wages due to her. The defendant showed that the plaintiff had never been in his employ. The plaintiff was therefore non suited.
Back to Barlow-Tasmania page