CURIOUS CASE AT BALLARAT

Evening Star, Issue 3437, 26 February 1874, Page 3

CURIOUS CASE AT BALLARAT

At the Ballarat Police Court on February 2, a curious charge against Mr Robert Kilpatrick, late schoolmaster at Miners* Rest of being about to commit a breach of the peace on the Hon, J. G. Francis, Chief Secretary of Victoria, was disposed of. The charge was*that on the 2nd of January, the defendant wrote a letter to Mr W. H. Odgera, complaining of the great injustice with which he had been treated by the Board of Education, and subsequently by Government; and after pointing out that he had in vain tried to get justice done m every legitimate way allowed by law, he had determined to wage personal war against the Chief Secretary, as the person who might, but who refused to do him the justice he was entitled to expect. Mr M'Dermott defended the accused, and on the Bench were the Police Magistrate, the Mayor, and Messrs Dyte, Eastwood, and Scott. The contained in the letter sent to Mr Odgers was that the defendant would proceed to Melbourne, find the Chief Secretary, handcuff him to himself, and lead mm out into the streetsas a prisoner. - It was proved in evidence that Kilpatrick marched about the township a whole day with a pair of handcuffs, snd in answer to, questions, said he meant \o proceed to vfith him. th,en^ ü b,e walked, and replied, “ I'U tafce him into the street, and he’ll have to go to a blacksmith's shop to get himself released. ” Some of his friends advised him not to be so foolish, to which he rejoined—“ I am an injured man. I have repeatedly applied for, and have always been denied, justice. I have asked the Government to waive its privileges, and to let me sue them, or to leave the whole matter to arbitration. They have refused both, and I can do no more to gain my rights-but resort to personal warfare. Mr M‘Dermot\ the accused’s counsel, characterised the prosecution as a moat ridiculous one, and unworthy of any intelligent man’s attention He was surprised the officers of the police force could not see that the whole affair was a trap set to catch the Government, and into which the first victim precipitated was the Chief M Cre^ ary * • Sura !y no one would believe that Mr Francis seriously apprehended danger to his person or liberty from such an absurd threat as that before the Court. Hisclient had tried all legitimate means to get redress and i when an investigation into the Miners’ Rest school dispute took place some time ago, it was conducted with closed doors, so as to prevent the public gaining a knowledge of the actual state of affairs. Fjhding hft efforts to ■ obtain justice thwarted Ineve'fy way, his client had "deviW T fcW present method of getting the correspondence aud Retails of his cabe in ’dpoti court,' and he had succeeded, iud'had outwitted Mr Francis and the Education Board. It was mopsirons, howeVer, to think that he ■ could' ever have seriously contemplated carrying hia threat }nto execution. Suppose he had instead havq written this tq Mr F r ftucia I intend to mopped tft Melbourne in a day or two, where I shall establish and preside at a pritmnal court, at which I shall hold an inquiry into your conduct, and if I find you are guilty, I shall order you to be taken from hence to the place whence you oame, there to be hanged by the neck until you are dpad, and may the Eord have mercy on your miserable political soul would Mr Francis have been afraid that the man really would come down and carry out his threat ? (Roars of laughter.) The present charge was not a whit less ridiculous. What would suoh men as Gladstone or Disraeli think of threats like these? Would they be frightened, and appeal to a police court for protection ’ Assuredly not. They would not have been caught in the trap, and thus subjected themselves to the laughter of the whole country. —Mr Gaunt, P.M., said that, notwithstand- : ing the ingenious defence of counsel tbe matter was a trap into which to lead the

Government, the Bench did not think the end justified the means; and, supposing a joke was meant, Mr Kilpatrick might have carried out the joke to the extent ne contemplated, and thus have provoked the b; each of the peace complained of, or done something worse. The Bench thought the Government right in bringing the matter into the Court as it was brought. The defendant would be bound over to keep the peace for twelve mouths, himself in LIOO, and two sureties of LSO each. Several of the defendant’s friends offered to go surety for him, but he absolutely refused to accept their offers, saying that he saw the Court was determined to carry out the system of persecution initiated by the Education department, and he should let them do so to the bitter end, and go to gaol. This decision of the defendant is quite in accordance with a portion of his letter alluding to the way he had been treated, which was—“ It is simply a matter of Might against Right, and I, as the weaker party, have made up my mind to suffer any indignity or hardship that may be permitted the Government to inflict upon me in following the path of duty, which is to fight the matter out to its legitimate issue, regardless of consequences.”