Thomas SLATER [1274]

  General Notes:

I am uncertain where the date of Thomas's birth came from, as I have not been able to find an official registration of birth for him, or his next sibling Eliza, however Thomas and Eliza are both mentioned on the subsequent birth registrations of their younger siblings.

Thomas Slater was quite short according to his prison record at 5' 0 1/2" in height, however, as he was only 15 and a half years of age when he was first imprisoned, perhaps he grew later on. He was 7st 2/12 ozs and had a fresh complexion, dark brown hair and grey eyes.

Riverine Herald (Echuca, Vic. : Moama, NSW : 1869 - 1954) Sat 23 Jan 1869 Page 2
His Honour Judge Macoboy opened the Echuca General Sessions yesterday morning, and disposed of nearly all the business on the criminal sheet. James Hackford and Thomas Slater, two very young lads, pleaded guilty to charges of horse-stealing, and other thefts, and were remanded for sentence. They will doubtless be ordered to a reformatory school this morning.
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/115117889

Riverine Herald (Echuca, Vic. : Moama, NSW : 1869 - 1954) Sat 23 Jan 1869 Page 2
James Hackford and Thomas Slater pleaded guilty to charges of having stolen two horses, bridles and saddles, the property of Hiram Smith, of Colbinabbin, and George Burke, of Shepparton. They were remanded until this morning for sentence. There were several other charges against the prisoners, who were very young.

Riverine Herald (Echuca, Vic. : Moama, NSW : 1869 - 1954) Wed 20 Jan 1869 Page 2 ECHUCA GENERAL SESSIONS CALENDAR.
James Hackford and Thomas Slater - larceny from a dwelling, also for horse-stealing, and for stealing a bridle and saddle.

Riverine Herald (Echuca, Vic. : Moama, NSW : 1869 - 1954) Wed 3 Mar 1869 Page 2 The Riverine Herald.
We learn with satisfaction that Sergeant Cleary has received a reward of £3 from the police authorities, for the valuable and arduous services rendered by him in securing the arrest and conviction of Thomas Slater and James Hackford, on a charge of horse stealing. Constables Balfour and Feely have each received £2 in recognition of their efforts in the same behalf.

The Argus (Melbourne, Vic. : 1848 - 1957) Sat 27 Feb 1869 Page 4 SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 27,
To Sergeant first class John Cleary, at Echuca, McIvor, £3; and to Constables John Balfour, and Henry Patrick Feely, £2 each, for their services in the arrest and prosecution of Thomas Slater, sentenced to five years for stealing horses and saddles, and of James Hackford, sentenced to one month's imprisonment, and three years in a reformatory for the same offence.

Leader (Melbourne, Vic. : 1862 - 1918) Sat 6 Mar 1869 Page 10 THE TOWN.
Sergeant John Cleary, at Echuca and Mclvor, £3; and constables John Balfour Maud Henry Patrick Feely, £2 each for services in the arrest and prosecution of Thomas Slater, sentenced to five years for horsestealing ; and James Hackford, sentenced to a month's imprisonment and three years in a reformatory for the same offence.

Thomas was sentenced to 5 years hard labour on 23 January 1869. He was only 15 years old. He seems to have spent his time at Pentridge and Geelong prisons during this period. Thomas seems to have been in quite a bit of trouble in his time in prison and in Feb 1873 he is charged with attempted sodomy whilst still in prison. He was given a further 2 years in prison with 2 whippings of 20 lashes on the first and six months next ensuing. He was released from prison on 7 September 1875 by remission.

No record of Thomas and Elizabeth's marriage can be found to date. It is said to be 1882 on one child's birth certifciate and 1881 on another, the 31st of June is consistent on both.

Thomas seems to have remained out of trouble for some years but on 29 May 1888 he is sentenced to 12 months hard labour for false pretences at Castlemaine.

The Kyneton Observer (Vic. : 1856 - 1900 Tue 15 Nov 1887 Page 3 THE ALLEGED STICKING UP IN BODKIN STREET.

Previously on Page 2 <https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/240859693/26214478> Scroll to next page <https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/240859693/26214479>

THE ALLEGED STICKING UP IN BODKIN STREET.
At the police court on Saturday afternoon, before Mr O'Meara, P. M, the evidence for the defence was taken in the case of Alexander McCarron, charged with having entered the house of Thomas Slater on the night of the 6th November, or the morning of the 6th with intent to commit a felony. Mr Godwin appeared for the prisoner.

The case for the prosecution was reported in Saturday's issue. Patrick Quinn said he was a contractor, residing at Kyneton. Remembered Saturday, 5th inst. Remembered meeting Thomas Slater on that day at Broderick's Hotel, in the evening. Had a conversation with him about work, as I had a contract that day from the shire council. Told him I would give him 3s 6d a chain to make drains. Mr Broderick was present. After seeing Slater there he and I left together. He had a belly of beer with him. I was going home, and when we got to the corner above Good's shop in High Street, Slater invited me to his house. When I got near the house, saw the prisoner and his brother James within five yards of the door. Slater said to them, " You'd better come in and have a drink of the beer. "Went into the house, and prisoner and his brother came in too and stood in the passage. There was no light there at time. I and Jim McCarron had beer, but prisoner had none. Could not tell who passed the beer. Do not think Slater was present when the beer was drunk. Think he was away for a candle. Did not see Slater there. Slater had said there was no light and he was going for a candle. Drank my beer out of a cup ; James M'Carron handed it to me. Left the place after having the beer, prisoner and his brother accompanying me. They left me to go home, about 100 yards from their own house, and I went home. Was at Slater's house on Sunday about half-past 1. Saw the prisoner's brother, Reardon, the prisoner, and Slater there. All were talking in an old shed together, and appeared to be on friendly terms. Slater had his coat off and wanted to fight some neighbor. Prisoner and his brother were persuading him not to fight on Sunday. The reason I went to Slater's house on Sunday was to tell him that I would not be able to put him on to work till Tuesday. The house did not appear one that anyone would be likely to rob. Slater asked him for 6d to buy bread. Gave it to him. Cross-examined : Was back and forward to the council chambers several times on Saturday.

Had three drinks up to dark that day. Had a couple of glasses after dark. Do not know what time it was when I went to Slater's. I was sober enough then to know what I was doing. The time might be a couple or three hours after dark ; I think it was between 10 and 11. Could not tell who was in Slater's room. Only was in the passage that night. The beer and cup were brought into the passage by James McCarron. Do not know what room he brought them from. He came, I think, from the room on the right, going in. Slater went into the house first, followed by myself, prisoner, and his brother. Prisoner stood in the passage with me, and Jas. McCarron went in and got the beer. Know Mrs Slater. Do not know if Mrs Slater was in the room where the beer was brought from. The room was the nearest the street. Have had no conversation with the prisoner about the evidence given by me here to-day. Neither did I speak to any one else about it. Did not speak to the prisoner, his brother or Reardon about the case on Sunday. Knew nothing about it then. Jas. McCarron served me with the summons as witness and I had no conversation with him then. Do not know how it was that the evidence to be given here to-day was put on paper I only say what I saw and heard myself. Spoke to the prisoner and his brother yesterday, but only bade him the time of day.

To the Bench -. Did not speak to them about the case. Cross-examination continued: Had no drink with the prisoner or his brother today or yesterday in any hotel or any other place. Was not in the Shamrock Hotel to-day drinking with prisoner, his brother, and Reardon. Was not there at all today.

William Roderick, a publican carrying on business in Kyneton, deposed: I knew Slater and prisoner; saw Slater last Saturday, the 5th, in my hotel. Prisoner and his brother were with him. To the best of my opinion, the time was between 9 and 10 o'clock. They had drinks together in the bar, prisoner paying for them. Think prisoner paid for two rounds. Would not swear that prisoner s brother did not pay for any drinks. They appeared to be on friendly terms. Heard Slater ask prisoner and his brother to his place. They left a minute or two after. Slater came back to my hotel after leaving with prisoner and his brother-about 11. 15. Quinn was not in the house when Slater came back, but they were in together before coming with the two McCarrons. When Slater came back after leaving with the McCarrons, he came back for 6d worth of beer, which I served to him in a black billy.

Cross-examined: The McCarrons and Slater left the hotel between 9 and 10 o'clock. When Slater went away after seeing Quinn he did not take any beer with him. Re-examined : When Slater was in with Quinn, he had not a billy with him, James McCarron, brother of the prisoner, deposed : On the 5th November saw Slater opposite the shire hall, about 2 o'clock p. m, went to the Hotel with the prisoner, Quinn, Macaulay and his son. Slater came in afterwards, After this, saw Slater near the Mechanics. I, the prisoner, and Macaulay, went up to Patterson's Hotel, in High Street, and Slater followed us into the hotel, where we were talking together. At the hotel, Macaulay paid prisoner and me our wages in cash. Previous to this prisoner shouted for Slater and himself. Slater must have known of the money paid by Macaulay. While in Patterson's, Slater asked me to come up and have supper at his place. Refused the invitation. ' W. Broderick, recalled; Slater twice asked prisoner to go to his place while in my hotel. Prisoner made no reply. Slater and the McCarrons went to the door. It was raining at the time, and prisoner said, "We'll go back and have another drink. " They came back and had a drink each,

On this Page 3 Scroll to previous page <https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/240859693/26214479>

Slater said, "the best thing you can do Alec is to come up to my place. " Prisoner made no reply. Slater said, " Will you come : and prisoner answered, " I will. " They then left, but Slater did not take prisoner by the arm.

James McCarron, recalled; After leaving Patterson's we went to Broderick's where we had two drinks each for which prisoner paid. Broderick served. While in Broderick's Slater asked prisoner to go to his place and previous to this, when on the path outside Patterson's, Slater made a similar request. Prisoner refused once, and Slater caught him by the arm and asked him again. Eventually we did go to Slater's at about 11 o'clock. There was no light in Slater's. Slater entered the house and we followed him. When we were inside Slated tried to lock the door, and asked if I'd lock it. I struck a match and lit a candle.

There was only one room. Mrs Slater was in the room, in bed. Slater said, "Can't we rise some beer?" and showed a shilling . I said, I'll shout" and gave him half a crown telling him to get 1s 6d worth of beer. Slater took an old billy-can, and went for the beer. While Slater was away the candle burnt out, and prisoner then left the room. I asked Mrs Slater if there were more candles, and she replied " No. " Heard some people coming up, and I went to the door and saw Slater and Quinn. Slater returned me a shilling. I told Slater there was no candle, and gave him a penny to get one. The beer was drunk in the passage of the house. I had some of the beer, drinking from the billy, and then handed Quinn the billy to get a drink. Prisoner, Quinn, and I went away. I got home first, and prisoner in about 20 minutes or half an hour after me. Prisoner and I sleep in the same room. I got home about 11. 30. Prisoner did not go out of the house again that night. Our house is about 100 yds from Slater's.

Prisoner was in bed before me. If shots had been fired near Slater's before prisoner came home I could have heard them. The 5th November was Guy Fawkes'Day. Heard no crackers being let off. Next morning Dan Reardon and Slater came to my house. In consequence of what Reardon said, I went to Slater's house, prisoner following. In the presence of the prisoner. Slater said "see the missus " (meaning' "his wife). We did see her and she said, there would be no more about the case. Prisoner and Mrs Slater afterwards had a chat together, and they appeared to be friendly. After the case was settled, I went home, and after this met the prisoner. Slater, and Dan Reardon down the town, walking together in Mollison Street We went back to Slater's together, reaching there about 12 or 1 o'clock, all being friendly. Slater wanted to fight a neighbor named Lane and prisoner and Reardon stopped him. Slater said " Lane was the cause of it all (meaning what occurred during the night).

Cross-examined: On the Saturday I had six or seven drinks, mostly glasses of beer one pint. Had the first beer about 11 a. m. Am quite sure I had not ten drinks, but might have had one or two more than six. Quinn had two or three drinks with me. If Mrs Slater swears that I and the prisoner never entered her room that night, that will be false. If Quinn swears that I went into the room at Slater's and brought him out a cupful of beer into the passage that will not be true. I know the revolver produced. I bought I it for 6d, six or seven years ago. It has been lying about the house, and prisoner could get it at any time. To my knowledge the revolver was loaded last about four years ago, after which a couple of shots were fired from it. I swear positively three revolver shots were not fired near Slater's house on the night in ques tion. It could not have been fired off near that place or I would have heard it. I will not swear prisoner had not the revolver with him. To Mr O'Meara: I do not know where the revolver was at the time in question. Witness: Powder and shot are not kept in the house.

The conversation with Slater in Mollison Street on Sunday afternoon was opposite Giles'. We were in the Town Hall Hotel on the Sunday. Slater was not given any money there. We had a " kind of refreshment" in the Town Hall Hotel, We had beers, for which " Alec " (prisoner) paid. Slater, Reardon, and I gave 6d each, and Alec (prisoner) Said " Give the lot to me, and I'll shout. " Prisoner handed the money for the drinks to Mrs Barnes. "It is not correct that prisoner gave Slater a 2s piece to pay for the drinks. It is in correct that Mrs Slater said her husband had seen the sergeant about the case. I have been once to Slater's to try and get the matter settled, and they said it was settled. Slater never said he had been down to the sergeant Daniel Reardon corroborated the evidence of the witness McCarron in respect to what occurred after seeing Slater at McCarron's on the Sunday morning, and said that prisoner and Mrs Slater shook hands, as did the prisoner and Slater, after the interview. Cross-examined: Had no conversation with prisoner and his brother about the row at Slater's.

Went to Slater's because he brought me there to settle the affair, Prisoner has been often in my company, but not lately. Never saw the revolver in prisoner's possession. - (The witness corroborated the evidence of SIater and the witness McCarron with reference to getting drink ; at the Town Hall Hotel on the Sunday, and said he believed Slater paid the money for the drinks. ) I did not pay 6d in towards the drink, but James McCarron did. Never interfered to settle the matter between the prisoner and Slater. Was not in a hotel this (Friday) morning with prisoner and Quinn.

George Lane, blacksmith, a neighbor of Slater's, living about 30 or 40 yards away, deposed that on the night is question he heard no discharge of firearms about 11 or 12 o'clock, though he was at home and was not asleep. Was not on friendly terms with Slater, who is a perfect nuisance.

Cross-examined: Several shots might have been fired about 12. 30 that night This was the case for the defence. The prisoner reserved his defence, and was committed for trial at the Kyneton General sessions on the 22nd inst. Bail was allowed as before.

The Albury Banner and Wodonga Express (NSW : 1860 - 1938) Fri 13 Sep 1889 Page 26
A STRANGE AFFAIR.
The Guardian relates the following strange incident:-" On Friday last, a young man named Thomas Slater, who has previously been convicted for uttering a valueless cheque, visited Kyneton, and during the day appears to have indulged in a drinking bout. In the afternoon be presented himself at the hospital in an excited state, and gained an audience of Dr. Fetherstonhaugh, the resident surgeon, to whom he represented that his brother Charley was dead.
As the doctor had recently been treating Charley at the hospital for a pulmonary complaint, the announcement did not cause him much surprise. He thereupon entered into conversation with the narrator concerning the death of his brother. Slater, in plaintive tones, gave an accurate description of the death-bed scene, and implored the doctor to give him a certificate of his brother's death, in order that he would be in a position to make arrangements for the obsequies. The doctor-good easy mind-believed every word the scoundrel had told him, and, without hesitation, wrote out the certificate and handed it to Slater. He then visited the residence of Miss Conway, the registrar of births and deaths, and presenting the certificate, obtained the usual registration of his brother's death. He next visited the establishment of Mr. T. W. Ross, the undertaker, in High-street, to make arrangements for the coffin and hearse. Mr. Ross, however, declined to negotiate with him, and shortly afterwards it was ascertained that Charles Slater was not dead, and that Thomas had imposed upon the doctor and registrar. A warrant was issued for his arrest in due course.
On Friday night, in the company of his little girl, Slater left Kyneton by the 10 o'clock coach for Langley,- where his parents reside. He arrived at his destination about 11 o'clock, and after some conversation with his parents gained admittance for himself and child. As he and his parents are not on friendly terms, they were disinclined to shelter him for the night. After some persuasion, however, they consented to his remaining till the following morning, and, in order that he might commit no misdeed while there, his poor aged father sat up all night lo watch him. Early on Saturday morning the offender took his departure, and was arrested the next day for making the false declaration, and was brought before the police court. The prisoner pleaded guilty to the charge, and was remanded. His offence is one of the most singular that has ever occurred in the district, and he can advance no reason why he should have been guilty of such unjustifiable conduct, by which he had nothing to gain."
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/254390888



The Kyneton Observer (Vic. : 1856 - 1900) Thu 27 Oct 1887 Page 3 Advertising
N O T I C E .
I DESIRE to Notify to TRADESPEOPLE of Kyneton and district that I will not be responsible for any Debts contracted by my brother. Thomas Slater (who has not been a member of our household since 14 years of age):
JOHN BENJAMIN SLATER, Jnr.,
Langley, 25th October, 1887.

The Kyneton Observer (Vic. : 1856 - 1900) Thu 24 Nov 1887 Page 2 GENERAL SESSIONS.
GENERAL SESSIONS.
KYNETON- Tuesday, November 22.
Before Mr Hamilton, Chairman.)
FELONIOIUS INTENT
Alexander McCarron appeared to answer a charge of having on the night of the 6th November entered the house of Thomas Slater, Kyneton, with intent to commit a felony.

Mr McInerney (Mr Godwin) appeared for the prisoner, who pleaded ' not guilty." The following jury was empannelled: -
Messrs R. McGrane (foreman) Jas Orr, R. Bloomfield, R. Fanning, A. Rae, M. Tyrrill, R. J. McLelland, G. Knight, F. Taylor, S. Maskell, W. R. Appleford, and J.Pechy.

The case was fully reported in the OBSERVER of the 12th and 15th insts. Dr Mclnerney took the objection that the presentment was not specific. The Crown Prosecutor amended the presentment by defining the felony intended to be committed as larceny of goods.

The charge against the prisoner was that about 12.30 a.m. on the 6th inst the prisoner uttered Slater's house and demanded' a shilling, at the same time presenting a revolver at Slater, subsequently threatening to blow out Slater's brains if he touched anything on the table. The prisoner was got out of the house by Mrs Slater, and a few moments afterwards the Slaters heard three shots fired, later in the day friends of the prisoner endeavored to have the matter squared.

Evidence for the prosecution was given by Thomas Slater, who was cross-examined with the view of showing that on the night in question he had drunk so much that he actually did not know what had transpired.

The witness gave his evidence under cross examination in a contradictory style, and admitted having been twice convicted. Elizabeth Slater, his wife, repeated the evidence given by her at the police court, and adhered to it consistently. She also swore that on the night in question her husband was able to take his boots off before going to bed, and that the prisoner conducted himself in a manner which showed that he knew what he was doing.

Constable McCarthy repeated his evidence in reference to finding at the prisoner's residence the revolver, which bore indications of three barrels having been recently discharged. Two other barrels were loaded. The charge in one barrel was a small quantity of powder and some paper; in the other, about 13 shot and sufficient powder to propel the charge.

Sergeant Young corroborated Constable McGarthy's evidence, and swore that three barrels of the revolver, when secured, bore signs of having been recently discharged. Margaret Rogers, who resides about 300 yards from Slater's house, deposed that on the night in question, after she had gone to bed, she heard two shots. This witness is a tenant of the prisoner's father Dr McInerney asked His Honor whether there was any case to go to the jury.

His Honor replied that there was. There was evidence that the prisoner had entered Slater's house and demanded a shilling, at the same time presenting a revolver.

Patrick Quinn, William Broderick, and James McCarron, repeated their evidence in the police court, which went to show that Slater, the prisoner, and the last mentioned witness, had been drinking freely together. In cross-examination James McCarron said that he went to Slater's, once to settle the case because he did not want his name mixed up with the charge, and afterwards admitted an acquaintance with Mr John Maloney, Mr Pat Maloney, and Mr Dan Reardon, Mr John Reardon. Daniel Reardon repeated his previous evidence.

Dr McInerney then addressed the jury. He said the case was a trumpery one and should never have been brought before a court of justice, or submitted to a judge or jury. He commented upon the previous good character of the prisoner and the contradictory evidence given by Slater and his wife for the prosecution, whilst the evidence given for the defence was confirmatory and conclusive., It was clear that Slater had invited prisoner to his house, and that the whole affair was a drunken freak. Supposing the prisoner had actually entered the house as stated by Slater, he could not have put Mrs Starter in such bodily fear, or she would not have had the presence of mind to get up and shove him out. In concluding he contended that Slater brought the charge against the prisoner with the intention, if possible, to extort money out of prisoner and his brother, as he knew they were in good circumstances, being contractors.

He did not think for a moment that a jury of rational men would find the prisoner guilty and have him convicted as a criminal of the deepest dye.

Mr Johnston reviewed the evidence of the case for the prosecution and defence, and submitted that the evidence of Slater and his wife was satisfactory, and there was nothing in it to show that they concocted the case. On the other hand the evidence of some of the witnesses for the defence was most contradictory, especially that of James McCarron's. He hoped that they would not treat the case as a trivial one, but review the evidence ,in a rational manner, and bring in a verdict for the Crown if they thought the prisoner guilty of the heinous charge with which he stood indicted.
His Ho nor reviewed the whole of the evidence, and strongly summed up in the prisoner's favour, as he thought the evidence for the prosecution was very weak.

There were slight discrepancies between the statements of Slater and his wife. If there was any doubt in their minds as to whether the prisoner entered the dwelling house of Slater with the intention of perpetuating a felony, the prisoner was entitled to that doubt.

The jury retired for the space of three minutes and then returned with a verdict of ''not guilty.". The. prisoner was therefore discharged.

The Kyneton Observer (Vic. : 1856 - 1900) Sat 25 Feb 1888 Page 2 POLICE. POLICES KYNETON. -Thursday, February 23.
(Before Mr H. Rawson, J. P. )
DRUNK, &C. John Curran, on the complaint of Constable Mooney, was charged with three offences, drunk and disorderly, obscene language, and resisting the police. On the first two offences he was fined 5s for each, and 10s for the latter, and the fines were paid.
John Flannery and Thomas Slater were charged by Constable - Rasmussen with drunkenness, and fined 5s with the alternative of 24 hours.
The Kyneton Observer (Vic. : 1856 - 1900) Sat 28 Apr 1888 Page 2 POLICE.
POLICE.
KYNETON-Friday, April 27.
(Before Messrs Armstrong, Blencowe, and Bennie, Js. P. )
FALSE PRETENCES.
Thomas Slater, remanded from Woodend, was charged with having at Kyneton, obtained money by false pretences - A valueless cheque. Senior-Constable Dwyer asked for a remand for eight days, to enable search to he made for another man concerned in the offence. The prisoner said he had nothing to say against a remand, but he was not guilty.
The Bench offered to discharge the prisoner at once if he could prove his innocence. The prisoner said the cheque was filled up before he saw it. He had put his name on the back because he had been asked to witness it.
Senior-constable McWilliams, of Woodend, deposed that he met the prisoner at "Woodend,' on Wednesday night, about 11 30 o'clock, Mid challenged him with the offence. Prisoner denied it, but on the road to the lock up said "There's no use denying it. I am the man. " To the prisoner: I asked you for the description of the other man, and if you knew who signed the cheque. You told me you signed your name as witness.
To the Bench: The prisoner described the other man who is wanted, and who has been seen about Newham lately. The prisoner was remanded till Friday next.


The Age (Melbourne, Vic. : 1854 - 1954) Wed 30 May 1888 Page 6 CASTLEMAINE GENERAL
Leader (Melbourne, Vic. : 1862 - 1918) Sat 2 Jun 1888 Page 21 CASTLEMAINE GENERAL ASSIZES
CASTLEMAINE GENERAL
SESSIONS.
FROM our own CORRESPONDENT
CASTLEMAINE, Tuesday.
At the General Sessions held here to-day Judge Chomley presided. Mrs. Wagstaff, who was charged with manslaughter, was remanded to the Sandhurst Assizes to be held on 19th June, as the court had no jurisdiction in such, cases. Thomas Slater, who was charged with obtaining money by false pretences in passing a fraudulent cheque, was sentenced to 12 months' hard labor in the Sandhurst gaol.

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/240861823
The Kyneton Observer (Vic. : 1856 - 1900) Sat 12 May 1888 Page 3 THE VALUELESS CHEQUE BUSINESS.
THE VALUELESS CHEQUE BUSINESS.
At the police court yesterday morning before Messrs Ewing and Elliott . J's. P. , Thomas Slater, a well known resident of this locality, was charged with having on the 16th March last obtained money and goods to the value of £1 15s from William Heffernan, of the Shire Arms Hotel, High Street.

Sargeant Young conducted the prosecution the prisoner was undefended.

M. K Armstrong, newspaper proprietor residing at Kyneton, deposed : On the 16th March last the prisoner in company with another man who gave the name of Brookes came to my shop and asked for a blank cheque on the National Bank. Brookes also made the request. I did not know either of the men, and asked Brookes his name. He said it was Brookes: that he was a farmer at Moorabbie. I asked where that place was and the prisoner answered, that it was near to McIvor. I then asked Brookes if he had a banking account, and he said he had an account at Sandhurst. I said "You're a stranger to me. can you mention the name of any respectable person here who knows you ? He said that Mrs Adams of Newham was his sister. I then gave Brookes a blank cheque. He asked me to fill up the body of it for him. I asked Brookes how much he wished it drawn for and he replied " Five pounds. " I 'asked him in whose favor he wished it drawn and he asked me to fill it up, "Self" I did so and gave him the cheque which he signed in my presence. The cheque produced is the same one.

There are two figures 5. 1 only wrote the figure close up to the £. One 5 has been added since 1 filled up the cheque. Dried the cheque on the blotting paper and on finally handing it back the prisoner held out his land to receive it, but I said "Oh. no it's not yours. " I gave, the cheque to Brookes who gave me a penny for it. Both men left the shop together. On 21st March the prisoner came to my shop alone and asked me if I remembered giving a man a blank cheque on the previous Friday. l said, "I do; l filled it up for him. " Then he said "There's something wrong with that cheque. Will you come up and see Mr Heffernan of the Shire Arms about it?" I said, "No if Mr Heffernan desires to see me about it let him come down to me. I have nothing to do with him. " I also said to prisoner "What is your interest in the cheque?" He replied "I had worked for Brookes doing some fencing. Brookes is a farmer at Morrabbie. " I asked him whether his account for fencing came exactly to £5 and he answered "No, it was a few shillings over, but I did not get the few shillings. " I told him he had better bring down Heffernan to me. He did so Heffernan told me in the prisoner's presence that the cheque had been passed upon him by the prisoner and Brookes; that he had paid it in to his account and that it had been returned to him discredited. I advised Heffernan to take the prisoner with him and lay the matter before the sergeant of police. They both then left. The prisoner asked no questions.

William Heffernan, licensee of the Shire Arms Hotel, Kyneton, deposed: On the 16th of March last the prisoner called at my place between 7 and 8 o'clock in the evening. Another man whom I did not know, and whom I have not since seen being with him. The prisoner handed me the cheque and the other man said "It's alright" The cheque was produced is the same I told them I did not care about cashing cheques. Prisoner asked me to give him £1 on it, which I did, giving him silver. Before giving him the money I asked him to endorse it. Gave prisoner a pen and he wrote his name on the back. They then had drinks. In a few minutes after prisoner came back and asked me for 6s more, which I gave him. During the same evening prisoner got drinks to the value of 9s, making £l 15s in all.

Prisoner said the money, and payment for the drinks, were to be deducted from the cheque, which I could cash at any of the banks. On the 19th March l paid the cheque into the Bank of Victoria, Kyneton for collection; The cheque was returned to me a few days after as valueless and marked "No account. " A few days after this the prisoner came to my place and asked if the cheque was right, and I told him it was not and that he knew very well it was not. Prisoner then said, " Come on down to Mr Armstrong's. " I went with him and prisoner said, "Your money will be all right. You won't lose your money. Mr Armstrong had some conversation with the prisoner, and eventually advised me to see the police about the matter. I did so, bringing prisoner with me. To prisoner: You handed the cheque to me and put your name on the back. I gave the money to you and the other man. Some of the silver fell on the floor and you both scrambled for it and picked it up between you.

Sergeant Young deposed:
On the 21st March the last witness and the prisoner came to the police station in reference to the cheque. The last witness handed me the cheque, and said that he had given the prisoner money and drinks to the amount of £1 15s for the cheque which had been returned to him marked " No account. " I asked the prisoner how he had become possessed of the cheque, and he said he had obtained it for fencing he had done for the man Brookes who had signed it. and who was a former at Moorabbie. I questioned him about the locality, and told him I would have enquiries made through the Heathcote police. Prisoner agreed to call at the station on the Friday following to hear the result. He did not do so, and I did not see him again until he was in custody. I told him the Heathcote police could not find any such farmer at Moorabbie as "E. Brookes," and asked how he became acquainted with them. Prisoner said he met him at the Albion Hotel. Kyneton, on the 16th March, and that they went together to Mr Armstrong's, obtained a cheque, and subsequently had it cashed at Mr Heffernan's Hotel. I asked him how he came to make the statement that he had been fencing for this man at Moorabbie, knowing that the man was not a farmer there. Prisoner replied, "I'll plead guilty to the cheque so far as I am concerned. "

The man Brookes has not yet been found. To the prisoner: You told me that Brookes owed you £5 5s for fencing and that you owed him 5s for a bet. Mounted-constable Dwyer, of Heath cote, deposed : I have been stationed at Heathcote for 17 years, and know the Moorabbie district well. It is 10 miles from Heathcote. It is my sub-district, and I am continually travelling round the locality. There is no farmer of the name of " E. Brooke" living in that district, nor has there been for the past 17 years. There is one farmer named George Brook at Moorabbie. I do not know the prisoner.

Edwin Jolly, clerk in the National Bank of Australasia at Sandhurst, deposed : The cheque produced came to me at the bank for payment. I dishonored it on the 20th March, answering it " No account. " No person named "E. Brookes" had an account at the bank at that date, and as far as I can discover there never has been an account at the bank in that name or in the name of E Brooke. Senior-constable -McWilliams, of Woodend, deposed: I arrested the prisoner on the 25th April about 11. 30 p. m. , at Woodend on the charge of obtaining money under false pretences. He then denied being the man wanted, but on the way to the lock-up said, " There's no use in denying it ; I am the proper man. Brookes: signed the cheque, and I put my name on the back. " This concluded the case for the prosecution.

The prisoner reserved his defence, and was committed for trial at the Castlemaine General Sessions on the 29th inst. Bail was fixed at £200-the prisoner in £100, and two sureties in £50 each.

Bendigo Advertiser (Vic. : 1855 - 1918) Thu 31 May 1888 Page 2 CASTLEMAINE.
Thomas Slater pleaded guilty to a charge of having passed a forged cheque at Kyneton, and was sentenced to nine months' imprisonment in the Castlemaine gaol.

Then in October 1889 he was again sentenced to gaol

The Age (Melbourne, Vic. : 1854 - 1954) Sat 19 Oct 1889 Page 10 FALSE DECLARATION.
FALSE DECLARATION. .
Thomas Slater, charged with making a false declaration, withdrew his former plea of "not guilty " and pleaded guilty. The evidence showed that prisoner went to the office of Miss Ellen Conway, deputy registrar of births and deaths at Kyneton, and producing a medical certificate registered the death of his brother, who, however, was not dead at all. Prisoner acknowledged a previous conviction, and was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment.

Bendigo Advertiser (Vic. : 1855 - 1918) Fri 18 Oct 1889 Page 3 SANDHURST COURT OF ASSIZE.
PLEADINGS.
Thomas Slater pleaded " Not guilty" to making a false declaration to the deputy registrar of births and deaths at Kyneton on 23rd August last.

The Argus (Melbourne, Vic. : 1848 - 1957) Sat 26 Oct 1889 Page 12 SANDHURST.
A batch of prisoners was sent to Pentridge to day from the Sandhurst Gaol, which included William McCarron, sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment for manslaughter in connection with the death of his and his daughter's child at Kaarimba, James Powell, sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment for cattle-stealing ; Thomas Slater, sentenced to one year's imprisonment for making a false declaration at Kyneton ; and Patrick Finn, a larrikin, who is serving a nine months' sentence for assaulting the police and street rowdyism.

The Kyneton Observer (Vic. : 1856 - 1900) Sat 17 Jan 1891 Page 2 POLICE.
P O L I C E . '
KYNETON. '97Friday, January 16.
(Before Mr M. K. Armstrong, J.P.)
OBSCENE LANGUAGE.
Thomas Slater was charged on summons with having used obscene language in Piper Street on the 8th inst. He pleaded, guilty, but asserted ignorance of the occasion of the charge.
Constable Gutcher deposed that he took proceedings on account of several complaints made to him, but he did not hear any of the Ianguage complained of.

Charles Slater, brother of the defendant, one of those who had complained to Constable Gutcher, deposed to the language used towards him by defendant. (The language was unfit for reproduction.)

Randolph Pearce gave similar evidence and deposed that defendant persisted in attempts " to kick up a row " with the previous witness. He ordered defendant away. Defendant did go away, but returned and wanted witness to fight him for five minutes. Witness was not agreeable, and the fight did not take place.

This was the case for the prosecution. The defendant said it was very hard to be punished because his family would not let him alone. His mother came to his place and called him a "Pentridge bird."
Fined 10s or 48 hours' imprisonment...........................

In a separate prison record prisoner 8441 - 22553 states that on 20 April 1893 Thomas was charged with Vagrancy under the name Thomas Salter in Maryborough and was sentenced to 3 months hard labour, but I have been unable to find any other mention or newspaper articles on this. In this document it states Thomas's height as 5' 4".

In 1883 Thomas was listed as a horse breaker, and in 1887 as a labourer. No record of this marriage can be found. It is said to be 1882 on one child's birth certificate and 1881 on another, the 31st of June is consistent on both.

It appears that Thomas was of an intemperate man. His wife states that he was. She also stated that they had been living in Kyneton for 6 years at the time of his death. She says she had been living with him for 13 years "when he was not in gaol". On the day of his sister Edith's wedding 25th June 1894, he went to Barry's hotel in Kyneton. There was some kind of altercation with his brother Joseph and possibly his new brother in law Henry Parsell. In Joseph Slater's statement he comments that he and his brother were not on speaking terms and had not been for some time.

The letter by the Kyneton Police dated 17 July 1894, sent to the Chief Commissioner of Police states that "all of the persons who were about the Royal hotel on the night of the 25th of June where the deceased met with the injuries that subsequently caused his death were called and examined, and although the evidence of nearly every witness who was there points more or less to the deceased's brother, Joseph Slater, being the person who gave the blow that caused the fracture, not one of them will state positively that he did strike deceased. I entertain but little doubt about it myself, but I do not think the evidence would warrant the police in bringing him before the court".

Sometime between his arriving at the hotel and his arrival at home on that night he sustained a head injury (possibly inflicted by his brother). He went to hospital the next day but discharged himself. For the next few days he went to the hospital to have his wound re-dressed and appeared to be improving, but several days later he became worse and spent the 6th of July in bed. He became paralysed down one side of his body and was returned to hospital about 3pm on Saturday 7th July where he died some hours later.

Although Thomas's previous antics with the law had been well reported in the newspapers of the day, I have so far found no mention of his death.

The Kyneton Observer (Vic. : 1856 - 1900) Tue 17 Jul 1894 Page 2 MAGISTERIAL ENQUIRY. MAGISTERIAL ENQUIRY,
How Thomas Slater Died. At the Kyneton Hospital on the morning of Monday, July 9, Mr J. E. Andrews, J. P. , opened a magisterial enquiry touching the death of Thomas Slater, who was admitted to the hospital on the previous Saturday, and who died shortly after admission. Dr J. H. Pestell deposed that the deceased was taken to the hospital on his recommendation. He was suffering from some ???? the right side. Made a post mortem examination, and found a large clot filling the whole of the right hemisphere of the brain and compressing it. Found a small fracture on the upper wall of the orbit on the right side. Witness' opinion was that death had been caused by secondary haemorrhage from the effects of the fracture. Dr S. Smith, resident surgeon at the hospital, concurred with Dr J. H. Pestell.

Elizabeth Slater, wife of the deceased, deposed that he came home between 7 and 7. 30 on the night of June 25. His face was covered with blood. She said " What have you been doing?" He replied. " That is the wedding party for you. " She placed him in a rocking chair and bathed his face. After this she asked how he got injured, and deceased replied "That's Joe. " She put him to bed with his clothes on and he slept until 11. 30 next morning. He was then taken by the police to the hospital. Deceased said to one of the police, "Joe and Jack Parsells hit me. " On the evening of the same day deceased returned from the hospital. Deceased repeatedly said "Joe did it. " During the following week deceased went to work, and several times got drunk. During the first week in July deceased complained of his head, and on July 6 remained in bed all day. On the next day he became unconscious and, at Dr J. H. Pestell's suggestion, was removed to the hospital.

J. J. Barry, of the Royal Hotel, deposed that on the night of June 25 deceased was at his place between 6 and 7 o'clock, and was partly intoxicated. Noticed no marks of violence on his face then. There was a dispute between Joseph Slater and deceased about a drink, and Joseph Slater pushed or hit him, and deceased fell backwards on the floor through the door into a passage. Witness lifted him up, opened the door, and put him out on the footpath. Deceased could not stand, and would have fallen if witness had not prevented him. Tried to shake him up but he slipped out of witness' arms and fell on the footpath in a sitting position and then rolled over, face downward. Lifted him up again and he walked into the passage and said "I want to go home. " Opened the back door of the passage and Parsells and witness saw him by the back way into Wedge street. Deceased shook hands and wished them "Good night" and walked towards his home quite steadily. Did not notice any blood on deceased when witness picked him up, but when taking him along the passage saw some blood on his face. Did not think deceased received the injuries to his head by falling on the footpath. The men in the room were in a better position than witness to say whether deceased was struck or pushed.

At this stage the enquiry was adjourned for a week to admit of necessary enquiries being made by the police.

The enquiry was resumed at the courthouse yesterday morning, before Mr Andrews, J . P. Mr Godwin appeared to watch the case for the licensee of the Royal Hotel. Dr J. a. Pestell (re-called) deposed that he had examined the brain of the deceased and found that there was no disease sufficient to account for death. Was still of the opinion that the fracture of the skull was caused by a blow from outside on the eye in an upward direction. Was of the opinion that there had been two blows - one from the front and the other from the side. The injuries to the forehead could have been caused by a fall on the footpath or on some foreign body. The blow which caused the fracture could have been given by a man's fist, but not by a hard foreign substance.
Dr R. B. Duncan deposed that he saw the deceased in the hospital ward on July 7. He was then, unconscious and breathing stertorously. Made a post mortem, examination and found that the brain was slightly congested. Found a fissure fracture of the frontal bone. In his opinion the cause of death was-(l) Fracture of the floor of the frontal bone; (2) haemorrhage, induced by the fracture. In the opinion of the witness the fracture, extending as it did to the cavernus sinus injured that structure and induced the bleeding; in the first instance the haemorrhage was slight and the leakage was temporarily stopped, but owing to some exciting cause secondary haemorrhage took place immediately prior to deceased's unconsciousness and by its presence in the brain was the cause of death. The injury which caused the fracture could not have been caused by the deceased having fallen on the footpath in a sitting position and then rolling over. The fracture was caused by direct violence applied just above the eye. The injury could have been caused by a blow from a fist. Dr J. H. Pestell (re-called) deposed that at the post mortem he removed that portion of the skull including the fracture and left it in charge of Dr Smith, the resident surgeon at the hospital. At the time of the fracture a slight haemorrhage took place at the seat of fracture, and some days afterwards secondary changes occurred, which led to diffusion of blood, which was the immediate cause of death.

Dr. Smith, resident surgeon of the Kyneton Hospital, deposed that he made a postmortem, in company with Dr. J. H. Pestell. Agreed with Dr. Pestell's conclusions, which were in accordance with witness's previous ideas. Deceased was brought first to the hospital on June 26. He was quite sensible then, and exhibited the wounds described by Dr. Pestell. The face was covered with blood, but apparently there was no fracture of the skull. The injuries had been inflicted within 24 hours of the examination. There was a good deal of swelling round the right eye. Deceased did not say how the injuries had been caused. Thought deceased had got into a row and had been fighting. The injury to the eye could have been caused by a blow from a fist. The fracture found at the postmortem could not have been found by the examination made when deceased was admitted to the hospital. Sent deceased to bed, as he was suffering from the effects of drink. Deceased left the hospital of his own accord about 5 o'clock in the afternoon of the same day. Deceased came to the hospital on the following day, or the second day, and had his head dressed. Next saw deceased when he was brought in again on July 7, about 3 o'clock. Deceased was then unconscious, and died three or four hours after without regaining consciousness, The marks on deceased's face on June 26. Deceased was paralysed on the right side when last admitted.

Charles Skidmore, labourer, residing at Kyneton. deposed that he knew the deceased. Remembered Monday, 25th June last. Was at the Royal Hotel that night about 7. 15. As he went in at the side door saw deceased fall across the passage from the bar parlour. Deceased, as he lay in the passage, had his feet in the bar parlour. -- Mr J. J. Barry picked him up, led him out into Piper street, and told him to go home. Slater staggered, and fell on the footpath. Mr Barry caught hold of him, and broke his fall. Slater came down in a sitting posture, and then rolled on the pavement. Mr Barry lifted him up, and be fell again, towards the gutter. Witness then went into the bar, leaving Barry, deceased, and Edmund Barry outside. Saw P. Keogh, P. Corby, Joe Slater, and John Parsells in the parlour. A man named J. McCarthy was in the bar, and W. Ryan was either in the bar or the parlour. Heard nothing about any quarrel. Saw deceased again in the passage two or three minutes afterwards. He was with Mr. Barry and Parsells. The only remark deceased made was that he wanted to go home. Did not notice any marks or blood on deceased's face when he was picked up in passage. When witness saw deceased in the passage the second time there was blood on his nose. Did not speak to any one present about deceased falling in the passage. Did not see any person strike, push, or ill-use deceased. Had not told any person that he (witness) had seen deceased ill-used. Did not remember saying next day that if it had been anyone else but Tom Slater he (witness) would have interfered, as it was shameful the way he was being knocked about. Had spoken to his father about that night, but to no one else except Sergeant Beck. Did not say to any one that he (witness) saw Barry strike deceased or chuck him out. Had not spoken about this case to Mr Barry since Monday last.

Patrick John Keogh, labourer, residing near Green Hill, deposed that on the 25^th June last he was at the Royal Hotel about dusk. Saw deceased at the hotel about 7 o'clock, in the bar parlor. Others in the room were those named by the witness Skidmore. Saw deceased fall on the door of the room, but did not know what caused him to fall. Deceased fell without any interference from any person. Deceased was annoying everyone present by his conduct, but was not quarrelling. Deceased fell in- side the room and no portion of his body was in the passage. Mr J. J. Barry picked [de]ceased fell again, this time through the door into the passage. Mr. Barry picked him up again and took him outside, and witness did not see him again. There were then no fresh marks on deceased's face when witness last saw him. Did not see any one strike deceased, but it was possible he might have been struck without witness seeing it done. Believed that deceased deliberately threw himself down, expecting that his brother was about to hit him.

John McCarthy, labourer, who was at the Royal Hotel on the night in question, and who saw the deceased there, deposed that Barry put deceased out through the bar door. Some time later deceased came into the bar parlour. Saw Mr Barry pick deceased up off the floor of the room, and take him into the passage. Did not see deceased again. Some-one in the room said "Joe hit him," explaining how deceased fell. Saw Joe Slater standing about 6ft. away from deceased. Did not see any person strike or push deceased. Patrick Corby, labourer, another of those who were at the Royal Hotel on the night of June 25, stated that the company present (whose names have been given in previous evidence) objected to the presence of deceased. Joseph Slater gave deceased a push. No one made any personal remark respecting deceased, and witness thought that deceased was not wanted there, as he was making himself objectionable. One of those present told deceased to sit down and be quiet. Thought Joe Slater rose on his feet and gave deceased a push. Was not prepared to say that Joe Slater did not strike deceased-It was a push with both hands. Could not remember exactly what took place. No one else touched deceased before he fell except his brother Joe. was "pretty near perfectly sober. " No one of the company was the worse for drink, but all had " a few. " Could not remember whether Joe Slater struck or pushed his brother, or whether he made any remark when striking or pushing. Could not remember whether he (witness had spoken to anyone regarding the events of that night. Had spoken to J. Parsells about it, but could not remember what was said.

William Ryan, farmer, Lauriston, deposed that he saw deceased at the Royal Hotel on the night of July 25. Deceased was on the floor and Joe Slater on the sofa. The latter got up and went towards deceased, saying " Clear out and go home. " Deceased then fell backwards on the floor. Thought Joe Slater got within a yard of deceased. Did not see Joe Slater touch deceased, as the former's back was turned towards witness. Mr Barry picked up deceased and told him to go home, taking him into the passage. Did not hear anyone say during the evening "Joe hit him. " A few minutes afterwards saw Mr Barry taking deceased along the passage. Mr Barry treated deceased very kindly. Did not hear deceased make any remark when going along the passage.

John Parsells, Kyneton and Black Hill, remembered being at the Royal Hotel on the evening of June 25 in company with other persons named by previous witnesses. Deceased was there too. There was no dispute. All that happened was that deceased staggered towards his brother Joe, who pushed him and told him to keep away. Deceased went down backwards on the floor. Joe Slater merely placed his open hands on deceased's chest and pushed him away. Joe Slater walked towards deceased before pushing him. Was certain Joe Slater did not hit deceased. It might have been a blow, but from where witness was it appeared to be a shove. Did not have any one say, "Joe, hit him. " Mr Barry put deceased into the passage, and sometime after called witness to help to take deceased away. Barry and witness each took hold of one of deceased's arms, and they led him into Wedge street. Deceased then shook hands and bade witness and Barry " Good night. " The time would be about 7. 30. Did not hear deceased say "I'll make it hot for some of you. " When deceased was picked up in the room there were no marks on him. When witness next saw gun there was blood on his nose. The only persons who touched deceased were Joe Slater, who pushed him, and Mr Barry Who picked him up. Never spoke to deceased after that night. Never told any one that Joe Slater struck deceased, but it might have "slipped out" unknown to him.

Edward Stephens, bootmaker, evidence to the same effect as Charles Skidmore in respect to deceased falling down in Piper-street. He did not hear any remark by deceased. Mr Barry and Parsells did not go out into the yard with deceased when taking him home. Parsells might have gone with deceased, but Barry did not It was not true, as sworn to by a previous witness, that Barry and Parsells went out of the passage with deceased. Was quite sure that no one ill-used deceased. Saw a little blood on his face.

Chas. Skidmore (re-called) admitted having told Sergeant Beck that he heard deceased say, "I'll make it hot for some one over this. " He had not heard deceased say that, and this statement to Sergeant Beck was not true.

J. J. Barry (re-called) deposed that he put the deceased out at the back as did not want to have him arrested. Took him into the yard and thence into Wedge street. Deceased followed witness back into the passage after witness had put him out the first time into Piper-street. Did not hear deceased say," I'll make it hot for some one for this " either on the night of the 25th June or the following night when he came into the bar. Asked deceased what was the matter and he replied, " Oh, I'm blessed if I know; I was knocking about the street last night. " It was not true that he had left deceased at the back door; took him into Wedge-street.

Constable Tennant deposed that on the night of June 23, when on duty, he saw deceased at the corner of Wedge and Piper streets, at a few minutes past 7 o'clock. This was on the opposite corner. Deceased came along Wedge-street and went home. Saw him go to his own door and knock. Saw him about 10. 30 that night, when Mrs Slater called witness in and said she thought her husband was dying. Deceased was in bed and appeared to be in a drunken sleep. took him to the hospital in a cab. Deceased said his brother and Parsells had "done it "the night before. At the hospital deceased repeated his statement that his brother and Parsells had assaulted him. Did not see him again until on his removal to the hospital when he was able to speak.

Joseph Slater, wood carter, Black Hill, was cautioned that he need not give any answers which would incriminate himself, he deposed that deceased was his brother, Were in company together at the bar parlour of the Royal Hotel on the night of June 25. There was no disturbance. Deceased staggered towards witness, who put his hands to prevent deceased falling on him. Deceased fell on the floor, and Mr Barry picked him up and took him outside. Witness did not get up and take a step towards deceased before pushing him. Any evidence given that he did so would be untrue. Did not strike deceased. Was not on speaking terms with deceased- It was not true that there was any dispute between witness and deceased about a drink. Had not spoken to any person whatever about his death. William Rees heard several of those in the room tell deceased to be quiet. Did not see deceased fall in the room, nor did he see Mr Barry pick him up. Saw Mr Barry take him by the shoulders and take him out through the passage door, and tell him to go home as he was making too much disturbance.

This concluded the evidence. Mr Andrews recorded as his finding at the deceased, Thomas Slater,died from fracture of the upper wall of the orbit in the skull on the right side, and the immediate cause of death was secondary hemorrhage from the effects of the fracture, but no direct or sufficient evidence was given as to the cause of such fracture.
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/240952325

The Kyneton Observer (Vic. : 1856 - 1900) Sat 30 Jun 1894 Page 2 An Explanation.
An Explanation.

(To the Editor of the Kyneton Observer. )
Sir,-A statement has appeared in your contemporary to the effect that a brother of mine, Thos. Slater, was at my wedding, and in a quarrel there received injuries which caused his removal to the hospital. All I have to say is that the paragraph was written in error from first to last. My brother was not at my wedding, nor was there any quarrel there. The wedding was not at my house, but at my sister's residence. Trusting that in justice you will insert this. -I am, etc. , MRS. JNO. PARSELL.
<https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/240881142 ^{2096,2097,2098}

Thomas married Elizabeth Ashe SCOTT [1273] [MRIN: 382], daughter of Henry SCOTT [101] and Jane HARDIE [114], on 3 Jun 1881 in Deniliquin, NSW, Australia. (Elizabeth Ashe SCOTT [1273] was born on 27 May 1860 in Campbells Creek, Vic, Australia,²⁰⁹¹ died on 11 Jul 1897 in Kyneton, Vic, Australia ^2092,2093 and was buried on 15 Jul 1897 in Kyneton, Vic, Australia.)