Elizabeth (Eliza)

  Noted events in her life were:

• Arraignment. TRANSCRIPTION OF THE TRIAL OF CHARLES OLIVER BREARTON AND ELIZABETH DAWES BOTH CHARGED OVER THE MURDER OF WILLIAM DAWES.

MELBOURNE MORNING HERALD TUESDAY 19 OCT 1852

The case was heard on 18 Oct 1852 in the Melbourne Supreme Court.

THE QUEEN V BREARTON

Mr. Michie addressing His Honour … had been under the impression that a change would have attended … … chambers for the purpose of entering an application on behalf of Brearton and Mrs. Dawes for a change of venue, but such … been the case he wished to know whether His Honour would adjourn to Chambers for … minutes for the purpose of … the Application?

His Honour objected to do so, as it was interfering with the business of the Court …er and Terminer. He had no notice of the Application or otherwise to have …. ….. ….. Application at nine or even …o'clock.
WILFUL MURDER

Charles Oliver Brearton and Elizabeth Dawes who had previously pleaded … ..inged for the wilful murder of William Dawes on the 26^th September last.

Mr. Michie and Mr. Wrixon ….. applications for a change of venue.
His Honour said he could not interfere here, as there had already been great …. …. On the part of the Crown. The application should have been made in Chambers and should have been made on Saturday.

Mr. Wrixon said the Attorney General had not instructed him in sufficient time about the application previously.

His Honour thought there had been … … in the case. He did not know who the Attorney was. The prisoners were then again remanded.

THE COLLINGWOOD MURDER.
During the adjournment of the Court, counsel for the prisoners argued before his Honour Mr. Justice Barry the points in favour of a change of venue for the trial of the prisoners Brearton and Mrs. Dawes.

His Honour refused to grant the application and ruled that the trial must at once proceed.

WILFUL MURDER

Charles Oliver Brearton and Elizabeth Dawes were arraigned for the wilful murder of William Dawes, on the 25^th September last.
Mr. Wrixon said that having been unsuccessful in changing the venue, he had now to apply that the trial of the prisoners be postponed till the first day of next sessions.
Mr. Michie followed on the same side, as did Mr. Smyth, urging that though excitement existed at the present time, it might be allayed by the next session.

The Attorney General opposed the application. There were nine witnesses in attendance and there was no grounds that he could see for a postponement. He was at a loss to conceive what was at the bottom of these pertinacious applications.
Mr.Wrixon said it was a case of life or death for the prisoners, and that all they sought was a fair and impartial trial. In England or Ireland the trial would probably not take place for five or six months after the commission of the offence, but here the Sittings were held every month. The Attorney General had opposed a change of venue, but he certainly thought he ought to accede to a postponement for a month.
His Honour thought if any impression upon the minds of the community, it could not be so ephemeral as to be removed in a month. He did not think that the jury would be influenced by any paragraphs which appeared in the newspaper pandering to the depraved taste of a murder-loving community. He felt compelled for the third time to refuse the application.

The following jury was then empanelled:- W.H Tuckett, foreman, Wm. Williamson, Geo.Thomas, Thomas Trotman,Richard Wicks, Saml.Taylor, Saml Thorpe, George Taylor, Jas. Warman, G. Vinge, John Towns, Alex Walker.
The male prisoner exercised his right of challenge objecting to Messrs. Alfred Turner, George Taylor, John Tankard, James Taylor, Charles Williamson, Peter Virtue, and James Turner.
Messrs. Michie and Smyth appeared for the male prisoner and Mr. Wrixon for the female.

The Attorney general having stated the case to the jury, intimating that he should bring forward many circumstances which had not developed themselves at the Coroner's Inquest, a full report of which was published at the time it was held, called the following witnesses. We shall merely present to our readers any additional evidence to that brought before the Coroner's Inquest.

The witnesses having been ordered out of the Court till called upon. The Attorney General called Richard Gee, the individual alluded to in our previous report of the case as Dicky Jones, who gave, with one exception, similar testimony to that which he gave at the Coroner's Inquest. He saw the deceased approach the prisoner's house: the male prisoner met him at the door, which was open, and fired a pistol at the deceased, who fell dead almost immediately,. Immediately after the first shot, a second fired from the inside of the house, and the female prisoner then dragged the dead body of her husband into the house, it having fallen just outside, he being upon the step of the door at the time he was shot. A favorable feature in the case of the male prisoner was alluded to by the Attorney General in his address to the jury, and detailed by this witness. It was, that Gee went back to the house for a stick which the deceased had accidentally left behind him. Brearton, on handing out the stick and a small quantity of spirits in a bottle, said "Get him away if you can." It was after this that the deceased went back to the house, and received the fatal shot. Gee also swore that upon the deceased returning to the house, some blows with sticks were exchanged between the deceased and the male prisoner, but it was not the latter who struck the first blow. The male prisoner could not have been more than two feet from the deceased at the time he shot him. Just as the deceased fell, Gee stooped to pick him up, when a second shot was fired from the house. Gee saw the barrel of the piece, which fell upon the floor, but was unable to say whether it was a gun or a pistol. It was fired in the direction in which the body of the deceased was lying. The female prisoner then rushed forward and dragged her husband in. Gee swore it could not have been the male prisoner who fired the second shot, there not being sufficient time from the period at which he saw him at the door, to have enabled him to go into the house and take up another piece. The second shot
- 3 -

was evidently fired from the bedroom. Gee ran away for the constables, and on his return, after an absence of about five minutes, Brearton, who was standing near the gate of the house, admitted that he had shot the deceased with a ball.

Mr. Michie, cross-examined the witness at some length and elicited from him that Brearton for some time humored the deceased, endeavoring to get rid of him. He denied that either the deceased or himself were at all intoxicated, nor did the deceased when he last went to the house appear excited or talk about having someone's blood. Although Brearton struck the first blow when the deceased went back to the door, Gee was unable to say whether the blow struck him.

Mr. Wrixon on behalf of the female prisoner also cross examined the witness and elicited from him that Mrs. Dawes when she called him told him that her husband was a rogue and a villain, and had behaved very badly to her. She did not say that he had used any personal violence to her. Not more than four seconds elapsed between the firing of the first and second shots, it was almost instantaneous. The second shot was fired before witness heard something fall heavily on the floor.(The object of this examination was to make it appear that the second piece had gone off by accident in consequence of falling upon the floor). The female prisoner pushed or dragged the body up the steps after the deceased was shot, using some violence. The deceased did not rush up to the door, or knock at it violently upon the last occasion of his going to it. The lights in the house were then out, but Brearton had not got his clothes off. Before the mortal shot was fired the deceased did not rush upon Brearton.
(The witness's deposition taken before the Coroner was here read, by which it appeared that he had then sworn that immediately before Brearton fired the shot the deceased had rushed at him.)

By The Attorney General - The deceased was as quiet a man as ever I saw in my life. He had very little to say; was not at all violent, and I didn't know what to make of him. He appeared stubborn. Brearton stood with the door wide open, with a pistol in one hand and a stick in the other at the time the deceased went towards him and was shot. I cannot say whether the second piece was actually discharged, but I am sure it went off before it fell to the ground. I cannot tell at what height the piece was from the ground at the time it exploded. Mrs. Dawes handled the dead body of her husband very roughly. The ball from the second piece struck the side of the door at a height of about twenty inches or two feet. (This evidence, which had never before been elicited is most important when taken in connection with the fact that the street is about two feet below the floor the of the house.)
The witness afterwards admitted that he couldn't say positively that the mark in the doorpost was made by the identical ball from the second piece, but he presumed that it was. When Mrs. Dawes pulled the body of her husband into the house, she was guilty of no ill-usage but pulled him in quickly.

John Gallagher, of the City Police, proved that he was on duty in Collingwood with another Constable named Wright on the 25^th of September last, when he saw Gee, and in consequence of what he said, he(Gallagher) was induced to go to Brearton's house, when he saw a boy, who asked him to go into the house,and on doing so, he saw Mrs. Dawes who said "This old scoundrel(meaning her husband) who was in the room, is constantly annoying me, and tantalizing me." She said she would never live a day with him. Brearton desired me to take Dawes in charge for annoying him but I told Brearton to give up the


man's wife and child and then there would be no annoyance. I was induced to go to the house in consequence of Gee telling me that a boy from Brearton's house had gone for a constable, and Gee said that he thought there was something wrong in Brierton's house. When Brearton told me the circumstances of the case, I refused to take Dawes in custody. Dawes said that he wanted his wife and child to be given up to him. Brearton told me that he would not give up Dawes's wife and child, for that Mrs. Dawes loved him, and he loved her, and they had lived so long together, he would never part with her. I told Dawes that the law was open to him, and to take the regular course. He said that he had been to the Police Office, but having no proof that Brearton harboured his wife and child, he could get no redress. The female prisoner took up a candle-stick, and struck her husband with it upon his head. I said I would take her in charge, but he told me not to do so, as she was his wife, and he loved her. I asked Brearton if Dawes had shown any violence, and he said that he had not. I saw nothing at all to justify me in taking the deceased in charge. Brearton said that he would make no charge against Dawes if he would only leave the house. Dawes appeared perfectly sober. He might have taken a glass.

Mr. Smyth cross-examined this witness on behalf of the male prisoner and elicited that Brearton entreated the deceased to leave the house quietly. Witness saw Gee and the deceased walk away from the house, and that time the lights were put out, and the imnates appeared to have gone to bed. Witness was not present when the deceased was searched but saw a pair of pistols, which he understood had been found upon his person.

By Mr. Wrixon- The female prisoner said that the deceased was always annoying and tantalizing her, and that she would never live with him a day. She never said to me that he had kicked or ill-treated her, nor did she tell me that he had knocked her down that very day. The deceased said that he loved and doted upon his wife, and he had no appearance of anger about him at the time I saw him. Brearton said that all he wanted was to get the deceased away. I saw no violence on the part of either Brearton or the deceased. I had a nobbler at the house when I went there.

Sergeant Higgins, examined by the Attorney General - I went to Brearton's house upon hearing that a man had been shot there, and found the pistols produced which appeared to have been recently discharged. There was a broken cap on the nipple. There was double-barreled gun in the corner of the bedroom. It was not loaded, and did not appear to have been recently discharged. The male prisoner was walking up and down the floor with a hammer whip in his hand, and the woman was crying. The body of Dawes was lying just inside the front door. I examined the body and there was a wound on his left breast. I found in his pockets the pair of pistols produced, which I don't think have ever been loaded. I found no ammunition on his person. The body when I first saw it was warm, but life was extinct. I saw some bullets and a powder flask at Brearton's house.

By Mr. Wrixon- I do not think the gun had been recently discharged, but I cannot swear positively. There was no blackness on the inside of the barrels as there was in the pistol. The female prisoner was crying, but in other respects she did not appear to be in great sorrow.

By the Attorney General- The female prisoner kissed Brearton when the handcuffs were put on him, and also in the watchhouse, before they were put into separate cells. When I tried the gun where was a little gunpowder on my finger, and some on the ramrod. I am unable


to say whether the gun had or had not been discharged within the previous twenty-four hours.

(The counsel of the female prisoner here represented that she was quite exhausted from standing, and His Honor directed her to be accommodated with a chair).

John Egan, an intelligent boy about fourteen yeas of age, who it may be remembered was examined at the Coroner's Inquest, gave precisely the same testimony as on that occasion. He stated that Dawes went away with the constables and Brearton having fastened the door put the light out, when the witness went to bed on the sofa. The witness added my master has a double barrel gun but I did not see it in the evening when I went to bed; after I had gone to bed I heard Dawes say to several outside the house"Don't leave me this night for there will be nasty work yet: there will be one life or two." Dawes then knocked at the door for about 5 minutes, and nearly pushed in the door the last time; Mrs. Dawes got up and opened the door when Mrs. Dawes rushed in; Brearton was close to Mrs. Dawes when she opened the door; Dawes struck Brearton on one side of the head and gave him a mark; blows were exchanged; Dawes and Brearton were standing on the threshold of the door and Mrs.Dawes was inside; Dawes rushed in and took the double barrel gun from the sofa where I had been lying; I did not see the gun that evening till it was in Dawes' hand; when Dawes got the gun he said "No Brearton now for it, one life or two." I do not know how the gun got to my bed; Dawes took hold of the gun by the barrel and raising the stock over Brearton attempted to strike him with it. Brearton ran into the bedroom for his pistol, and shot Dawes, who was standing at the door of the house, still having the gun in his hand. The sofa lies very closely to the door. The moment Dawes rushed in he seized the gun. Mrs.Dawes caught hold of the gun, and Dawes was about to strike her with the gun, having wrestled it out of her hand, when Brearton ran into the bedroom for his pistol. Dawes was then about to strike Brearton with the gun, when Brearton fired and shot Dawes. The pistol produced is the one with which Brearton shot Dawes. They were about three feet asunder when the shot was fired. After Dawes was shot, he threw the gun at Mrs. Dawes, but did not hit her, and he then took a stick and broke everything on the table; took a jug and threw it at her, and then went outside, and putting his hands to his breast, exclaimed "I'm shot-I'm shot." Dawes walked out at the front door, and stood outside for three or four minutes before he fell. I can't tell if there was a second shot fired. I was frightened. I had cleaned the gun about twelve o'clock that day. I had loaded one barrel but I fired it off afterwards to clean it. I don't know if it was loaded that night. I loaded the gun with a ball. I asked Mrs. Dawes if I should put in one ball or two, and she said one. I then loaded the gun and fired it off afterwards. The gun was generally kept loaded. I loaded the gun for the purpose of discharging it in order to clean it. I fired the gun off at the back part of the house whilst Mrs. Dawes was in the bedroom. After I had cleaned the gun I put it in the bedroom and left it there. The gun was generally kept loaded with ball. Mr. Brearton used to load it.

By Mr. Michie- Dawes had been in the house about two o'clock that day, and said to Mrs. Dawes "will you come back?" She said "No, when I can earn my living." Dawes raised a stick over Mrs. Dawes, who was in the bedroom, and said "he would murder her". She had a child in her arms, and he knocked her down at the foot of the bed, but did not strike her. He snatched the child out of her arms and pushed her down. Dawes would not leave the house, and I and Mrs. Dawes then left the house, leaving Dawes there. Dawes would neither leave the house nor allow me to lock the door. Dawes followed us, and pushed Mrs. Dawes down on the footpath, taking the child from her Dawes slept in the house on the
previous night. He came and knocked at the house at about one o'clock in the night or morning and I let him in and he slept on the sofa with me. He stayed the next morning and breakfasted with Brearton and Mrs. Dawes. When Dawes slept with me I don't think there were any balls or ammunition in that room. I think the ammunition was in the bedroom. Dawes appeared on friendly terms when he breakfasted there. There was no quarrelling.Dawes went away after breakfast, before Brearton had left for business. Dawes stopped for about an hour in the house one night before. There is but a very short distance between the door and the sofa. When the gun was in Dawes's hand Mrs. Dawes caught hold of it, and then it was Brearton ran for his pistol. When he returned with it Dawes had wrestled the gun from Mrs. Dawes, and it was then the shot was fired. Mrs. Dawes might have loaded the gun after I had cleaned it but I did not see her. Before I went to Mr. Brearton's service I was employed by Mr. Spence.

By Mr. Wrixon- Dawes struck Mrs. Dawes in the course of the day, and said he would murder her. When she asked Dawes in the morning to leave the house he said he would wait until Brearton came home and have blood on the floor. He appeared to be in a great passion at the time. I never saw Mrs. Dawes loading a gun. I was knocked stupid when the first shot was fired,and can't say if a second shot was fired or not. The gun made a great noise when it was thrown upon the floor by Dawes after he was shot.

By the Attorney General- I noticed a mark on the side of the door, about twelve inches from the bottom, on the Sunday, the day after this affair. I never saw the mark which a ball leaves in a piece of wood. Dawes slept with me on the morning upon which he came, at about half past one o'clock Mrs. Dawes was in bed at the time.

Messrs. Michie and Wrixon objected to this line of cross-examination

The Attorney General said the drift of the examination on the opposite side was to show that the male prisoner was the injured man. To prevent the jury drawing such a conclusion , he (the Attorney General) wished to show that Dawes was the injured man.
His Honor was of opinion that the question which the lad had last answered ought not to have been put.
The Attorney General would, then, put the questions he wished to thought the Court, His Honor having expressed an opinion that it would be unwise for him to exclude the questions.

John Egan(the boy) examined by His Honor:- When I opened the door to Dawes on the night in question, I don't know where she was unless she was in bed. I had last seen her going to bed. I went to bed between nine and ten o'clock, and Mrs. Dawes went to bed before me. I slept on the soda in the front room. Mrs. Dawes used to sleep in the bedroom. There is only one bedroom in the house. Brearton was in bed at the time. When the knock came to the door, Brearton came out of the bedroom and spoke to Dawes, and then went back to bed again.

By Mr. Michie - I don't know if Dawes knew there was only one bedroom in the house. He remained in the house knowing that she was there, as he breakfasted with her and Brearton in the house on the following morning.

Mrs. Mary Trotman examined by the Attorney General - I know the prisoner Brearton, who lived in one of my husband's houses, and we occupied the adjoining house. The size of
Brearton's sitting room was 12x12. I remember Saturday, 27^th September. My husband went to bed before me on that night, and I sat up with a sick woman in our house. Our house was perfectly quiet. About nine o'clock in the evening I heard loud talking in Brearton's house. Brearton was talking louder than usual, and I thought he was having a few words. I could not hear any particular words, nor do I know the parties who were talking. In a short time everything was quiet for a while, and then the boy John Egan came out at the back door of Brearton's house, and said, "Am I to put one or two?"

Mr. Mitchie contended that this evidence was inadmissible.
Mrs. Trotman - I am sure it was Brearton's voice which replied "Put in two." After that I heard the back door opened several times, but everything was very quiet. I heard the last row about eleven o'clock. There were three knocks at the door- not loud knocks. It appeared to me the door must have been opened on the latch, and then there was a noise in the house, scuffling, fighting, and beating about. I heard the voices of men for about ten or twenty minutes, and in a short time before the scuffle was over there was a shot fired, and in a short while there was another shot fired. I am quite positive I heard two discharges; they made a great noise.

By Mr. Smyth- My husband is on the jury but was not on the Coroner's jury; to the best of my belief it was Brearton who said"Put in the two; it might have been ordering the boy to put in two candles or two potatoes."

By Mr. Wrixon- Brearton's is a brick house and mine is a weather board; I heard what was said in consequence of the boy having to come out to a detached kitchen; the first shot was the loudest one, but I am quite sure there were two shots fired.

By a Juror- There are three rooms in Brearton's house, a bedroom, a parlour, and detached kitchen; there was a sofa in Brearton's house behind the front door as you opened it.

Mr. Edward Wold, the landlord of the Rochester Castle at Collingwood, proved that on the night in question Dawes and Gee left his house perfectly sober; Dawes had nothing but a bottle of ginger beer in the house; they left at about ten o'clock, when the witness wished to close his house.

This closed the case for the Crown.

The jury expressed a wish to re-examine Gee the Principal witness and having been recalled Gee stated when I left the Rochester Castle with Dawes he was perfectly sober, and he was never out of my sight so that he could not have got drunk without my knowing it; I was close to him when he was shot, and he had nothing in his hand but a stick when he went up to the house; it was not possible for Dawes to have gone into the house and got a gun without my seeing it.

Mr. Wrixon urged that there was not a scintilla of evidence against Mrs. Dawes, and suggested that her case might be put separately to the jury. If a man's house was assaulted by night and blood was spilt, surely his servants were not to be rendered amenable. That was the proper period to mention the circumstance, in order that if his Honor agreed with
the views which he (Mr. Wrixon) entertained upon the point, he might allude to it in charging the jury.

Mr. Michie addressed the jury in a very able speech on behalf of the male prisoner, begging them not to allow the circumstance which had been alluded to of an improper intimacy existing between the prisoners to influence their minds.

Mr. Wrixon addressed the jury on behalf of the female prisoner, contending that there was not a particle of evidence against her, and that she was entitled to an acquittal at the hands of the jury.

Mr. Smyth called George Hansliffer, who deposed:- The prisoner Brearton is Mr. Spence's superintendent. I have repeatedly had conversations with Dawes, the deceased, and in those conversations had heard Dawes threaten Brearton. On the morning of the day upon which this occurrence took place Brearton told Dawes he would apply to the mayor for another warrant against him. Dawes said he was determined to have his wife, and Brearton said he was perfectly willing that he should have her; that he did not detain her against her will. I have known Mrs. Dawes on two occasions to go back from Dawes to Brearton of her own accord. I recollect her saying she had been repeatedly ill-used by her husband, and she once begged me to tell Brearton that Dawes had ill-used her on board of the Flash, and to beg of him to come and fetch her.

Mr. Wm. Waters examined by Mr. Michie-I recollect a short time before this occurrence, a great many threats being uttered by Dawes against Brearton. Dawes said he would have Brearton's life.

Dr. martin examined by Mr. Michie- I have heard the boy Egan's evidence. It is not necessarily untrue if it is stated that a man has moved about ten or fifteen minutes after being shot through the lungs. Many such cases are up record. Gunshot wounds are frequently received of which the parties are not cognizant at the time, although they die in ten minutes afterwards.

By the Attorney General - If a man received a pistol wound immediately above the heart, I should scarcely think he would be able to use violent exertion, if the ball passed through the ventricles. If shot in the lungs the case would be different.

The Attorney-General having exercised the privilege of reply.

His Honour ….. ….. ….. ….. that he must invite their most serious ……. to the case, and although it had been said that it had created so much excitement as to render it desirable that it should be tried elsewhere, he did not al all regret that he had declined to accede to the application, having seen nothing during the trial to convince him that the prisoners had not had the fairest trial that could be desired. They had been ably represented, their witnesses had been attentively heard, and the jury, he had observed had paid the greatest attention to the case. In fact, had observed none of that excitement which, it had been anticipated, would operate so prejudicially to the prisoners. His honor proceeded to define the necessary ingredients to constitute murder, and difference between that crime and manslaughter. The distinctions are so well known that it would be tedious to repeat them. His Honor quoted several authorities upon Justifiable Homicide, and carefully recapitulated the evidence to the jury, telling them that he did not think it would be fair to take into
consideration the circumstance of the domestic happiness of the unfortunate man Dawes having been disturbed or destroyed by the connection which existed between the two prisoners. His Honor commented upon the deportment in the witness box of the principal
witness for the Crown, Gee, remarking that it appeared to him he exhibited in some instances a desire to answer some questions and a reluctance to answer others. The admission of Brearton put it beyond doubt that Dawes fell by Brearton's hand, but Gee's evidence did not at all support the statement that threats were made by Dawes. Gee, indeed, said that he was remarkably mild and apparently on good terms with Brearton. He swore positively that two shots were fired, and this statement was corroborated by Mrs. Trotman, although not by the boy Egan, who was in the house. The jury would have well to consider whether a party arming himself with a stick and attacking another justified the party attacked in having recourse to deadly weapons. Mere threats would not justify having recourse to such weapons unless such threats were accompanied by some indications of an intention and ability to carry them into effect. If the jury thought that a second shot was really fired, they must be satisfied that it was fired in the direction in which Dawes was lying; but from Gee's evidence it did not appear at all clear that this was the case. He thought the jury would find that the statement of Gee was not altogether reconcilable with what had been gleaned from other witnesses. He thought the evidence of Egan was entitled to the careful consideration of the jury, and to full credence, not only from the youth of the witness, but from the manner in which the testimony was given. With respect to the gun said to have been seized by the deceased, and with which he made an attack upon the prisoners, the jury had nothing guide them, but the evidence of Gee and the boy, whose statements were directly opposed to each other. If they believed the boy, matters were placed in a totally different position the moment Dawes seized the gun and used it as a weapon of offence as a club. So long as a man was merely armed with a stick his threats amounted to nothing, but when armed with such a weapon as a gun the case was widely different; in fact, if the jury believed the evidence of the boy upon this point, a totally different complexion was place upon the whole affair. Notwithstanding the apparent improbability of that portion of the boy's statement relative to the muscular exertion used by the deceased after receiving a mortal wound, it was nevertheless not impossible that it might be perfectly true, and it was for the jury to say to which statement they would attack most credit, Gee's or the boy's. He could not tell how the mind of the unfortunate deceased was constituted, but it certainly did appear strange that he should have remained in Brearton's house whilst the two prisoners were consummating his shame. Yet such was the case, if they believed the evidence of the boy. The law would not offer up a living. ….. upon the shrine of a dead man who had by his conduct brought his death upon himself. The law would say he had been his own executioner, and it would be for the jury to determine whether the conduct of Dawes had been such that Brearton really fired in self-defense, the law justifying a party in repelling force in defense of his life or property.

The jury retired at twenty minutes to 11 o'clock, and after an absence of three quarters of an hour returned to Court, finding both prisoners Guilty of Manslaughter, and they were remanded for sentence.

The Court then adjourned till ten o'clock this morning.





MELBOURNE MORNING HERALD WED. 20^TH OCT 1852

MANSLAUGHTER
Charles Brearton and Elizabeth Dawes who had been convicted of manslaughter, were then placed in the dock for sentence.

Mr. Wrixon presented affidavits from Mr. Spence and Mr. Hird, setting forth the mild character of the male prisoner and representing him as a young man who had filled with credit to himself and satisfaction to his employers, situations of trust and responsibility.

His Honor passed sentence upon the prisoners in a very feeling manner, recapitulating all the circumstances of the case which we have recently placed so fully before the public, that it would be tedious to allude to it at any length.

The male prisoner was sentenced to two years imprisonment, and the female to nine months imprisonment. Both prisoners appeared remarkably unconcerned.

DISCHARGED:
Thomas Quinn, Mary Regan, William Virtue, John Talbot, Thomas Jones, J
ames Burns, Edward Moore, George Henry Smith, Alexander Douglass, Edward Dyke, William Jordan.


MELBOURNE ARGUS 20/10/1852

MANSLAUGHTER

Several minutes having elapsed after the last sentence being pronounced, the Associate directed Charles Oliver Brereton and Elizabeth Dawes, convicted yesterday of manslaughter, to be placed in the dock. The prisoners having taken their place, Brereton (who is apparently a young man of some 27 years of age, and of form, shape, and size that presented a marked contrast to the usual tenants of that place) was asked if he had anything to say why the sentence of the Court should not be passed on him. The prisoner remained with his arms folded across his breast, and with great composure bowed to his Counsel (Mr. Wrixon).Elizabeth Dawes (a dark complexioned woman, about 25 years of age, with nothing singularly attractive about her person, except good form and eyes, that speak of deeper passions lurking inwardly than externally appear) being similarly questioned, answered in the same way.

Mr. Wrixon then rose and presented to the Court affidavits of the character of the male prisoner, from Mr. Spence and Mr. Hird. The former described Brereton to be a man of a singularly mild and inoffensive character. The he had been in his employ as manager for more than two years, and so persuaded was he of his character that he would this moment take him back to his situation. Mr. Hird's affidavit stated that Brereton was a noble hearted kind man, and utterly incapable of committing any act such as the one for which he was indicted. As to Elizabeth Dawes, Mr. Wrixon said that there now could be little doubt that she had been grievously, deeply injured by that man, whom nature had designed should be her defender, her guardian, and her protector. If under circumstances such as those, in which she was placed, she did not display that affection which she should have shown, pity, compassion, but not punishment should await her. Counsel spoke in a most feeling manner on behalf of the female prisoner.

His Honor then addressed the prisoners as follows: You, Charles Oliver Brereton, and you Elizabeth Dawes, have each been found guilty of the crime of manslaughter. The circumstances of your case as disclosed in the evidence must convince any one that the mind of the unfortunate man, whose life your act has taken away, was influenced by circumstances of no common kind. However mollified may be those acts that have associated you, you have been found guilty of manslaughter, and must therefore bear the punishment of that crime, and not for the violation of those civil rights you have trampled on. It was apprehended you would not obtain here a fair trial. I thought otherwise and the issue has justified my opinion. The trial was conducted with order and decency, and you have no reason to regret you were tried here. In the evidence there was a conflict; this made me not feel justified to withdraw your case, Elizabeth Dawes, from the jury, and I accordingly sent it for their consideration. What has lead them to ….. you in the common verdict- …. …. Loaded the gun or were ready to …. Brereton, or fired the shot that us not my province to determine. You, Brereton I consider have a character yet to sustain. The evidence shows you desired the deceased to leave and this is a considerable point in your favour. If you fired when he was but armed with a stick your crime is indeed great, but the verdict of the jury acquitting you of murder sets this at rest. This too makes me deal leniently with you, as they have found it so. yet, even in self defense must not a man's life be rashly taken away. You could have obtained another weapon beside you pistol. You were within hearing of the police, and therefore you have been the more to blame. If, however, the boy be believed, your danger was great, yet not so great as would justify you


to use the deadly weapon you made use of; other means might have been adopted that would have freed you of the annoyance to which you were subject. However the jury have decided this by acquitting you of murder; yet though they have, your punishment must not be so light as I felt it my duty to pass in this court some months since. One so mild I cannot pass, yet shall I not pass one that will forever stigmatize you, or blast your character, but only one that will give you an opportunity of passing many hours of deep thought and anxious reflection over that sad deed, that has consigned a fellow creature to the grave.

You, Elizabeth Dawes, the jury must have considered the circumstances under which you were placed as different from Brereton's. It is suggested that your husband did not treat you with that affection that a wife deserved. Still you have been found guilty of manslaughter, and must be punished, one circumstance there is which must give comfort to your mind; your husband did not die by your hand, This hereafter may be a consolation to you. The occurrences too passed in so short a time as to show no premeditation, and taking all the circumstances of your case into consideration, my duty will be to punish you less severely than your partner in guilt.

His Honor then proceeded to pass sentence in these words.

The sentence of this court is that you, Charles Oliver Brereton, be imprisoned in Her Majesty's goal, for a period of two years; and that you, Elizabeth Dawes, be imprisoned for a period of nine calendar months.

Immediately after the passing of the sentence the prisoners were removed.

His honor then went through the calendar, when the following jurors were discharged William Virtue, J. Talbot, T. Burns, J. Jones, E. Moore, Alexander Douglass, E. H. Smith, E. Dyke, M. Jordan.

The Court then adjourned at a quarter to five o'clock.



Note from Ros Taylor: where you see …… it means that I was unable to read the word as the photocopy of the film was at times very pale or the word missed altogether.

Elizabeth married William Dawes, son of Aaron Daws and Elizabeth Bannister. (William Dawes was born on 5 Mar 1814 in Cornwall England, christened on 8 Apr 1816 in Rye, East Sussex England, died on 25 Sep 1852 in Melbourne, Victoria Australia and was buried on 28 Sep 1852 in Parish of St James, Melbourne, Victoria Australia.). The cause of his death was Shooting (manslaughter).