Former A-G, G. Crosby GILMORE, Counsel for Tom Nevin 1911
Interpretation of the CRIMES ACT 1900: "incite" and "resist"
Subject: William John Nevin (1878-1927)
Photographer: unknown, possibly his father Thomas J. Nevin
Location and Date: Hobart, Tasmania, ca. 1897
Provenance: by descent, Thomas J. Nevin and family.
Copyright © KLW NFC Group & KLW NFC Imprint Private Collection
This is one of the saddest stories to emerge from publicly available records relating to the adult lives of the six surviving children born to parents, photographer and civil servant Thomas James Nevin snr (1842-1923) and Elizabeth Rachel (Day) Nevin (1847-1914) at Hobart, Tasmania, between 1872 and 1888.
It involves three of their four adult sons - George Ernest Nevin (known as Georgie) and Thomas J. Nevin jnr (known as Tom) who were arrested on identical charges on two separate occasions of inciting their brother William John Nevin (known as Bill) to resist arrest: the first on 29 June 1909 with George Nevin; and again on May 6, 1911 with Tom Nevin in another incident, this time involving assault by police of both brothers Bill and Tom Nevin. Where Constable Flude had succeeded in penalties for the charge in 1909 against George Nevin during the arrest of his brother Bill Nevin, he was sure he would succeed with the same charge in 1911 against Tom Nevin during another arrest of Bill Nevin but he failed, because this time the former Attorney-General G. Crosby Gilmore stepped in.
Police harassment of their father
This family first became associated with the police and judiciary when their father Thomas J. Nevin snr was contracted on colonial warrant as photographer servicing the courts and legal fraternity from the date of his marriage to Elizabeth Rachel Day at Kangaroo Valley, Hobart, Tasmania in 1872.
The incident which resulted in their son Bill Nevin's arrest on 26th June 1909, and the charge of incitement to resist arrest against his brother Georgie Nevin took place at the Ship Hotel, Collins Street, Hobart, but the incident which resulted in Bill Nevin's arrest on the same charge on May 5th, 1911 and the same related charges brought against his other brother Tom Nevin in June 1911, took place outside their parents' family residence, 82 Warwick Street, Hobart.
The property at Warwick Street was regularly surveilled by constables in the years after their father Thomas J. Nevin's dismissal by the Hobart City Council from the position (and residency) in December 1880 of Hobart Town Hall Keeper for drunkenness while on duty. In addition to full-time civil service as the Hall Keeper, Nevin's fourteen (14) years of government contractual work (1872 to 1886), which required the production of prisoner mugshots for the Municipal Police Office in Hobart's courts and prisons, among other duties as Special Constable during the Chiniquy riots of 1879, ensured his much too much familiarity with police brutality and judicial indifference, as police knew only too well. From 1878, when he was assigned Office Keeper for the HCC at the Town Hall to his dismissal in December 1880, he was privy to council and mayoral committee decisions affecting just about everyone in the greater Hobart region. He was also assigned assistant bailiff duties to senior detectives in the mid 1880s, a job guaranteed to raise hostility from those affected by house evictions etc etc.
Another source of information about police readily came from Thomas J. Nevin's younger brother, Constable John Nevin (William John Nevin, 1852-1891), known as Jack to the family. He had joined the civil service, aged 18 yrs in 1870, and was stationed at the Asylum, Cascades Prison for Males, Hobart by 1875. His service continued at the Hobart Gaol, Campbell Street, as "Gaol Messenger", a rank which covered his duties as photographer's assistant to his brother, and as a hospital "Wardsman" until his untimely death from typhoid while still in service, aged 39 yrs old. His nephew Bill or Will (the subject of these arrests in 1909 and 1911) was given the exact same name at birth as his father's brother (William John Nevin), just as his brother Tom Nevin was given the exact same name as their father at birth (Thomas James Nevin).
Thomas J. Nevin snr was constantly harassed by constables, some of whom he recognised as ex-prisoners recruited to the police force in times of social unrest. Others held him responsible for their demotion in the ranks when he reported them for being drunk on security duty for the Town Hall during his time as Keeper. They regularly sought him out in Hobart's streets while meeting with friends, even hanging around outside his house, to lay charges for "obscene language" or school truancy of his children, or even singing dirty ditties within the confines of his own house, until he finally complained to the court he was being targeted as a "stereotype" . Tasmanian law allowed for charges to be brought, because even though Nevin was not on public property, he could still be heard by passers-by. He was inside the yard "abutting on Warwick Street" when using "very filthy language" according to the constables who seemed to appear out of nowhere at just the right moment.
TRANSCRIPT
CITY POLICE COURT. - The Police Magistrate (Mr. B. Shaw) and Mr. James Harcourt, J.P., adjudicated yesterday.
Thomas Nevin, labourer, was charged with having used obscene language in a house in Warwick street on the 9th inst.. He pleaded not guilty, but Constables Crane and Clark proved the offence. Defendant remarked that he was always brought up on the same charge. He thought he must be "stereotyped" with the offence. The Police Magistrate : I am afraid you are ; you have been convicted 33 times of the same charge. We order you to pay a fine of £5, in default you will be imprisoned for three months.
Source: THE MERCURY. (1898, September 21). The Mercury (Hobart, Tas. : 1860 - 1954), p. 2.
Link: https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article9431088
When fined 50/s- on Thursday, 14th March 1895 for obscene language which could be heard from the street, the Magistrate also applied for a notice to be issued to publicans prohibiting them from supplying liquor to Thomas Nevin, "operatic for twelve months". He also advised Thomas Nevin to seek medical attention. The prohibition was impossible to enforce, however. With George Adams' Tasmanian Brewery located across the road on the corner of Elizabeth and Warwick Streets, just metres from the Nevin residence at 82 Warwick Street and in full view from their front door, both Thomas Nevin and son Bill would be tempted with easy access to alcohol the moment they left the house.
As for stereotypes, what were the common targets of social prejudice and opprobium in the 1890s, the decade which saw the rise of the Temperance movement? Was Thomas Nevin snr cast as the hot-tempered red-head, the drunken Irishman, garrulous to the point of madness with "no control over his unbridled tongue" as one Police Magistrate put it (Mercury 26 May 1897)? Or was he less than the masculine ideal - a soft and sensitive" artist-photographer" who hand-coloured his photographs of convicts - .i.e. prisoners? He had found himself the butt of that insult in the meeting of the Police Committee which sacked him from the Hobart Town Hall keeper position in December 1880. Then again, he might have cursed long and too loud the imperialist war-mongers wanting to send his sons off to fight the Boers. Neither Thomas J. Nevin snr nor any of his children volunteered service in the Imperial Forces at the Boer War (1899-1902) or at the First World War (1914-18). Pater familias and Wesleyan John Nevin snr had not brought his family across the world from Ireland to settle in Tasmania to see them sent off to fight another war. His nightmarish experiences fighting the French in waist-deep snow at the Canadian Rebellions in 1839-40 were set as example enough that none of his family should ever go to war again.
Warwick and Elizabeth Streets, Hobart, Tasmania.
Thomas J. Nevin snr and family resided in this neighbourhood 1880s-1923
Detail of a view of Hobart, Domain and eastern shore taken from West Hobart
Pretyman Family (NG1012) 17 Aug 1892
Archives Office of Tasmania
Link: https://libraries.tas.gov.au/Record/Archives/NS1013-1-729
William John NEVIN, known as Bill or Will Nevin, the second son to survive to adulthood of photographer Thomas James Nevin and Elizabeth (Day) Nevin, was born at the Hobart Town Hall, Macquarie St. where his family resided during his father's incumbency as Town Hall Keeper. He was registered by his father at birth as William John Nevin on 14 March 1878 (see BMD records in Addenda below). The press reports of 6 May, 1911, however, stated he was arrested and booked as William James Nevin by police on two charges. It appears to be an error made twice by the same or different reporters at the Tasmanian News (May 6, 1911) and the Daily Post (August 19, 1911), although he may have changed his middle name "John" to "James" to avoid confusion with his uncle, his father's brother, Constable John Nevin (William John Nevin, 1852-1891). He was certainly not identical with another Tasmanian, unrelated to the Nevin family of Hobart called William John Nevin, born 16 October 1866, at Longford in the north of the island, son of farmer James Nevin and Mary (Hemphill) Nevin.
The Crimes Act 1900
Section 60 of the Crimes Act 1900 was used by police to bring the charge of incitement to resist arrest against brothers George Nevin in 1909 and Tom Nevin in June 1911. They were charged with having incited their brother Bill Nevin to resist Constable Flude in the execution of his duty on two separate occasions and two years apart, involving the same charge and the same constable. So while their brother Bill Nevin was the cause on each occasion of these charges filed against his two brothers during his arrest by police - and for each incident he was fined just a small amount - it was George and Tom Nevin who were the real targets of a zealous Constable Flude's pursuit of this family, using the same charge of incitement under Section 60. In addition, a charge under Section 32 of the Crimes Act was used by police to accuse Tom Nevin in 1911 of aggravated assault of police. Prior to 1900, charges of obscene language brought against their father Thomas J. Nevin were applied under Amendment 1888 to the Police Act 1865.
"INCITE" and "RESIST"
Source: Crimes Act 1900
https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/download.cgi/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ca190082
https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/download.cgi/cgi-bin/download.cgi/download/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ca190082.txt
TRANSCRIPT
CRIMES ACT 1900
- SECT 60 Assault and other actions against police officers
60 Assault and other actions against police officers
(1AA) A person who hinders or resists, or incites another person to hinder or resist, a police officer in the execution of the officer's duty commits an offence.
Maximum penalty-- Imprisonment for 12 months or a fine of 20 penalty units or both.
(1) A person who assaults, throws a missile at, stalks, harasses or intimidates a police officer while in the execution of the officer's duty, although no actual bodily harm is occasioned to the officer, is liable to imprisonment for 5 years
(1A) A person who, during a public disorder, assaults, throws a missile at, stalks, harasses or intimidates a police officer while in the execution of the officer's duty, although no actual bodily harm is occasioned to the officer, is liable to imprisonment for 7 years.
(2) A person who assaults a police officer while in the execution of the officer's duty, and by the assault occasions actual bodily harm, is liable to imprisonment for 7 years.
(2A) A person who, during a public disorder, assaults a police officer while in the execution of the officer's duty, and by the assault occasions actual bodily harm, is liable to imprisonment for 9 years.
(3) A person who by any means--
(a)wounds or causes grievous bodily harm to a police officer while in the execution of the officer's duty, and
(b) is reckless as to causing actual bodily harm to that officer or any other person, is liable to imprisonment for 12 years.
(3A) A person who by any means during a public disorder--
(a) wounds or causes grievous bodily harm to a police officer while in the execution of the officer's duty, and
(b) is reckless as to causing actual bodily harm to that officer or any other person, is liable to imprisonment for 14 years.
(4) For the purposes of this section, an action is taken to be carried out in relation to a police officer while in the execution of the officer's duty, even though the police officer is not on duty at the time, if it is carried out--
(a) as a consequence of, or in retaliation for, actions undertaken by that police officer in the execution of the officer's duty, or
(b) because the officer is a police officer.
Source: https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/download.cgi/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ca190082
The Case against George Nevin, 1909
Bill's younger brother George Ernest NEVIN (1880-1957) was the fifth child and fourth son born to photographer Thomas J. Nevin and Elizabeth Rachel (Day) Nevin. He was the second surviving son born at the Hobart Town Hall during his father's residency as Town Hall keeper. In adulthood, George Nevin kept vegetable gardens for profit at his Penna estate near Richmond, Tasmania, and shared a carrier business with his older brothers Bill and Tom Nevin. He also kept an extensive collection of family memorabilia, including photographs taken by his father in the 1870s, and records of his younger brother Albert's pacers at the race track. Known as Georgie to his nieces and nephews, he lived with his older sister May Nevin in the big house at 23 Newdegate Street from the time of their father's death in 1923; neither was known to have married.
On 26 June 1909 at the Ship Hotel, Collins Street, Hobart, George Nevin intervened in the arrest of his brother Bill Nevin, who was charged with being drunk and disorderly. He was accused of inciting Bill to resist arrest, of jostling the arresting constables and calling on the crowd to protest. Bill Nevin pleaded guilty, George Nevin pleaded not guilty. Both were found guilty and ordered to pay a fine of 10/- or 7 days' imprisonment.
TRANSCRIPT
CITY POLICE COURT.
MONDAY, JUNE 28. Before Aldermen H. T. Gould and D. Freeman, J's.P.
William Nevin pleaded guilty to a charge of having been drunk and disorderly in Collins street on June 20, and was ordered to pay a fine of 10/ or go to gaol for 7 days.
Inciting to Resist.
George Nevin pleaded not guilty to a charge of inciting one William Nevin a prisoner under arrest, to resist the police in the lawful execution of their duty. Constables Goss and Flude gave evidence to the effect that they had arrested William Nevin on a charge of being drunk and disorderly, and that the defendant tried to pull the prisoner away from them, his action causing the prisoner to resist violently. The defendant also jostled the arresting constables, and attempted to turn the crowd on to them. The Bench found the defendant guilty, and pointed out the seriousness of the offence to him. They ordered him to pay a fine of 10/. with 7 days' imprisonment as an alternative.
Source: CITY POLICE COURT. (1909, June 29). Daily Post (Hobart, Tas. : 1908 - 1918), p. 3.
Link: https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article187875890
Above: Rabiteers, with George Nevin, extreme right, ca 1890
The verso is signed "George Nevn" [sic].
Copyright © KLW NFC Imprint Private Collection 2009 ARR.
The Case against Tom Nevin, 1911
Bill's elder brother Thomas James NEVIN (1874-1948) jnr, known as Tom (and Sonny to family), son of photographer Thomas James Nevin and Elizabeth (Day) Nevin, was born at his father's photographic studio, 140 Elizabeth St., Hobart Town, the second child born after elder sister Mary Florence Elizabeth (aka May) Nevin in 1872. He was given the same name as his father but did not follow his father's profession of photographer. Tom established a boot-making business at 236 Elizabeth Street, Hobart, in the early 1900s, near the corner of Warwick Street where his parents and five of his siblings - May (born 1872), Bill (born 1878), George (born 1880), Minnie (born 1884) and Albert (born 1888) - had taken up residence at No. 82 Warwick St., opposite the Domeny coach stables at 69-75 Warwick St.
Tom Nevin married Gertrude Jane Tennyson Bates, daughter of bandmaster Walter Tennyson Bates on 6 Feb. 1907 at the Methodist Parsonage, Melville St. and settled into family life in Lochner Street, West Hobart, where Gertrude gave birth to a son Walter in 1909. The child survived just one year. He died of bronchial pneumonia and was buried - on 16th August 1911 - just three days before Tom was called into court to face the magistrate's decision - on 19th August 1911 - for the charge against him of inciting his brother Bill to resist arrest.
Without doubt, Tom Nevin's emotional suffering that week was immeasurable. He was facing imprisonment for an unfounded and unproven charge. Costs incurred at trial over months by his legal counsel, the well-heeled former Attorney-General G. Crosby Gilmore, had placed considerable financial distress on his wife, and with the sudden death of their baby son Walter just days before the court's decision, they would have questioned whether Bill Nevin, the brother whose scuffles with police had led to their reduced circumstances, was ever going to be safe.
Subject: Tom or "Sonny" Nevin (T. J. Nevin jnr)
Location and date: Peacock's Jam Factory, Salamanca Place, Hobart, 1905
Photographer: unknown
Provenance: Nevin family by descent
Copyright © KLW NFC Group Private Collection
Tom Nevin was defending the charge of inciting his brother Bill Nevin to resist arrest on the evening of 5th May, 1911 outside the Nevin family residence at 82 Warwick Street, Hobart when the police additionally accused him of assaulting them under Section 32 of the Crimes Act 1900. On August 19th, 1911, the Police Magistrate finally gave his reserved decision and dismissed the case.
Source: https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/download.cgi/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ca190082
Press reports May to August 1911
In each case leading to the arrests of all three Nevin brothers in 1909 and 1911, Constable Flude consistently lied about the sequence of events and rough handling by police. In the first of these press reports during the case against Tom Nevin in 1911, Constable Flude grossly exaggerated his account of the arrest of Bill Nevin with accusations that he "acted like a madman" and needed "four policemen" to take him to the police station.
1. CITY POLICE COURT (1911, May 6). Tasmanian News (Hobart, Tas), p. 2.
Link: https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article187120196
TRANSCRIPT
CITY POLICE COURT
At the City Police Court to-day, before Mr. W. O. Wise, P.M. Inspector Weston prosecuting. William James [sic, John not James] Nevin was charged with having been drunk and disorderly in Elizabeth street on May 5, and with having resisted Constable Flude in the execution of his duty.
Constable Flude stated the defendant was very much under the influence of drink, and using indecent language. When witness attempted to arrest him, he acted like a madman, and it took four policemen to bring him to the station.
The P.M. imposed a fine of 10s, or in default seven days in imprisonment, on the first, and £1, or 14 days, on the other charge.
Source: CITY POLICE COURT (1911, May 6). Tasmanian News (Hobart, Tas. : 1883 - 1911), p. 2.
Link: https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article187120196
G. Crosby Gilmore, Counsel for the defence
Tom Nevin's defence, former Attorney-General G. Crosby Gilmore, brought Elizabeth Rachel (Day) Nevin, mother of the two brothers involved in this case, to testify in court that when police were called by onlookers the cause of blood on her son Tom's face was not from any event that took place inside the house. Her sons had not been fighting with each other. Her son Tom was in his shop when he saw a man in a scuffle with his brother Bill outside on the street. When the police arrived, it was Bill they arrested, accusing Tom who followed them, crying out to police not kill his brother, that he was inciting Bill to resist arrest. It was then that Tom's lip was cut and bloodied from police assaulting him. Mr Gilmore made it very clear to the court that Tom Nevin was an emotional man who had never before been in court, that he was innocent of the charge of inciting his brother to resist arrest, and that the blood on his face was from police striking him. Inspector Weston, counsel for the plaintiff, counter-attacked by suggesting to Tom Nevin that his brother Bill had kicked a constable so hard in the groin it "nearly ruined him for life".
Defence Counsel G. Crosby Gilmore effectively argued that Bill Nevin was resisting arrest BEFORE Tom Nevin ran to his brother's rescue. This was first inadvertently admitted by Constable Flude himself on June 2, (1911) in court. When questioned by Inspector Weston, he agreed that Bill had resisted "before his brother interfered? Oh, yes". The second argument centred on the vagaries around legal definitions of INTENT: it was not Tom Nevin's intention to incite his brother nor to obstruct police, he was simply begging the police not to be too rough with his brother, G. Crosby Gilmore argued, and there was nothing illegal in that. The case was dismissed, the charge dropped against Tom Nevin.
Defending Tom Nevin was former Attorney-General, G. C. Gilmore
Photographic portrait of the Hon. G. C. GILMORE Attorney-General of Tasmania 1904-06
Archives Office Tasmania. Link: https://libraries.tas.gov.au/Digital/PH30-1-9972/PH30-1-9972
2. INCITING TO RESIST. (1911, June 2). Tasmanian News (Hobart, Tas.), p. 4 (5.30 EDITION).
Link: https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article187122698
TRANSCRIPT
INCITING TO RESIST
THE CONSTABLE'S EVIDENCE
A WARM JOB
Thomas Nevin was charged at the City Police Court today with having incited Wm. Nevin to resist Constables Flude and Jackson at Hobart on May 5.
He pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr G. C. Gilmore. Inspector Weston prosecuted.
Constable Flude said that on the night of the 5th May he had occasion to arrest the defendant's brother, Wm. Nevin. The defendant came from out of their house. He was in a very excited state, and was calling out "Don't murder him, " and also "Give him a chance". At the time they had William Nevin on the ground, where he was struggling and kicking violently. Defendant kept coming towards them and inciting him to resist. When they got Wm. Nevin on his feet he began to kick, and they - Constable Jackson and himself - found it necessary to call help. Defendant followed them down to the station, continually singing out. Going down he kept repeating , "Don't kill the man. If he's dead in the morning there will be plenty of witnesses." They gave the arrested man a chance to walk, but he refused. Defendant, Thomas Nevin, accused the police of having assaulted him, He (witness) then told him that only for him being a decent fellow he would have put him where his brother was.
Mr Weston: - Did the interference of Thomas Nevin cause William Nevin to resist? Oh, yes, I should say so.
But did he resist before his brother interfered? Oh, yes.
What did Thomas Nevin do to make William Nevin to resist? His brother calling out caused Wm Nevin to resist.
Mr Gilmore: - Did Wm Nevin's kicking and all that cause you to use him rather roughly - No, I don't believe to being rough.
Constable Wm. Jackson gave corroborative evidence. The defendant rushed up when they were arresting his brother, and said, " Oh, my poor brother, you are killing him."
To Mr. Wise: - There was a disturbance in the defendant's house, and he heard a voice calling out, "Oh, Bill", "Oh Bill," and when the defendant came to the door there was blood all over him.
Constable Clements gave evidence that he had been called to the assistance of Constables Flude and Jackson, who were taking the present defendant's brother to the police station, He corroborated the evidence of the other witnesses.
Mr. Gilmore said that defendant, Nevin, has never been in a police court before, He was a man of intensely emotional character and had a wholesome fear of the law. In a case like this the Bench should look at intent. The intention of defendant all the time was to ask the police not to hurt his brother, and he had no intention whatever of inciting him to resist.
The defendant, Thomas Nevin, said that he was working at his shop on the night of the 5th inst., when he heard a tussle near his door. He went to the window and a saw a man with his brother, who was in a state of intoxication. His brother was then brought in, but he went out again by the back way. There was some trouble in the street after that and his brother was arrested by a policeman. The constables were very rough, and he said "Give him a chance, let him up." At that time they had his brother on the ground across the gutterway. He went towards his brother, and one of the policemen swung back and hit him (witness) in the face. He went back to his shop, and then came out and followed the police. They were carrying his brother, but would insist on carrying him with his head lower than his feet, and witness asked them several times to carry him properly. He did not at any time incite his brother to resist.
Mr Gilmore: - What was your condition - your feeling - at the time? I was very much broken up at the time, and was crying part of the way.
To Mr. Weston: - There was no disturbance in the house, only that caused by his brother.
Mr. Weston: - Did you see your brother kick the police? No, I did not.
Elizabeth Nevin, mother of the defendant, corroborated the statement of her son.
Henry John Mills also gave evidence.
Mr. Gilmore: - Did you see the defendant inciting Wm Nevin to resist? - No, I did not: but I heard him screaming and crying, and saying something about killing.
It was decided at this stage to adjourn the case till Friday next.
Source: INCITING TO RESIST. (1911, June 2). Tasmanian News (Hobart, Tas.), p. 4 (5.30 EDITION)
Link: https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article187122698
Elizabeth Rachel (Day) Nevin testified in court that neither of her sons Tom or Bill had been fighting inside her house, nor had Tom any blood on his face until he was struck by police.
Detail of larger portrait of Elizabeth Rachel Nevin nee Day (1847-1914) taken ca. 1900
Wife of by photographer Thomas J. Nevin (1842-1923
Mother of the three sons Tom, George and Bill Nevin arrested in 1909 and 1911
Copyright © KLW NFC Group & KLW NFC Imprint Private Collection
3. POLICE COURTS. (1911, June 3). The Mercury (Hobart, Tas.), p. 8.
Link: https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article10103238
TRANSCRIPT
INCITING TO RESIST THE POLICE
Thomas J. Nevin was charged with having incited his brother Wm. Nevin to resist the police whilst the latter was under arrest for being drunk and disturbing the peace. He denied the charge and was defended by Mr. Crosby Gilmore. Inspector Weston conducted the case.
Constable Flude said that about 9.15 pm on the 5th ult. he was called to a disturbance at defendant's house in Warwick street near Elizabeth street where they had occasion to arrest Wm. Nevin who was drunk and disturbing the peace. Defendant interfered, was very excited and kept calling out not to kill his brother not to murder him but to give him a chance. At the time witness had Wm. Nevin on the ground where he was struggling and kicking violently. Witness told the defendant to desist his interference or he would get into trouble. Constable Jackson blew his whistle and as they got Wm. Nevin to his feet the prisoner commenced kicking. Constables Clements and Hudson came up and the four of them had to carry Nevin to the police station. Defendant followed and interfered on the way and accused the police of having assaulted him and cut his lip. His conduct caused the prisoner to further resist and became more violent.
In reply to Mr Gilmore: We were not rough with the prisoner at all. We were not so severe on him as we should have been as my leg was painful the next day from his kicking. Hitherto I regarded the defendant as a decent man; he might be very emotional. I will swear that one of the other constables did not hit him but he asserted that he had had been struck by the police.
Constable Wm Jackson gave corroborative evidence and swore positively that neither he nor the other constables struck the defendant; when he came out of the house there was blood on defendant's face and he was very excited. There was a crowd outside urging the constables to interfere as they were "killing one another in the house".
Constable Clements gave similar evidence.
Mr Gilmore said the defendant had never been in a court of any sort before and had no intention of breaking the law; he was excited over his brother being taken to the lock-up.
The defendant gave evidence denying the charge. He got excited over the police dragging his brother along the ground and pleaded for him being given a chance when one of the constables swung his arm backwards and struck him as he (witness) stood behind. He only spoke to the police because he considered the police were treating his brother too roughly.
Inspector Weston: Do you know that your brother kicked one of the constables and nearly ruined him for life? - No I do not.
Inspector Weston: And after you interfered he became more violent.
Elizabeth Nevin, defendant's mother, swore that defendant did not leave the house with his mouth bleeding and that there was no disturbance inside.
Henry T Mills, called for the defence, said that W. Nevin was drunk and very violent and the defendant was screaming crying and shouting, "They'll kill him."
The further hearing of the case was adjourned till Friday next for the consideration of the legal point of whether what the defendant did amounted to an intention to incite the prisoner to resist.
Source: POLICE COURTS. (1911, June 3). The Mercury (Hobart, Tas. : 1860 - 1954), p. 8.
Link:https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article10103238
4. WHAT IS INCITING? (1911, June 30). The Mercury (Hobart, Tas. : 1860 - 1954), p. 3.
Link: https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article10106117.
TRANSCRIPT
WHAT IS INCITING?
A LEGAL TECHNICALITY.
The adjourned hearing of the case in which Thomas Nevin was charged with inciting a prisoner to resist came on again yesterday at the Hobart Police Court, before Mr. W. O. Wise, P.M., when Mr. Gilmore, counsel for the defendant, addressed the Bench at length on the law regarding such an offence.
Mr. Gilmore said defendant's intention was to get the police to be less rough with his brother, who at the time was under arrest. He had absolutely no intention to incite his brother to resist. If a man was doing something perfectly legal in itself, and something followed from it which he did not intend and of which he had no conception, he was not responsible. There was nothing illegal in Nevin's begging the police not to be too rough with his brother, and there was no proof that he intended to incite his brother to resist. He submitted as a general principle that under any penal statute intent is a necessary ingredient, and must be proved unless the statute in express words negatives [legal use of word as verb] the need of proving such intent, or there was a necessary inference to be drawn from the wording of the statute that intent need not be proved. According to the law, as he read it, there was certainly nothing which directly negatived the need for proving intent, nor could any inference be drawn in that respect. He further submitted that Nevin, who was admittedly a decent fellow, and had never been in court before, was not guilty of inciting his brother to resist the police. He had no intention of inciting, nor did he believe that he was inciting.
The P.M. said he did not believe that Nevin said the words with the idea of inciting his brother to resist. The fact, however, remained that he did use them. He would go into the law on the point, and give a decision later.
Source: WHAT'IS INCITING? (1911, June 30). The Mercury (Hobart, Tas. : 1860 - 1954), p. 3.
Link: https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article10106117
5. CHARGE OF INCITING TO RESIST. (1911, August 19). Daily Post (Hobart, Tas.), p. 5.
Link: https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article178350509
TRANSCRIPT
CHARGE OF INCITING TO RESIST.
INTERESTING JUDGMENT.
The Police Magistrate (Mr. W. O. Wise) gave his reserved decision on August 30 in the case in which Thomas Nevin was charged with having incited a prisoner, his brother William James [sic - John, not James] Nevin, to resist Constables Flude and Jackson in the execution of their duty at Hobart on May 5.
Mr. Wise stated: "The defendant in this information, Thomas Nevin, was charged with having incited a person to resist. The defendant pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr. G. Grosby Gilmore. The evidence of the constables who had the said William James [sic] Nevin under lawful arrest was that the defendant Thomas Nevin was calling out 'Don’t kill him,' meaning the prisoner, and 'Give him a chance,' and such like expressions. The prisoner resisted violently, and had to be practically carried to the station. The defendant gave evidence on his own behalf, and stated that he did not attempt or intend to incite his brother to resist, but that his object in speaking to the police was to protect his brother, as he thought he was being roughly handled. The counsel quoted a number of authorities as to the meaning of the word ‘incite,’ and contended that there was no intention on the part of the defendant to incite his brother to resist.
“As far as I have been able to ascertain there is no direct decision upon what amounts to inciting a prisoner to resist, and I have come to the conclusion that each case must be decided upon its own merits. Mr. Gilmore contended that there must be some act or words of the defendant which showed that he intended to incite the prisoner to resist, although I can conceive such a case where a person, without addressing a prisoner directly, but by remarks to the arresting constable, would incite a prisoner to resist. In this case the strongest factor in the defendant's favor was that before he came upon the scene of the arrest his brother was violently resisting the constables.
"Upon perusing the evidence I have endeavored to ascertain whether the conduct of the defendant incited the prisoner, and I have come to the decision that although the conduct of the defendant, and also his remarks were most indiscreet yet they were not the cause of the prisoner resisting the police. The information will therefore be dismissed."
Source: Daily Post (Hobart, Tas. : 1908 - 1918), Saturday 19 August 1911, page 5
Link: https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article178350509
Thomas James Nevin jnr, known as Tom Nevin (1874-1948)
Also known as Sonny to family, taken by a family member ca. 1947
Photo copyright © KLW NFC 2020 Private Collection
Tom Nevin with wife Gertrude Tennyson Bates, (1883-1958) and their second son Athol Clarence Nevin (born Launceston, 26 October 1915), travelled to California in 1920 to reside for a time with his wife's family who had migrated there in the early 1900s. They returned to Hobart in 1922. Tom Nevin joined the Salvation Army soon after. He was farewelled as Sergeant Tom Nevin on his death in 1948, his address given as 23 Newdegate St. North Hobart, where three of his siblings - May, George, and Albert and family - still resided. By 1949, Tom and Gertrude's son Athol, who had served in WW2 and changed his middle name to "Tennyson", was resident in Melbourne, working as a storeman.
Some Quiet Observations
Bill Nevin's personal reasons for finding himself in the midst of altercations in public and the calls for his arrest might never be known. He may have inherited his father's alleged alcoholism more as a genetic disorder than a behavioural issue when arrested for being drunk and disorderly in 1909, and drunk and disturbing the peace in 1911. Temperance was certainly a factor in the lives of his nieces and nephews, remembered and noted even today for abstinence. Noted too were the family's objections to war. Not since the emigration of their grandfather John Nevin to Tasmania in 1852 would a single direct descendant ever serve in a war, which was not the case for the other (unrelated) Nevin family who had settled at Hadspen in the north of the island. James and Mary (Hemphill) Nevin 's grandson Archibald Reinmuth Nevin was 24 yrs old when he was killed in action in Belgium on 23 September 1916.
Just possibly, Bill Nevin in his twenties was simply an exuberant, happy fellow, given to drinking and dancing and singing too loudly in public. But to authority he was hostile, which might explain his furious response to provocations resulting in scuffles and arrests with the ensuing brutal treatment by police, and the anxiety of both his brothers to protect him. Tom had shouted at Constables Flude and Jackson not to murder his brother Bill during the incident outside the house in Warwick St. on the evening of May 6, 1911, fearing they might actually kill him.
Whatever the incident, the police saw Bill Nevin as fair game, a target for their social prejudices and physical abuse for several reasons, and not all to do with the law. They would likely interpret his attention-seeking behaviour and snappy dress-sense as signs he might not be a cis-gender male. Since Bill Nevin was working as a shop assistant during these years (Denison electoral rolls 1905 ...), he would dress like all front-of-store men who were employed at large shops such as Fitzgerald's and Moran & Cato's or at the fancy shoe-shop called Ray's (photo below). He would suit-up in a three-piece, button-hole a gold chain for his fobwatch, wax his moustache, curl his forelock, and pin a pansy to his lapel, as in this photograph ca. 1897:
Sporting a fancy fedora with a teardrop crease and front pinch in finest wool (as in the signed negative photo below ca. 1908), his grooming fit the stereotype of the gay bachelor shop assistant for whom Constable Flude would undoubtedly pursue to find a law with a view to arrest.
Ray's shoe store, Hobart, Tasmania (c1900s)
Photographer; C. P. Ray, Tasmanian Archive and Heritage Office: album at Flickr
Bill's single marital status too was another unknown aspect of his family life. His three siblings - brothers Tom and Albert and younger sister Minnie were either married by 1909 or would eventually marry and have children, but William seemed to have stayed single. But so too it seems, had George and his eldest sister May (Mary Florence Elizabeth Nevin) who was rumoured to cross-dress and follow her brother George around at night - she never married and even devoted her life to her father, caring for him until his death in 1923. Bill Nevin wore the stereotypic signs which police perceived to contradict the conventional masculine norms of the day as indices of deviance. Tasmania decriminalised homosexuality in 1997, the last Australian state or territory to do so, and was the only state to criminalise "cross-dressing", which was decriminalised in 2001 [!!!]. Perhaps Bill Nevin was gay, perhaps not. The lack of historical marriage records in his name means little but he certainly went a-wooing with prints such as this one signed "Yours Truly, Will". If the intended recipients of this print were strictly female, no evidence has yet emerged that he actually married one. That he signed himself "Will" here when immaculately dressed to the nines while his siblings called him by the more vernacular "Bill" was another sure sign he saw himself well above the status of the grubby policemen who stalked him.
Negative inscribed by Bill Nevin, signing himself as "Will"
"Yours Truly, Will": William John Nevin ca. 1905-1910
Print from a glass negative of Thomas J. Nevin's third son William John Nevin (1878-1927)
Copyright © KLW NFC Group and KLW NFC Imprint, Shelverton Private Collection ARR
Wm John NEVIN, prison record 1920
Soon after the death of their father Thomas J. Nevin in 1923, his four adult children - Bill (William), George, Albert and May (Mary Florence) Nevin - moved to the large property at 23 Newdegate St. North Hobart. Albert had married in Launceston in 1917 and brought his wife Emily Maud Davis with him. They occupied the small cottage on the property. Bill, George and May were single and lived in the big house fronting Newdegate Street. Bill was working as "cook" in 1920 when lost his temper, unleashing a series of expletives. He was photographed at the Police Office Hobart on 8th December, 1920, charged with using obscene language. The charge "obscene language", of course, might have denoted any mild curse or epithet. These sorts of menial and trivial charges were a source of revenue for the Tasmanian Government in an era when personal income tax was yet to be formally legislated.
Name: Nevin, William
Record Type: Prisoners
Year:1920
Record ID: NAME_INDEXES:1483648
Link: https://libraries.tas.gov.au/Digital/GD63-1-5P726
William Nevin, charged with obscene language on 8th December 1920, was sentenced to three days at the Police Office, Hobart. These police records in Book 7 were damaged by fire at the Hobart Gaol, but some detail is visible: William's occupation was "cook" in 1920, for example. His moustache had become a shaggy half-horseshoe once again.
Wm John NEVIN, accidental death 1927
William (Bill or Will) Nevin established a carrier and furniture removal business in the early 1920s which he partnered with his elder brother Tom, younger brother Albert and brother-in-law James Drew who had married their younger sister Minnie Nevin in 1907. They had vans as well as carts and horses, operating from Morrison St. Hobart Wharf and nearby Market Place. When siblings May, Albert, George and Bill Nevin moved to the property at 23-29 Newdegate St. in 1923 on the death of their father Thomas J. Nevin (registered as "photographer" on his burial certificate), Bill maintained the carrier business there until his untimely death in a horse and cart accident in 1927.
William John (Bill) Nevin was 49 years old when he died in a horse-and-cart accident on the 28th October 1927. The accident and coroner's inquest were reported in the press, 31st October 1927. The death of Bill Nevin, victim of drink, was served up as a moral about alcohol for Mercury readers.
William John Nevin (1878-1927)
Verso inscription "William J. Nevin, Furniture Removalist"
Unattributed, no date, ca. 1926? Died in a cart accident, 1927.
From the estate of William John Nevin (1878-1927)
Copyright © KLW NFC Imprint Private Collection
TRANSCRIPT
FALL FROM A CART
DEATH Of WILLIAM JOHN NEVIN.
VICTIM OF DRINK.
The Coroner (Mr. E. TV. Turner) found, on Saturday, that William John Nevin, aged 49 years, who died in the Hobart Public Hospital on Wednesday last, succumbed to wounds accidentally received as the result of having fallen from a cart in Elizabeth Street the previous day. At the inquest, the police were represented by Inspector A. Bush.
The story of the accident was told by Percy Johnson, a carter, living in Murray Street. On Tuesday night, about 8.20, he said, Nevin and a man named Leslie Smith came to his house under the influence of drink. Nevin's cart was standing outside the Waratah Hotel. Witness joined the two men, and had a drink with them In the hotel. Smith was not served with intoxicants, as "he had had too many." The three then got into the cart, and witness intended to drive the other two home. However, Nevin Insisted on driving, and they went along Warwick Street and down Elizabeth Street at full gallop. They "pulled up" outside McLaren's Hotel, in Collins Street, and when they got out of the cart a man said to witness, "There are two sergeants on the corner watching you." Witness got the two men into the cart again, and took charge. Nevin and Smith sat down. Witness drove up Elizabeth Street until just before Warwick Street. Smith's legs were hanging over the back, and he said, "Pull up. I am going to get out." Witness "pulled up " and Smith and Nevin got out. A few minutes later they got Into the cart again. Nevin stood up and made a dash forward. He snatched the reins from witness, and fell over the side. Witness felt a bump, and when he got out he saw Nevin on the ground, with the reins round his foot and his leg through the wheel. He drove Nevin and Smith to the Public Hospital.
Charles Harold Dowsing, an eye-witness of the events which occurred when the cart returned up Elizabeth Street, near Warwick Street, corroborated the evidence given by Johnson. Smith was not called.
Dr. B. M. Carruthers, House Surgeon at the Public Hospital, said there were hardly any signs of external injury on the deceased when he was admitted to hospital. He was injured severely internally. His collar-bone was broken, a broken rib had pierced a lung, and another had pierced his heart. Death was due, in the first place, to shock, and, secondly, to collapse caused by haemorrhage.
The Coroner said that deceased was another victim of drink. His finding would be that death was due to injuries accidentally received as a result of a fall from a cart in Elizabeth Street, Hobart. The moral was obvious.
Source: FALL FROM A CART (1927, October 31). The Mercury (Hobart, Tas), p. 9.
Link: https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article24206465
In Memoriam notice from Bill Nevin's siblings, 1928
Family Notices (1928, October 26). The Mercury (Hobart, Tas. : 186 - 1954), p. 1.
https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article24236425
Addenda
1. GAY YOUNG THINGS
These photographs were passed down by descent from the estate of William (Bill) Nevin. They were taken in the Edwardian period, the years 1900s-1920s named for fashions set by the Prince of Wales [King Edward VIII] when young working class men who liked to dress for occasions favoured a three piece suit, rounded shirt collars, cuffs, a Prince Albert fob chain and and a wide-brimmed fedora, the sort worn by Prince Edward when he visited Tasmania in 1920.
One of Thomas and Elizabeth's four adult sons -
Possibly George or Tom (Thomas J. jnr) or Bill (William John) Nevin ca. 1901
Posed in best suit - full length portrait with wicker whatnot.
Family photograph taken at home by his father Thomas Nevin snr
From the estate of William John Nevin (1878-1927)
Copyright © KLW NFC Imprint Private Collection 2020 ARR.
Subject: two well-dressed young men, unidentified, seated on a studio railing
Photographer: Burrows & Co. Studio, Launceston
Location and date: Launceston Tasmania ca. 1910
Details: Cabinet photograph printed as a postcard
From the estate of William John Nevin (1878-1927)
Copyright © KLW NFC Group & KLW NFC Imprint Private Collection
.jpg)
.jpg)
Subject: two well-dressed young men, unidentified, one seated one standing
Photographer: unknown
Location and date: possibly Melbourne or Sydney ca. 1923
Details: Cabinet photograph printed as a postcard
Verso inscribed with mostly illegible information about dancing to "The Blue Lagoon"
From the estate of William John Nevin (1878-1927)
Copyright © KLW NFC Group & KLW NFC Imprint Private Collection
POSTCARD verso: "... they have a lot of different dances over here but they have grand hall's & always a orchestra playing they play the Blue Lagoon for a Barn Dance and it goes all right ..."
This recording made for the 1923 film "The Blue Lagoon" is most likely the music mentioned by the writer of this postcard.
"The Blue Lagoon" is a lost 1923 British-South African silent film adaptation of Henry De Vere Stacpoole's 1908 novel of the same name about children who come of age while stranded on a tropical island ....Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blue_Lagoon_(1923_film)#Development
https://youtu.be/iTlbuA20ThI?feature=shared
2. BDM RECORDS: William John (Bill) NEVIN (1878-1927)
1878: Birth registration
Name: Nevin, William John
Record Type: Births
Gender: Male
Father: Nevin, Thomas
Mother: Day, Elizabeth Rachel
Date of birth: 14 Mar 1878
Registered: Hobart 1878
Record ID:NAME_INDEXES: 1093874
Link: https://libraries.tas.gov.au/Record/NamesIndex/1093874
1927: Burial registration
Source: https://libraries.tas.gov.au/Record/NamesIndex/1560157,Church of England EE - Page 24, Plot 277
Nevin, William John
Record Type: Deaths
Age: 49
Description: Last known residence: 23 Newdegate St
Property: Cornelian Bay Cemetery
Date of burial: 28 Oct 1927
File number: BU 26646
Record ID: NAME_INDEXES:1560157
Link: https://libraries.tas.gov.au/Record/NamesIndex/1560157
3. BDM RECORDS: Thomas James "Tom" NEVIN (1874-1948)
https://libraries.tas.gov.au/Record/NamesIndex/976011
1874: Birth registration
Nevin, Thomas James
Record Type: Births
Gender: Male
Father: Nevin, Thomas James
Mother: Day, Elizabeth Rachel
Date of birth: 16 Apr 1874
Registered: Hobart
Registration year: 1874
Record ID:NAME_INDEXES: 976011
Link: https://libraries.tas.gov.au/Record/NamesIndex/976011
1907: Marriage to Gertrude Jane Tennyson BATES
Nevin, Thomas James
Record Type: Marriages
Spouse: Bates, Gertrude Jane Tennyson
Date of marriage: 06 Feb 1907
Where married: Melville Street, Hobart
Registration year:1907
File number: 465
Record ID: NAME_INDEXES:1940114
Link: https://libraries.tas.gov.au/Record/NamesIndex/1940114
1909-1911: Birth and death of son Walter Sydney Tennison NEVIN
Name: Nevin, Walter Sydney Tennyson
Record Type: Births
Gender: Male
Father: Nevin, Thomas James
Mother: Tennyson Bates, Gertrude Jane
Parent occupation: Storeman
Date of birth: 09 Dec 1909
Registered: Hobart
Registration year: 1910
Central registration number: 711
Record ID: NAME_INDEXES:2209131
Link: https://libraries.tas.gov.au/Record/NamesIndex/2091128
DEATH from bronchial pneumonia: Nevin, Walter Sydney Tennison
Record Type: Deaths
Gender: Male
Date of death: 14 Aug 1911
Where died: Paternoster Row, Hobart
Registration year: 1911
File number: 1141
Record ID: NAME_INDEXES:1998961
Link: https://libraries.tas.gov.au/Record/NamesIndex/1998961
Leather wallet with initials "W. J. Nevin" 1880s-1927
From the estate of William John Nevin (1878-1927)
Copyright © KLW NFC Imprint Private Collection
RELATED POSTS main weblog
- Rosanna Domeney nee Tilley at Thomas Nevin's studio 1870s
- The desecration of Minnie Carr's grave 1898
- Death of Constable John Nevin in the typhoid epidemic of 1891
- Tom Nevin and father-in-law bandmaster Walter Tennyson Bates
- Thomas James 'Sonny' Nevin (1874 - 1948)
- Haulage at Newdegate Street North Hobart
- Thomas Nevin 1886: assistant bailiff to Inspector Dorsett
- The Chiniquy Riots, Hobart Town Hall 1879
- Constable Blakeney's revenge on Thomas Nevin 1880
- Marcus Clarke and Thomas Nevin at the Old Bell Hotel 1870