"He's Gone!"

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXVII, Issue 93, 19 December 1913, Page 5

"He's Gone!"

THE HANCBNC OF KELLY,

EXTRAORDINARY SCENES.

[By Electric Telegraph— Copyright] Times—Sydney Sun Special Cables.

Loudon, December 18

There were extraordinary scenes at Oldham over the execution of Kelly. The Government's decision was given from a window of the Town Hall late at night, a crowd of 10,000 people groaning their disappointment and anger. "To Manchester to rescue Kelly!" someone shouted. The cry was taken up everywhere. The croud trudged through the dreary suburbs, arriving in Manchester in the early morning.

The clatter of clogs was heard half a mile away. They carried three millflares, which were stolen en route, and were- armed with sticks, crowbars and stones. They clattered through the streets to Stangeways Gaol, breaking two miles of street-lamps and the windows of a lire-station and of tramway cars. The crowd found 100 police at the gates of the gaol. The police, apparently, understood the crude-sense ot justice which had brought Oldham's young people to Manchester. A boy o! fifteen walked up to the gaol walls between the police, read the notice proclaiming that Kelly would be hanged that morning, and repeated the newsro the crowd, which gradually worked itself into an angrj mood. "A rescue might be possible," shouted .someone; ''let's get him out!" In the meantime 600 police arrived in taxi cabs, and the crowd was driven quietly through the Manchester streets. Five constables wero slightly injured. The people were shouting out cheers for Kelly and execrations, on the Government. Then they started singing ragtime. The crowd was reinforced at daylight by many Manchester people, and there were 10.000 near the prison at eight o'clock. At threa minutes past eight the prison bell tolled, and the people muttered "He's gone!" taking off their hats.

rial purppses was 51b, so that "drenches" had to account for a very large quantity. In the case of the first three informations no explanation, whatever had been given by defendant of the disposal of the opium.

The amuiint covered was about 31 lb

As to balancing the opium book, it was laid down that at March 31st and September 30th or each year th > retail.'' of opium shall balance his book, and if there is any discrepancy he must filter in trie book his reason therefor. On October 28th, a Customs office? took stock of defendant's opium tincture, finding ten Winchesters. Or November 13th another visit was made, and it wav found that two- of the Winchesters had disappeared. There was no explanation of where the bottles had gone. In respect of four sales set out, defendant merely entered that tincture had been sold in cattle drenches and prescriptions. ' Mr Spence: What more does the Act require chemists to do?

Mr Weston: He, should enter so much for cattle drenches and so' much lor prescriptions. Mr Weston drew the attention of the S.M. to the fact that the book appeared to have been entered all at the one iine. Counsel contended that defendant had procured a quantity of opium quite out of proportion to the amount usually put througn by people in a business of the size of his, and the explanations given of its disposal were hopelessly incomplete and in some cases there was-no explanation at all.

Protest from Counsel. Mr Spence said that he had pleaded guilty to the whole of the nine charges. He intended to plead guilty for failing to balance his hook, but in respect of the other charges lie contended that there was room for legal argument. Counsel did not intend to palliate defendant's ignorance or carelessness, but it was well known that if people were called upon to keep

books it was found hard to keep them up to doing so. He submitted that defendant had given all the information required by the regulations in respect of how the'tincture was disposed of. He protested against the increasing of the number of charges laid, tin's tending to prejudice defendant. The regulations had been broken in spirit, but there was no reason why an endeavor should be made to gain a vindictive verdict.

The S.M. said that it was shown that an enormous quantity had been purchased and had not been accounted for. One would make all reasonable allowance in such cases. The charges regarding balancing were important. All the charges were in respect of different dates. Where such a large quantity was unaccounted for it was no case for a light fine.

A fine of £lO was imposed on each of three informations, counsel's fee of two guineas being allowed in each case. Court costs totalled £1 OS and witnesses expense? .CI 3s.