ABN:

58834493681

Contact Us

Copyright

2007-2009 Oz History Mine

This is a Commercial Site with a Difference. The cost of researching and providing information on this this site are substantial but, in return, we only ask you to PAY WHAT YOU CAN  AFFORD for using this service.

Discussion Boards

In the Illawarra Mercury, 3rd January 1859, the Shoalhaven Correspondent reported the following:

“COLONEL ATKINSON has been here [in the Shoalhaven] for some days, and bought a large and superior lot of Mr. Berry’s horses for the East India Company. He has not secured many from other private lands, and intends proceeding to Braidwood on Monday accompanied by Mr. E. De Mestre.

“DR. LANG’S LETTERS have caused a sensation here [Shoalhaven], but not at all the sensation that would gratify him. Even if all he said about Mr. Berry were true, which is not at all the case, the sentiments he expresses are not those of a Christian Minister of the Gospel. Mr. Berry’s choking with a piece of earth in his mouth may be Dr. Lang’s conception of God’s judgment in the matter, but has doubtless read, that with whatsoever judgment we judge, we shall be judged, and he may himself be found grievously wanting. His second letter may be summed up as follows : Those who have acquired property are diggings for those who have none, which is the doctrine of the Socialists. It is amazing to see how men who howl out this theory ad nauseum, whilst they possess nothing, change their tune instantaneously when they acquire property. It used to be a potent cry some years back at elections in the mother country, but the people have discovered that their idols but where clay, and the dodge, used up at home, has been exported to Dr. Lang, who is welcome to do the best he can with it. It would be a pretty sight to see him installed as master of the estate over which his mouth waters, carrying out his benevolent theory and enriching the rest of Shoalhaven at his own expense. 31st December 1858.”

“Illawarra” had this to say on the “Shoalhaven Incubus” :

SIR. - In two long letters with which Dr. Lang has been pleased to favor us, he attempts to show us that Shoalhaven is afflicted with an incubus - something which oppresses and paralyses the people of the district. He tells us that Mr. Berry owns a very fine and very large property, which he will neither sell nor improve, that he is in the habit of buying adjacent lands at a higher price than other people are able or willing to give for them; that he is an old man without children; and that he will not give his tenants long leases. For these reasons Mr. Berry is branded an incubus.

“If Dr. Lang comes here to do good, to teach or to learn, he must write no more in this strain. His letters will do mischief - if they do anything. Their tendency is to create prejudice and enmity, on grounds which are perfectly unreasonable and unjustifiable. They convert and confuse. Is it wrong for any man who has many acres to buy more ? Is it wrong to be the highest bidder for land ? Is it wrong for any one to hold land without improving it ? Is it shameful to be old ? If wrong in one, it must be wrong in all, and there is no need to attach the blame to any individual.

“Dr. Lang knows as well as anybody can tell him, that it is best for each, and best for all, to limit no man’s possession, either in land, money, houses, ships, cattle, sheep or any other property; he knows that it is best that every one should be free to buy whatever he likes; and he knows that it is best that he should be at perfect liberty to manage his own property in his own way, whether it be large or small, much or little.

“If this Dr. had the Berry property, it is very likely he would do something with it that Mr. Berry has no intention to do. He might promote the formation of towns and villages, and the settlement of industrious families. He might sell the land in small farms, erect comfortable cottages, grant long leases, and expend a few thousand pounds in public improvements. Nobody would have any right to forbid him or to molest him. Some might think that his proceedings were foolish, ruinous to himself, and destructive of a noble estate. But to revile him, to ridicule him, to call him ugly names, to foretell his reception in another world, would be considered rather improper, in fact a vulgar impertinence, even in a puppy.

“Since the Dr. knows so well how landed property ought to be managed, what prevents him from giving Mr. Berry a few quiet hints. Let him show him how the estate could be made to yield a larger revenue to its owner. Or, if the Dr.’s plans do not aim at a larger revenue, let him tell us why Mr. Berry more than other rich men should be called upon to adopt them. If we are all to be held up to contempt because we do not manage our lands according to the Dr.’s notions, I wonder who he will praise.

“To tell us that ‘the public have an undoubted right to require that the possessor of property shall make use of it in some way for the benefit and advantage of his fellow-men,’ is to tell us what is not true, and if it were true, it would make every freeholder a villain as well as Mr. Berry. The public has no such right. Neither should it have such rights, unless it be desirable to make the diligent and frugal support the idle and the improvident. But to argue the matter would be childish. No one will believe the Dr.’s doctrine. He does not believe it himself.

“Dr. Lang knows many things, but unfortunately for him, he does not know himself. He seems to be quite unconscious of a fault which has often rendered his ability powerless, and his industry pernicious. He allows his personal resentments to get the better of his judgment and of his justice. I have not the least doubt that he has had some quarrel with Mr. Berry, who has probably not been sufficiently attentive or courteous. The two letters are not written to enlighten us, but to vex Mr. Berry, and his tenants, who are declared to be serfs, because they accept leases which the Dr. does not like.”

In a letter to the Editor Henry Moss now enters the wider public arena with an intelligent and well structured justification for the establishment of a Council for the district. Whilst not naming Berry directly in his criticism of large local landholders, he certainly arrested Berry’s attention as we shall see later:

“SIR - I find your Shoalhaven correspondent has not given a faithful account of the meeting held at the Royal Victoria Hotel, a few days since, ‘to consider the desirability of establishing a Municipality for this district.’ In his report of the meeting, the following is attributed to me - ‘They now had an opportunity of taxing themselves, and were they to reject it’ - and some other such nonsense as ‘if they had no Municipality they should still have to pay the taxes, on tea and sugar, and for Justice, too.’ and ‘that the district ought to have time for considering the subject.’ I can only state that such expressions were never uttered by me.

“He also appears, or pretends to be in the dark as to the conclusion then arrived at, or he would wish the public to be in doubt, from the impression conveyed in his ‘wind up’ of the meeting, for he must have been perfectly aware that the Chairman, Mr. James Graham, stated distinctly enough that Mr. Aldcorn’s amendment was carried, and, in the face of this, I am astonished that he should have omitted to state positively the conclusion arrived at by the meeting.

“With regard to taxation what I said was this - “That they forget that the cry of no taxation, which was echoed through the district, was equivalent to the cry of no roads, no bridges, no police, no nothing.’

“If your correspondent thinks he can misrepresent my sentiments, or those of any other parties, he will be defeated.

“I am aware that a very strong prejudice appears to exist throughout the district against District Councils, owing chifly to misrepresentations of interested parties, who take this method of meanly opposing the workings of the Act in this district. To them it would be folly to appeal, but I would wish to call upon the public to examine temperately and dispassionately the objects contemplated by the establishment of Municipal Institutions. I am quite confident that not one out of fifty has taken the trouble of reading, much less studying, the Act itself; and I also feel convinced that were they to do so, their objections would disappear, and their hostility subside, and, however premature some might consider them, all would acknowledge that their establishment was a measure calculated to be of essential advantage to the community, a measure liberal and well intentioned on the part of the Government, and characterised by a great degree of liberality and fairness.

“The Government has given up a vast amount of patronage and influence.

“The sooner these Councils are commenced, the sooner they will pay for themselves, and I think we certainly ought to pause before we reject so desirable and necessary a measure. In all ages taxes have been unpopular, often they have been unjust; but whether just or unjust, the odium attached to the tax-gatherer has been nearly the same, and the cry of ‘no taxation’ has never yet been raised either by patriot or designing landlord, without finding an echo amongst the ignorant and un_____. The greatest opposition to Municipal Institutions is made by extensive landholders, these gentlemen have the inconceivable folly to imagine that, in a civilized country, they are to be allowed to hold large estates without contributing in proportion to their extent to the public funds, even for local purposes, as the chief burthen of local taxation would necessarily fall upon them. They must learn to know that property has its duties as well as rights.

“The Mosaic laws made real property inalienable, to prevent large tracts of land falling permanently into the hands of individuals.

“Solon abolished all existing tenures among the Athenians, and made an equal division of the territory among the free inhabitants.

“The Roman laws prohibited citizens acquiring more lands than they could turn to useful account. And even approaching nearer to our own times, I find the ‘Colony law’ had great effect, though not strictly expected, in opening the wilds of nature to the crooked plough. That law imposed on every proprietor, the obligation of improving and cultivating within a limited time, a certain proportion of his land; and which, in case of failure declared these neglected lands grantable to any other person. Is this not sufficient evidence that, from time immemorial the landholders were expected to fulfil those duties attached to property, which, at the present day, they look upon with so much horror.

“What is ‘Municipal Legislation,’ but to arm the elect of the people with legal authority to force these great land proprietors to perform such duties, the chief duty being to contribute towards the general revenue by local taxation, for the benefit of the public and the improvement of the immediate locality in which their lands are situated. Such are the sure means, modern political economy has provided for rendering the possession of immense property comparatively harmless, by making property contribute in proportion to its extent to the general burthen. Anything more equitable, wise, and fair, than this, it would be impossible for the mind of man to comprise. Even had the incorporation of districts for local purposes no other object to recommend it than this, it ought to be generally adopted.

“Lord Duncan, in his report on the Constitution of Canada, characterizes - ‘the practice of making grants from the general revenue for local purposes as a system so vicious and so productive of evil, that until it is entirely eradicated, Representative Government will be incapable of working well and smoothly in the colonies.’ And further, ‘that the establishment of Municipal Institutions for the whole colony should be made a part of every colonial Constitution.’ What say our Shoalhaven landlords to this ?

“I also find that Robertson, Guiant, Sey, the Tocquevilles, and M’Cullock, men of the highest eminence, in favor of Municipal Legislation.

“Similar views of the wisdom of developing local business on local authorities have been maintained by a great number of eminent political writers - Milton, Hume, Burke, Bentham, and Jefferson, who all agree in their impressions of the policy of some such arrangements.

“After this, it cannot but be looked upon as the greatest presumption in persons of merely colonial experience to set up their own narrow-minded prejudices and opposition, to the deliberate and unanimous judgment of men, like those quoted, who, possessing intellect of the highest order, have devoted their lives to studies of this description.

“I hope to again revert to this subject, and am, your most obedient servant,
Nowra.                                   H. MOSS.’

In the Illawarra Mercury of the 10th January 1859, the Shoalhaven Correspondent responds to Moss:

“MUNICIPALITY MEETING - I am sorry to find Mr. Moss accuses me of misrepresentation, and I think on insufficient grounds. On referring to the Examiner, a copy of which I discovered with difficulty, I find he is there represented as having urged for time for the people to consider the matter, therefore, unless both reporters have been in collusion, it is unlikely that he should not have used the expressions attributed to him. Arguing from this, he may be similarly incorrect in his memory as to the other expressions, and therefore I may be right. Q.E.D. -I did not hear the Chairman say Mr. Alcorn’s [sic] amendment was carried, but such was the buzz of conversation that he possibly may have said it. Will Mr. Moss explain how the ten hands held up at first became twenty on the second call ? I am by no means sure myself that the motion was bona fide carried.”

A report of the proceedings of the Shoalhaven Court of Requests, held 5th January, noted the case of Hyam v. Alley to recover 2s, being the price of a meal consumed and not paid for. Alley claimed he had been invited to tea by Mr. Biddulph who denied that he had intended to pay for his tea, but sat with him to avoid appearing rude. Verdict to Hyam plus costs.

On the Municipal front things were moving slowly, at least from a public perspective;

“This district appears to be very apathetic in regard to any move on the political chess-board here. The apathy evinced by the electors here is good proof that our present member has given satisfaction. The only political move I know about, was a requisition attempted to be got up a few weeks ago by Mr. G.U. Alley to Dr. Mackenzie, J.P. I hardly think this is with the Doctor’s consent, However, I have nothing since of the requisition, and know not how Mr. Alley has succeeded. I think we might well be spared the turmoil and excitement of an election in returning again, without opposition, Dr. Aldcorn, who has proved so staunch and faithful a representative, as we can depend on him in supporting a liberal land bill.” (Illawarra Mercury, 13th January 1859)

The first bombshell by Alexander Berry was soon to be lobbed, however, and it was to have an enormous effect which, I believe, Berry seriously underestimated.

“The Shoalhaven Incubus Libel.

“It cannot be deemed probable that any very serious consequence will follow the initiatory proceedings for libel against DR. LANG, at the insistence of MR. A. BERRY. We have no doubt.....[Lang] has the simultaneous and hearty sympathy, and will have the cheerful and sufficient assistance of the great mass of the inhabitants of this colony.....Lang’s comments.....plain case of the infringement and neglect.....of the implied and acknowledged moral obligations of those placed in Mr. Berry’s position to his fellow men - the pure and patriotic motives which have induced the Dr. to hold this infringement up to the public gaze.....the opinion of almost every uninfluenced person in these districts....is that the Dr. has said nothing but what is true and deserved.....By a large number of the inhabitants his presence [Lang’s] is looked for with hope and certainty.....By a small, but powerful and cunning, minority his presence in that Assembly will be viewed with alarm and dismay.....It will put before the people, in a prominent position and in a glaring light, one of the worst features of the past and present land systems of the Colony, by which the British people have been shamefully defrauded of their patrimony, and the real settlement of the country retarded.”

“POLITICS. - I do not think it likely that Dr. Aldcorn will again wish to represent us in the Assembly, as the late hours and poor ventilation have nearly deprived him of sight, but it is rumored that his nephew, Mr. James Aldcorn, will be a candidate, and it is believed that his political opinions nearly coincide with those of his uncle. As to the the report of Mr. Alley canvassing for Dr. Mackenzie, I do not suppose it to be with that gentleman’s sanction, as I take him to be too good a judge to risk his chances of success by any such measure. He will probably let us know his intentions in time to secure his friends.”

Letter to the Editor:

“SIR, - In your issue of the 30th ult., there appears an article from your Kiama correspondent, handed to him, and which he says may not be inaptly called ‘Kiama Municipality - the other side of it.’ With all deference to your respected correspondent, I would submit that it ought, with greater propriety be called ‘Kiama Municipality - the Berry side of it.’ For, unless I am greatly mistaken, the authorship of the article referred to can be trailed to ‘Coolangatta’s’ lord [Alexander Berry], and I don’t think I am far wrong when I state that it was addressed to two canny gentlemen in the southern portion of the Kiama district, for the purpose of enlisting their sympathy against the proposal to erect Kiama into a Municipality, after the author had done all the mischief he could in that way down here; and further that a reply was returned inviting ‘Coolangatta’ to a conference. Whether the trio ever met, and constituting themselves, in Tooley-street style, the people of Kiama issued their proclamation that Kiama was not to have a Municipality, I have not yet learned. If I be right in my conjectures as to the authority of the article, most of your readers will know what weight to attach to the assertions (I cannot call them arguments) made use of, and consider the motives for which it was written, before they pin their faith on it.

“In one of the opening paragraphs of the article, the writer says ‘that to clear the land in these districts is sufficient taxation for years to come, and that even the Emperor of Russia exempts new settlers for many years to come.’ Granting that this be true, how does the ‘Emperor Coolangatta,’ and his substitute ‘King Log,’ act in this respect ? Instead of giving their ground for ‘many years’ for the clearing, they exact a yearly rent of 20s, and in some instances 25s, per acre for bush land, or bush and swamps, as the case may be, and compel their tenants to clear and fence the ground, on a miserable lease of four years.....
N.N.”

Letter to the Editor:

“DEAR SIR - ‘A Correspondent’ in this day’s issue of the Mercury, under the head of Shoalhaven, states ‘that the only petition here is a requisition attempted to be got up a few weeks since by Mr. G.U. Alley to Dr. M’Kenzie, J.P.’ I can assure you, it is the first I have heard of such, as there is not one word nor even the shadow of truth in it. Moreover, I consider it to be altogether premature even to think of such an attempt; neither am I disposed to take any such prominent part. Indeed, I do not consider it at all necessary to send a requisition to any resident of the district, as, if he have the laudable desire and ambition to serve the public, he should come forward, at the proper time, without waiting to be called upon to do so. Besides, the subjects to be considered by the ensuing Parliament are of such grave importance that without knowing his opinions on the Land, State Aid, and other important questions, it would, to say the least of it, be very unwise to pledge myself, and others, to support any one by ‘attempting to get up a requisition.’

“Will you do me the favor to contradict the statement of your correspondent.
Examiner Office, Kiama, January 13.                                GEO. U. ALLEY.”

Letter to the Editor:

“SIR - Will you allow me space for a few remarks in answer to the attack made upon me by Mr. George Underwood Alley, as Editor of the Kiama Examiner. I have no idea of being lugged into a newspaper controversy by such a man as Alley. I have no time for such work, and still less inclination.

“Alley fancies he has discovered in me the writer of the letter signed ‘J. Roebuck,’ [see above] because, in conversation with another person and him, in which the police were mentioned, by whom first I cannot say, among various grievances (some, if true, far more serious than what I said) mentioned by each, I stated that I had been robbed, that I had told the police, that the man was seen crossing the ferry with, that he was a splitter in the employ of Mr. Berry, living near Meroo, but I did not know his name, but referred him to the ferryman, who could direct him better than I; twice or more I urged his apprehension, but the constable said I had better get a summons. And herein was my complaint, that he did not apprehend the prisoner at once. However, after a week had passed, Mr. Alley says ‘I sent a polite note &c.’ I asked the ferryman to get word conveyed to him that if he did not send the axe I would send a warrant after him; the axe came back in a few days, per Reardon, the ferryman.

“These are the true facts of the case. See how the sapient Editor (save the mark) perverts facts to suit his own evil purposes. I never dreamed of concealing the theft, nor did I fear losing the man’s custom, or that of any of his friends - if he has any, and I do not know to this day who the man was. I have no inclination to measure swords with George Underwood Alley. His way of life is far removed from mine; the high estimation in which he is held by the inhabitants of Illawarra was evinced at the last election [Alley received 39 votes or 1.75% of the total]. I can never hope to attain the wonderful ascension of the political ladder as exhibited at Mr. Thomas’ - it is beyond my ambition. The editorialship of a provincial journal is far beyond my humble ideas, and the treat to G.U.A/, the glorious treat, of being able to slander ones neighbours is denied to me. Read his report of Hyam v. Alley, and read the same case in the Mercury. Does the proprietor imagine his paper will flourish if he allows such abuse to appear, and continue the man as editor. Alley is the last man in the district I would trust, If I purposed doing anything I did not wish known. The fact of his knowing anything about it would prevent me, but luckily I have no occasion for it. He may fret and frown, like a toad round a sealed bottle; I shall not take the least notice of him. His good opinion is of no value. I neither court his friendship, nor fear his hate. God forbid that I should ever perpetrate an act that would gain for me the good opinion of such a man as George Underwood Alley.

“After some study, I have concocted a prescription which, I hope (if he will take it) will soothe his nerves, and stay the nasty feeling he has of setting people by the ears. Take of the herb runabout, and with the root called nimble-tongue of each six handfuls, fifteen ounces of ambition, the same quantity of nonesense, and bruise them well together in the mortar of misapprehension; then boil them over the fire of evil surmises till you perceive the scent of falsehood rising to the top; strain it through the cloth of mis-construction; put it in the bottle of malignity; stop it with the cork of envy; and suck it through the quill of malevolence. The dose to be repeated when the feeling of strife becomes paramount. You will preceive I have omitted grey powder, but with this the coat pocket is usually provided; but, after taking the foregoing, I do not think it will be needed.
         Yours, &c.,
                        RICH. H.F. KEMP.”

(Illawarra Mercury, 17th January 1858)

The same issue of the Mercury carried a report of Lang’s committal for libel against Berry, from the Sydney Morning Herald, which concerned the first letter he had published. Lang had written to Berry’s solicitors, Norton, son and Barber, stating that the letters ‘.....were so written by him and published at his instance’ also adding that they were written ‘exclusively from public motives, and, without any feeling of personal animosity towards Mr. Berry himself.’

At the committal Lang deposed -

“In the early part of last month, he visited the district of Shoalhaven for the first time. A day or two before he left to return to Sydney, he was waited upon by several respectable inhabitants of the place, who, in the course of conversation, recommended that he should call at Coolangatta station, Mr. Berry’s establishment, they thinking it a matter of courtesy, and believing that he would get a courteous reception.”

Lang decide against this as he felt that by accepting accepting Berry’s hospitality he would be prevented, by a sense of moral obligation, from then stating his opinion on the matters raised in his letters. Lang then stated ‘Not one of the facts upon which the offensive part of his letter rested had been denied by the Attorney for the prosecution.....he.....took it for granted [therefore].....the conclusion was the only matter for objection.” After his return to Sydney he had written the letters as ‘no one had ever called public attention to the enormous social and political grievances of the Shoalhaven district.....”

The Bench found that Berry had made out his charge against Lang, who was committed to face trial at the next session of the Criminal Court. he was required to post L100 bail and two sureties of L50 each.

On the 20th January 1858 the Editor of the Illawarra Mercury reported that Berry was suing the proprietors of that paper, the Sydney based Evening Mail, whilst the proprietor of the Kiama Examiner had been informed of pending legal action.

We have no doubt MR. BERRY thinks he will extinguish DR. LANG and the papers he has proceeded against. In this he will be greatly mistaken. If we understand the law and our duty as journalists, he has not a leg to stand upon. He is only aiding the efforts of DR. LANG and the newspapers, in taking the steps he has; the fullest possible publicity will now be given to MR. BERRY’S conduct as a landholder, and that is all that is required to ensure its condemnation, and to open the eyes of the people to the monstrous iniquities which have grown up under the past and present land systems of the colony.”

There was also an editorial piece on ‘Is it an advantage to have a Municipality or not ?’

with reference to Colonial Legislatures “In these cases not even a compliment has been paid to the British principles.....But the people are so unaccustomed to their prerogative, that they sit heavily on them as a burden.....The only notion some people have of self government is summed up in the election of their representatives to the general Parliament.....These people would have every road, every ditch, and every drain, made with funds derived from direct Paliamentary grant if they could.....Every locality must look after its local concerns.”

The following was also reprinted from Saturday’s Era :

“MR. BERRY’S LIBEL CASE. - .....The alleged fact that public improvement throughout the whole district was paralysed by the grasping monopoly that retained nearly 100,000 acres of valuable land in a state of nature and idleness.....If it shall be shown that Dr. Lang has published a tissue of malicious lies, neither his cloth nor nay other consideration should screen him from punishment, if an honest, independent jury [finds] that he has written.....truth.....they will send him forth acquitted, and with honor.....The public should take care that Dr. Lang is provided with the very best legal aid that the country can afford.....”

Mr. T.W. Dixon, of Woodside, Good Dog, was reported to be the agent for the Illawarra Mercury.

The Illawarra Mercury’s editorial, 24th January 1859:

“PERHAPS all of our readers are aware that MR. ALEXANDER BERRY, mortified at being rudely questioned in his old age, has determined on making the proprietors of the Mercury pay their portion of the penalty of fidelity to the duties of journalism. In their case however there is a difference. The original writer of the offensive letter is prosecuted as if he done something criminal. One of the Sydney journalists share the same fate. Even the Kiama Examiner is not to be allowed to come off scatheless. Against the Illawarra Mercury he simply brings a civil action for damages. We have, perhaps, no right to know the reasons for the distinction.....”

The editor asks why didn’t Berry simply publish a refutation ? He goes on to state that Lang has indemnified the paper in event of a civil action and that the action taken by Berry was purely to cause suffering. There would be no apology for doing their public and journalistic duty and that since Berry was a Public Figure it was the fundamental and Constitutional right of every Briton to make strictures on him. The paper also reprinted this news from the Sydney Morning Herald, 20th January:

“WATER POLICE COURT - WEDNESDAY.”

James Fussell proprietor of The Evening Mail and New South Wales Advertiser.

Fussell published Lang’s letters in the public interest. He is committed for trial for Libel at the next Criminal Court. Bail is set at L100 with two sureties of L30 each.

A Letter to the Editor expressed the current of public opinion in the matter:

“SIR. -Permit me to express the sorrow I feel at seeing in your issue of yesterday, an account of the above trial [The Sholhaven Incubus Libel]. To see a gentleman of Dr. Lang’s standing, usefulness, and worth, brought up at the instance of a man like Mr. Berry, is something calculated to surprise and pain us. The Dr., as far as we can ascertain, has been one of the most useful men, that ever graced the Australian shores. he has ever taken the side of the oppressed, and has endeavoured, by every possible means, to ameliorate the condition. He has crossed the mighty ocean more frequently, perhaps, than any man in this colony, and has on each occasion, done so for the ostensible, for the acknowledged purpose of benefitting this, the country of his adoption. He has boldly stood up in opposition to every measure which he conceived would be prejudicial to the interests of the country. Nor was his mind to be purchased or altered, by flattery or terror. The Dr. has borne the burden and heat of the day, sacrificed personal interest for public good; and I reiterate it does seem strange that the Dr.’s conduct should be questioned in this case for a moment.

“On the contrary Mr. Berry has always been distinguished by his parsimonious and niggardly habits. And the whole of the Dr.’s letters, as referred to in the indictment as having appeared in the Illawarra Mercury, are as generally and as fully believed, as that the sun shines in the heavens. That Mr. Berry’s a perfect ‘Incubus,’ an incumberance, is so universally believed and asserted that he is all sides styled the ‘Leviathan.’

“Mr. Berry may have friends; men of his kind generally have. But, sir, I feel bold to assert, without fear of contradiction, that where Mr. B has one true friend, the Dr. has a thousand. But Mr. Berry may say ‘I have a friend in my pocket, and need no other.’ He may exceed Dr. Lang in that point of view; but allow us to observe, that in the event of a paucity of ‘the success of war’ on the part of the Dr., here are men, sir, in Illawarra who can and do appreciate talent, worth, and public spirit; men who can and do discern between ‘Righteous and the Wicked’ to some extent, men whose motto is ‘Advance Australia;’ and of course, men who repudiate as not fit for civilized society those whose eternal aim is to clog and impede such advancement, and above all, sir, men who, upon the slightest intimation, would get up a subscription list - the result of which might arouse even the ‘Incubus’ himself.

“These, sir, are not my feelings alone; I have had the opportunity of hearing others express their sentiments with more enthusiasm than I do.

“Truth, liberty, and justice, are great, and they shall prevail !

“Yours &c.,     Scipta Epistota Abut
 Jamberoo, January 13th 1859.”

The Illawarra Mercury, 31st January 1859, reported that the Shoalhaven Electoral has been prepared and there were 890 eligible voters. The issue also carried the following.

“DR. LANG. - the meeting of sympathisers with Dr. Lang, took place yesterday at the Victoria Hotel. Messrs. Alley, Moss and James Aldcorn, J.P., spoke in terms of sympathy with the reverend gentleman; but as you will have a full report from another quarter, I will not occupy your space with a twice told tale.”

“SYMPATHY WITH DR. LANG.
(From a Correspondent.)

“A public meeting of the inhabitants, persuant to notice, was held on the evening of the 24th inst., at Mr. Thomas’ Inn, to consider what steps should be taken to relieve the Rev. Dr. Lang of the consequences of the actions for alleged libel on Mr. A. Berry. James Aldcorn, J.P., was voted into the chair.

“It was moved by Mr. H. Moss, seconded by Mr. James M’Guire, and carried unanimously, ‘that a requisition be drawn out to the Bench of Magistrates here, requesting them to convene a meeting of the inhabitants at Mr. Berry’s Court-house, Numba, to give the people of the district an opportunity of expressing their sentiments in the case of Berry v. Lang.’

“A requisition was accordingly drawn out, and has been already numerously signed. It will be presented to the senior Magistrate here, Dr. Aldcorn, about Monday, and the meeting, I expect, will take place about Wednesday next.

“It is fully expected that the meeting will be a crowded one, and that a substantial expression of sympathy and support will be elicited.”

Advertisements for similar meetings at Wollongong and Shellharbour were also printed in this issue. On the 7th February the Mercury reported that the Shellharbour meeting had voted unanimous support for Lang and a fund raising committee was also established. A meeting was to be held at Ulladulla where it was said there was a strong and unanimous feeling of condemnation of Berry’s actions; “What is still more decisively indicative of public feelings is that the Doctor is to be requested to stand as a member for the Shoalhaven Electorate of which this place is a part.

The editorial piece of this issue noted that Berry’s solicitors had been refused permission, by the Attorney-General, to prosecute Lang privately and the prosecution will be conducted by the Crown. The editor felt that the Crown appeared to be lending itself to revenge rather than redress in the case; “The whole mighty apparatus of State power is wielded to indulge the animosity of an individual heart [Berry].....the use of personal revenge.....It is no honor to past Attorney Generals that they never sought to have this flagrant abuse rectified.....”

The same issue carried the Parliamentary Reports from the Sydney Morning Herald, and on Thursday in the Legislative Council, Mr. Wilshire moved that letters in Queen v, Lang and Queen v. Fussell be tabled. The Attorney General wholeheartedly agreed as he saw it as an opportunity to answer an attack, made through a newspaper, on him by “an honorable member of this house.” Mr. Johnson rose to object, saying that the attack could have been made by anyone, at which point the Attorney General was ruled out of order. In the Legislative Assembly, on the same day, Mr. Plunkett put the following questions to the Solicitor General:

1. The letters were published in the Sydney Morning Herald on the 2nd February 1859; are they genuine copies ?
2. Whether the Attorney-General intends to prosecute at the public expense ?
3. Whether Berry was reused permission to prosecute privately and at his own expense ?
4. Had the Attorney-General ignored long-term practice in the colony, standard practice in England, and the Libel Act (11 Vic No 13) ?

The Solicitor General, on behalf of the Attorney General, gave the following replies:

1. The implication contained in the question was contemptible and beneath his dignity to reply.
2. Did intend to prosecute at the public expense.
3. The answer was bound in with the decision arrived at in answer to question two.
4. Referred to the Attorney General by Crown Law Officers. “the only costs a private prosecutor was entitled to were the samll costs attending such a plea of justification and no more.”

The question of who should prosecute Lang was raised in an Editorial of the Illawarra Mercury 10th February 1859 and Mr. Lutwyche, on behalf of the Government, was quoted as saying that there would be no more private prosecutions conducted in the name of the Queen; “We do not think we can ever expect the true doctrine of libel to be settled in the colony by members of the legal profession.....personal interests.....to be treated in a matter of that nature.....The true English doctrine, asserted by the first Judges of the land, is, that to criticise the conduct of public persons [Berry], the very highest, severly, and even with liability to be in error, provided it has been done manifestly with honest aims, is the right of every British subject. Not only is there no assumable crime in the thing, but it is an express fulfillment of a constitutional right and duty.....when a functionary feels himself galled by censures on his conduct, for him to conjure up an imputation on his motive, and so justify a prosecution. The liberty of speech would be effectively destroyed.....Civil actions are the only proper things for libel.....” The editor goes on to state that since the preceding was written the discussion that took place between the Attorney-General and Berry’s counsel had come to hand and the Court had decided in favour of the Attorney-General for these reasons

1. The Attorney-General is both grand jury and public prosecutor, which was different from English practice, therefore the precedent did not apply.
2. It had no power to take the matter out of his hands.

After a meeting at Wollongong a committee was appointed to raise funds, for Lang, by subscription lists. The Ulladulla meeting, followed the close of a meeting to institute a Municipality there and was reported to have been given great support:

“Mr. R. Seccombe, on rising, said he held in his hand a requisition, calling on the Dr. to allow himself to become a candidate for the electoral district of Shoalhaven. He had no personal acquaintance with the Dr. he knew him only as a public man.....and had the highest opinion of him.....

“”Mr. J. Warden had much pleasure in seconding the adoption of the requisition. He did not think there was a better man in the colony to represent them.....

“Mr. William Cork said some years since he had seen the Dr. in London, and had heard him lecturing to the working men as to the benefit of immigration to this colony. He had never heard of the Dr., but he was endeavouring to do his fellow men good.....He was quite willing to subscribe his mite to aid in defending the Dr, in his defence of all the merited comments he made on Mr. Berry’s conduct as a landholder.

“Mr. W. Sturrock could not always say with the Dr., but in his present position he deeply sympathised with him.....an attempt to put down the freedom of speech and of publishing our opinions on the public conduct of a public man.....people ought to come forward and indemnify him and the press.

The meeting decided that ‘every effort’ should be made to raise funds for Lang’s defence at once and further that that the requisition seemed generally approved of, in the event that Dr. Aldcorn did not stand. A meeying was also held at Moruya, which passed the following resolutions -

1. That Lang who in his difficulties as the result of doing the public good is deserving of public support.
2. Lang had no other motive than the public good and that it would be an ‘indelible disgrace to prevent him to fight the battle unaided.’
3. A subscription list be circulated to raise money be circulated and that a committee be appointed.
4. A treasurer and secretary be appointed.
5. An expression of sympathy to Lang and the newspaper proprietor being prosecuted.

The meeting expressed its good feeling at Lang’s actions and also expressed the ‘disgraceful feeling’ it held against the ‘Incubus,’ or Mr. Berry. Public outrage was expressed in other areas of the colony and even the opinion at Moreton Bay was said to be sympathetic to Lang.

The paper also reported, briefly, that Lang’s trial had been adjourned for a day after legal argument.

The trial concluded with Lang being acquitted on the charges before the Central Criminal Court. It took the jury only half an hour to reach its verdict - “The announcement was received with a most unusual demonstration of applause from a crowded court, which subsequently was severely animadverted on by the learned Chief Justice.” Fussell was also found not guilty, within quarter of an hour, by a jury of his peers at his trial. (Illawarra Mercury, 14th February 1859)

Berry continued his legal attack on the Illawarra Mercury as the Editor noted -

“We have received information from our Solicitors to the effect that a declaration has been filed in the Supreme Court, by the Hon. ALEXANDER BERRY, setting forth the grounds of an action against us for an alleged libel in publishing DR. LANG’S letters. The damages sued for are One Thousand Pounds !”

“ ‘The Shoalhaven Incubus’ - Dr. Lang and the S.M. Herald.

“In Friday week’s Herald appeared an exceedingly bitter and violent leader on DR. LANG and the result of the trials. In the same paper, on Saturday last, the Dr. replies, and more clear refutation could not be penned, especially as regards the motives which actuated DR. LANG in writing the letters. The letter is as follows : -

“SIR, - Although I have no intention to make a formal comment on the grossly vituperative article in reference to myself and the late libel case, which you were pleased to insert in your paper of Friday last, with an obvious view to hold me up if possible to the detestation of mankind, all over, the civilized world.....there were one or two points in that article, which I deem it incumbent on me to notice....”

That Lang and Berry had lived side by side for more than 30 years and that Lang had known of Berry’s management practices but only chose to criticise them when Berry had refused Lang permission to use the church at Numba. Not true - first time visit to the district in December. he had rode with Dr. Aldcorn, M.P., to Green Hills and Aldcorn arranged with Prosper de Mestre that Lang should preach at his flour mill on the Sunday morning. Prosper de Mestre fitted it up, voluntarily, for the purpose to Lang’s ‘entire satisfaction.’ It was also arranged for Lang, if convenient, to preach on the Sunday afternoon in the Nowra Denominational School classroom. Lang returned to his Hotel room, at Numba, at about 4 o’clock where he was immediately called upon by five or six respectable inhabitants, one of whom was a magistrate, urging him to call on Mr. Berry. Lang decided against this as he felt that by accepting accepting Berry’s hospitality he would be prevented, by a sense of moral obligation, from then stating his opinion on the matters raised in his letters. He then received a note from the Rev. Mr. Garvan, Presbyterian Minister of the locality, offering the use of his church at any time on Sunday. That night, at 10 o’clock, a note was sent to Mr. Garvan from Berry prohibiting the use of the church by Lang, “threatening him [Garvan] with pains and penalties if he did. And this message and menace it seems, was repeated by Mr. Berry on the Sabbath morning.” Garvan then sent a messenger to Lang, at his Hotel on Sunday morning, expressing anxiety and alarm at this “unexpected criticism” but leaving the decision to use the church up to Lang. Lang basically replied that he would stick to his original plans and Garvan was not to worry himself as he had a large family and lived in one of Berry’s Houses. This incident had no influence on his writing the letters, it only confirmed what he had heard about Berry from other quarters.

In the District News section the following reports appeared.

“SHELLHARBOUR.
“DR. LANG’S ACQUITTAL. - That the Sydney Morning Herald would denounce Dr. Lang is just what everybody here expected.....The ‘Incubus’ case is over, and the Dr. exonerated.....”

“ULLADULLA.
“DR. LANG. - The news of the Dr.’s acquittal arrived here on Sunday morning last, and has been the theme of conversations and congratulation ever since. The merits of the case have been before the whole country, and the voice of public opinion declares the letters no libel.” (Illawarra Mercury, 21st February 1859)

After the result of these trials Berry decided to speak publicly and wrote the following letter to the Editor, in which he attempts to portray himself as a humble, hard done by settler, of a paternalistic bent:

“SIR, - My name and my possessions have been so unwarrantably brought before the public by the Rev. Dr. Lang and the editors of various papers, who have enabled him to gratify his morbid appetite for slander and misrepresentation, that a brief narrative of the circumstances under which I became possessed of the Shoalhaven Estate, may not be uninteresting to your readers, and may afford them means of correcting misrepresentations so gross that the Attorney-General (Mr. Lutwyche) determined to prosecute the matter at the public expense.”

Berry goes on to state that after visiting Hunter River and Bong Bong (or Berrima) and requesting a grant of 2000 acres each at Berrima the Governor, after some hesitation, agreed to the application. He left for England in March 1820 and on his return voyage, in 1821, he was on the same vessel as Sir Thomas Brisbane and on his arrival found that all the land around Berrima had been allocated with no provision for their grants. At the time his partner, Edward Wollstonecraft, was suffering from ill health due to his residing in an unhealthy part of Lower George Street, so under medical advice, he had taken an 800 acre grant on the North Shore of Sydney. Here he built small cottage which he called Crow’s Nest. Disappointed at the loss of land at Berrima they concentrated on Mercantile pursuits.

Berry then went on his south coast and Clyde River explorations.

Berry then writes that he happened to hear that Brisbane wished to break up the expensive Government Establishments, which were formed by Macquarie, for the employment of convicts. The agreement was for the employment of one convict for every 100 acres granted and although he claims they had given up all idea of agricultural pursuits ‘my attention was again turned to the subject.’ Only those under a life sentence were to be assigned and it was calculated that each convict cost the Government L16 per annum to maintain. Berry worked out the cost of keeping the convicts at 3s 2 1/2d per acre of land, per annum. Berry believed this to be most onerous on the settler and that even with a cow thrown in, per acre, it was such an expense to the settler that Brisbane was forced to change the way in which grants were given. Despite this the partners ‘accepted’ 10,000 acres at Shoalhaven.

In 1825 Brisbane introduced the sale of land at 5s. per acre, no conditions, and the partners purchased a further 4,000 acres, each, at Shoalhaven.

Because of the lack of convicts to work the estate, Major Goulburn declined to deliver the deeds for the original 10,000 acre grant but this was rectified after the arrival of Darling. They then applied to Darling to purchase a further 3,320 acres which was duly approved. All other land he owned was purchased from individual owners. “In the early days of the colony, possession of land was so little coveted that it was almost considered a degradation to become an Australian settler.....although one time possessor of Macnamara’s Wharf [Sydney], it was obtained by purchase.” Berry appears to believe that he did the Government a favour by accepting the huge grants of land he was given ! Berry then returns to the subject of convicts -

“In the management of convicts assigned to us, we received neither assistance nor protection from the Government, and our lands were as completely Isolated as the Island of St. Paul. We did, however, contrive by mild measures and moral influence to exercise a most beneficial control over the men assigned to us, and by giving increased comforts to the well-conducted, and putting those who behaved badly upon what were called Government rations, a very general feeling of satisfaction prevailed amongst the men.....”

Berry and Wollstonecraft had written to the Colonial Secretary on the 1st May 1826 (Mitchell Library CY 3220) and stated that up until 1824 their Prisoner Servants were kindly treated and generally they, in return, behaved well. This changed when Samuel Terry and Cornelius O’Brien, both of Illawarra District, took possession of a portion of their best grazing land “as soon as the goodness of our pasture.....[and] the fertility of our Estate.....” became known to our neighbours. Because the deeds for the estate had not been issued the interlopers ignored efforts to move them on, and the insult to Berry and Wollstonecraft was soon emulated by the convicts who felt that they also “.....with impunity commit then depredations and Plunderings, in conformity with the example set by their betters.
“They all at once became completely disorganised, neglected their work, were insolent to their Overseers, discontented, troublesome and devious.” It was about this same period, July 1825, that 5 of the convicts absconded, with stolen guns, ammunition and food, to the bush and made raids on the south side of the Shoalhaven River, breaking into stores and huts, killing cattle and eventually stealing a small boat. Berry, in charge of 4 soldiers, 2 constable and 4 other persons sworn in as special constables, arrived at the Estate from Sydney in August. The desperadoes escaped but were eventually captured and brought to trial.

But returning to Berry and his letter, they purchased the ‘Blanche’ from the Government, in June 1822, and set sail for the Shoalhaven. The master was Thomas Davison, whom Berry had rescued from the ‘Boyd’ in New Zealand, and they were accompanied by Hamilton Hume. He gives an account of foundering on the bar but once inside Crookhaven he directed an overseer to employ some men to cut the ‘channel’ over the isthmus. Then he, Hume and some natives examined the country up the Shoalhaven River. “The channel I had cut was at first only sufficient to allow a boat at half tide to pass, but I afterwards widened and deepened it, and it is now fathoms deep and chains wide.”

He selected lands on both sides of the canal and the country was very different from what he had anticipated stating that I had “involved myself in a very difficult and hazardous undertaking.” This is a strange statement since Berry had visited the area in January of that year and travelled up the river as far as Burrier, so he would have known exactly what the country was like and what rich natural resources of timber grew there! He claims that the grants did not repay them for many years “.....much of the land was useless, until at least a hundred miles of drains had been opened. This great work was executed by free labourers [his tenantry].....even then the land did not for a long time become productive.....” Berry argues that it was necessary to purchase land of a different character for cattle and crops to feed the establishment, to enable the original grant to be developed. It is hard to reconcile the statement of ‘much of the land was useless’ with the assertion in their letter to the Col. Secretary quoted above, when those Illawarra villians took possession of a portion of their best grazing land “as soon as the goodness of our pasture.....[and] the fertility of our Estate.....” was known.

If we look more deeply into how Berry ‘developed’ the area at this time we can clearly see that the Shoalhaven Estate was worth a fortune in the cedar which grew on it. SRNSW Colonial Secretary, Letters Received, Special Bundles 1826 - 1934; 4/1128.1, 1826 - 1839, Licenses to Cut Cedar: in a ‘Statement of Cedar imports at Sydney from 20th July 1826 to 5th April 1827’ Berry supplied 188,465, or 63%, of the 299,159 super feet of cedar landed at Sydney. Other timber was also exported from the estate and between January and March of 1828, 42,011 super feet of Blue Gum was exported (Mitchell Library MSS 315/52, Business Records re timber and Timber Getters, 1823 - 1839. Invoices and memoranda for timber shipped locally and overseas, Feb. - Dec. 1826, Jan. 1828 - Nov. 1839.) In 1825 the estate had the following under cultivation - 150 acres of wheat, 25 acres of maize, 12 acres of barley and oats, 4 acres of potatoes, 2 acres of flax and hemp, 2 acres of tobacco, 3 acres of gardens, 258 acres fallowand a further 250 acres cleared and fenced ready for cultivation (Mitchell Library MSS 315/37, Records re assigned servants, 1823 - 1846. Copy at CY 2172.) It is hard to see how the grants did not repay !

He goes on to state that in 1856, Census year, his estate was home to 1478 ‘human beings’, which included a large and respectable tenantry which had know grown to 1700 people. Berry then again returns to the issue of convict labour on the estate:

“The statements by Dr. Lang, that large gangs of convicts were employed in cutting down cedar, and that the men so employed were frequently flogged within an inch of their lives for the slightest offence, is without foundation. It is a fabrication that could have emanated only from the most diabolical mind, and will be indignantly repelled by hundreds of the alleged victims now living. We had indeed no means of flogging convicts, or even of bringing their conduct under the notice of the police. For a few years only, the police magistrate at Wollongong visited Shoalhaven, and then but once a month.....We employed the convicts assigned to us in the ordinary operations of husbandry. Michael Connor, who is now, and has been for thirty years in my employment, lately informed me that he never knew me to flog, or rather to be the means of flogging a convict, and several others.....afforde the same evidence.” [My emphasis]

This statement, no matter how we dress it up, is a lie, as a look at the Assigned Servants Punishment Book, 7th Jan. 1830 - 25 Apr. 1846, Mitchell Library MSS 315/41, CY 2172, will show. Punishments used on the Shoalhaven Estate included sentencing to an iron gang, flogging, return to Government Service or Goal. Two examples are -

• Henry Thompson, carpenter, received a total of 265 lashes from 1834 to 1837.
• John Kelly received 30 lashes for insolence to J. Berry, in April 1840.

Berry tries to explain, that yes floggings took place but they ‘did not apply to me’ as it was a Government sentence. True, but who brought the ‘miserable convicts’ before the magistrates where a sentence of flogging was often the inevitable result. He maintained that the ‘Secret Police’ at Shoalhaven were used only during the convict era to discourage bushrangers.

As to the rights of property Berry stated he was more sympathetic with the revolutionaries of France but, “for the honour of England, find favour even with a chartist mob.” He was using every available to graze or cultivate and the waste lands he rented from the Government were used to graze sheep, “I infinitely prefer an industrious agricultural population to a crowd of starving villagers.....”

Berry then outlined his contribution to the district-

• Gives his tenants a ten year lease which only terminated at the tenant’s request.
• Allows the Illawarra Steam Navigation Company to use his Greenwell Point Wharf for free. He was a member of the original Steamship Compnay and had invested L1500 which was swallowed up within 12 months, he then bailed out.
• Gave L30, many years ago, towards the construction of the wool road.
• Built a Post Office.
• Constructed Collangatta Cottage, in 1823, “I, however, prefer it to a mansion, the splendour of which might make me a mark for the envious and maligned.”

He maintained it was useless to build houses for people without occupation as towns grew of themselves and cited the failed attempt at Jervis Bay, South Huskisson or Vincentia as it is now called, and Nowra, where only five houses had been constructed.

With reference to Lang and the Church at Numba he merely pointed out to the Rev. that such an indecorous proceeding would make him and his congregation a laughing stock whilst the use of the school to hold political meetings was against Regulations. (Sydney Morning Herald, 22nd February 1859)

We can see the state of the Shoalhaven Estate, around this period, by consulting Alexander Berry’s Estate records -

1861 - Total Population 428: 169 adults & 259 children. Acres Leased: 2296. Yearly rental income: L3051; 36% paid by cash, 25.2% in grain, 5.8% by improvements, leaving 33% owing. (Mitchell Library, Alexander Berry 1802 - 1873, ML MSS 315/76- Estate Records c. 1837 - 1871, Returns after 1856, 1861, 1863 - 69, Copy at CY 2505)

The Shoalhaven Correspondent of the Illawarra Mercury, 28th February 1859, reported :

“The district has been much benefitted by the late rains. The whole country was in a parched and miserable state owing to the scarcity of water. The nearest available supply to the river bank being Nowra Creek, adjoining the town of that name. I suppose our future Nowra Municipality will look to this, as it must be a great benefit to the inhabitants of Greenhills to be accommodated with a reservoir securely fenced, which could, at small expense, be provided with a pump. The reservoir should be constructed between the two bridges, near the Walter Scott Inn. An improvement of this description will be a great boon to the population of Greenhills, and on the establishment of the Municipality ought to be immediately attended to.

“MUNICIPAL. - There is a rumor here of a counter-petition against the proposed Municipality from the Incubus party, but the people of Nowra, Greenhills, and Good Dog [Cambewarra], have, I should think too much good sense to stoop to such subserviency.

“BUILDINGS IN NOWRA. - I perceive that Mr. Alexander Berry, in his communication in the Herald, has misrepresented the rival township ‘Nowra.’ He states there are only five buildings in Nowra. I beg to contradict him; there are sixteen buildings and seven others in course of erection, two of which are brick houses. This number, of course, is exclusive of the Catholic Chapel, and stone flour mill, beside several other buildings, nearer the river bank, but within a stone’s throw of the township.

“THE PRESS PROSECUTIONS. - A public meeting is called for Wednesday, 9th March, at the Sir Walter Scott Inn, at 3 p.m., to take the necessary steps in assisting the local journals in the action of libel, preferred against them by Mr. Berry. The independent men of Ulladulla, I know, only await the tocsin’s sound, to be up and stirring. Broulee and Shannon View, I know, will not be backward in so good a cause.”

It was also reported that town lots in Nowra had been sold to Messrs. Hyam, R.H. Kemp, Jamison, Reardon, Murray and others. “If the sections near the Catholic Chapel were cut up, and offered for sale, I have no doubt, they would meet with ready purchasers, as land adapted for gardening purposes could then be obtained in conjunction with building sites.” The Government Surveyor, Mann, was working near Meroo at this time.

John F. Hargraves placed an advertisement, to the electors of East Camden, that he was offering himself as a candidate. He had recently accepted the office of Solictor-General in the Cowper administration and wished to occupy a seat in the assembly to support the Government there. He was in support of the establishment of Municipalities and pledged to take a deep interest in works of great local importance. (Illawarra Mercury, 3rd March 1859) Soon after this he visited the Shoalhaven:

“MR. HARGRAVE AT SHOALHAVEN. - On Wednesday, Mr. Hargrave arrived at Shoalhaven, accompanied by Mr. J. Garrett. From several causes they did not get to Shoalhaven until after the time advertised for meeting, which notice was only received at mid-day. From these confused causes, few were aware of the visit of the Solictor-General; Dr. Aldcorn, Jas. Aldcorn, Esq,. J.P., and several other gentlemen, where at the wharf when the steamer arrived. Several gentlemen exerted themselves, and about a dozen persons were collected to gather in Mr. Thomas’ hotel. Dr. Aldcorn occupied the chair. After Mr. Hargraves had given an exposition of his views on the current topics, and answering several questions put by the gentlemen present, a resolution was passed affirming his fitness as a representative, and a committee was formed, Mr. Moss acting as secretary, in order to be prepared, if any opposition should arise. The general opinion being, that none would be offered, but certainly, in the present conjecture of affairs, no opposition could be successful, they thought it would cause delay.” (Illawarra Mercury, 14th March 1859)

The editorial, of the same issue, also criticised the Sydney Morning Herald for its prejudice and repeated tirades aginst the verdicts in the Lang and Fussell trials. The same issue also contained Alexander Berry’s, extremely long, letter, which we have discussed above, as a paid advertisement.

The New South Wales Government Gazette, No. 46, 15th March 1859, carried notice of a petition for a Municipality to be established which was signed by 103 inhabitants of Nowra, Nowra Hill, Greenhills and Good Dog [Cambewarra].

In a letter, dated Sydney 22nd March 1859, Alexander Berry wrote to William Elyard requesting information on the trial and conviction of Henry Moss on the charge of subornation of perjury. See The Formative Years of Henry Moss for details of this trial. An annotation to the letter stated “A gentleman called for an answer to this. I mentioned that I did not feel authorised to give any particulars in this case. I will also reply to that effect.....22 June 59.” (SRNSW, Colonial Secretary, Letters Received Main Series 1826 - 1934; 4/3449, 61/2214, Letter 59/1058) It would appear, from subsequent events, that the muck racking into the past of his political opponents had begun.

Hargrave won the by-election for the seat of East Camden by a massive vote of 638 to his opponent’s, John Tighe, 2. One of Tighe’s votes was polled at Coolangatta. (Illawarra Mercury, 24th March 1859)

In the same issue the inhabitants of “Nowra and neighbourhood” advertised a petition praying to be incorporated into a Municipality. The first step to self government had been taken.

The Shoalhaven Correspondent, of the Illawarra Mercury 28th March 1859, wrote:

“THE LATE ELECTION. - Mr. Berry’s did not appear on the side of the Solictor-General [Hargrave].....

“MUNICIPAL ELECTION. - We are glad to see the Nowra petition for a Municipality gazetted. Should a counter-petition be attempted by the ‘Incubus,’ I hope it will find very few signatures. Let neighbor caution neighbor; and let any attempt to upset this petition be defeated, for it will be a great victory, and one decidedly in favor of progress. The great scope of land up Broughton Creek and Gooddog, included in the proposed Municipality, must be thrown open to the public, should the Municipality be proclaimed, which it certainly will be in three months, if the people only remain true to the meeting.”

The most vulnerable of Berry’s political opponents were to be dealt with first as the following letter to the Editor was published in the Editor of the Illawarra Mercury, 31st March 1859 :

“SIR. - In his recent production, legal, in defence of his character and conduct, Mr. A. Berry declares himself to be a perfect prodigy of liberality and benevolence, and one would fancy, on rising from the perusal of his self-laudations, that the anxious looker out for an Australian Elysium had only to speed to Coolangatta’s shade, to be freed from all the trials and troubles, and under the beneficent sway of its much abused, lord to dwell in peace and prosperity. Surely no one would fancy taht even now a reign of terror had commenced. Let, however, the following circumstances speak for themselves.

“It is well known that for many weeks the subject of the Berry - Lang case was here, as elsewhere, the all absorbing matter of conversation was almost universally condemnatory of him, who, from Coolangatta’s top, is lord of nearly all he surveys. Well, among the number of those who exercised a Briton’s right of free thought and speech was Mr. Morrison, the agent here for the Illawarra Steam Navigation Company. As a tenant of Mr. Berry’s, and an intelligent observer of things in this district, he could and did speak of the effects of the ‘Incubus.’ But, unfortunately for him, the rebel sentiments were uttered in the hearing of two or three of a class who arrogate to themselves the title of gentlemen, and claim from all others the obsequious homage of serfs and slaves. Speedily as steam could convey them, these Berry defenders hasted to unberthen their minds of the Greenwell Point treason, and I have no doubt the North Shore soon resounded with the cry of vengance. The yard-arm would suggest itself to the minds of some of the relaters as the fitting reward of the traitorous sentiments uttered at the base of Coolangatte. But, I suppose, the libelled lord would, with quivering lip, cry out ‘I have him now - Manning to the rescue !’ Sure enough, at all events, an avenger has Mr. manning proved of the faniced wrongs of Mr. Berry; for speedily issued from the Phoenix Wharf [the I.S.N. Co.’s Headquarters in Sydney], to Mr. Morrison, a notice to quit, with an intimation that the name of Berry must be held sacred by all steamboat agents, if they would not incur the high displeasure of steamboat owners.

“Thus for daring to have an opinion, and to express it, of an individual, in no way connected with the Steam Navigation Company, the best agent, without exception, that has ever been at Shoalhaven, has been summarily dismissed, and with wife and family cast adrift as a sacrifice to the ‘Incubus.’

“It is reported that Mr. David Berry says that neither he nor his brother urged the dismissal of Mr. Morrison. If so let them come forward and publicly say so in order that indignation may descend on the head of the responsible party or parties.

“Have the Directors of the steamboat company sanctioned the dictum of Mr. Manning, or is he the Director ?

“Believing that a very general feeling of regret will prevail at the removal of Mr. Morrison, and believing, also, that such a miserable piece of persecution should be exposed, who ever may be most to blame in the matter. I ask ypu, if you agree with me, to insert the foregoing remarks in your first publication, and I am, sir, &c.,
Shoalhaven, 26th March, 1859.                                      ITA EST.”

Two Shoalhaven Correspondents submitted news to the Illawarra Mercury, of the 4th April 1859. The first critical of the opinions expressed in Ita Est’s letter :

 “I have been surprised at the appearance of a letter from some one signing himself ‘Ita Est,’ in your issue of Thursday. He is right in saying that the reign of terror has commenced. It is now apparent that what used to consider the private relations in society are to be public relations, that no man shall till his land, or hire and dismiss his servants, without being abused in print. Aspicis deteriora. 2nd April, 1859.

An absurd and trite observation, that is not worth commenting on, from a conservative supporter.

“I hear that the fam’d whipper-in of the great Incubus, is again employed getting signatures against the Nowra Municipality. Of course the tenants (very fortunately few, indeed, this time) are the first waited on by this person. The great land monopolist, will find to his dismay that he is completely check-mated, and that he must either open his vast tract of land, now lying unimproved and useless, to the strong arm of industry, or be made to bear a proportionate share of the weighty public burthen, which such like him, would evade by counter-petition. A few will be got to sign the counter-petition, as nearly all Gooddog, all the Depot, all Greenhills, with slight exception, and the whole town of Nowra, and Nowra Hill, are anxious, and in favor of a Municipality for Nowra. The people now are getting too enlightened to be made the dupes of great or little men.”

On the 4th of April 1859, Henry Moss wrote to the Colonial Secretary ‘respecting certain Signatures attached to the Petition from Nowra for a Municipality. Unfortunately this letter has been lost.

On the 8th April 1859, Alexander Berry wrote to the Governor General.

On the 19th April 1859 Alexander Berry wrote to the Secretary for Lands and Public Works.

In May Dr. Aldcorn announced he would not be standing for re election because of his poor eyesight. At a meeting at the Royal Victoria Hotel he gave an account of his time in Parliament, to those assembled, and an Election Committee was duly appointed consisting of Graham, Moss, Mackay, J.L. Biddulph and others (Illawarra Mercury, 2nd May 1859).

On the 3rd May 1859, Alexander Berry wrote to the Under Secretary for Lands and Public Works.

One of the Shoalhaven Correspondents wrote of the meeting of the committee - A meeting of the ‘so-called’ election committee which was in reality an imitation of the American Caucus was held in the Victoria Hotel. He was unable to gain admission “but I learn that’ Mr. Blakeney had been nominated, after being proposed by H.G. Morton and seconded by A. de Mestre. The motion was not formally put by the chair but was generally agreed to. Over 100 people attended and Alexander Mackay was in the chair.

The same issue also reprinted a letter from H.S. Chauncey, licensed surveyor, in which he stated that he had surveyed more than 30 farms, at Broughton Creek, averaging 80 acres each in preparation for sale to the public “clearly proving that there is an excess of 27 chains, north and west, affecting the greater part of Mr. Berry’s property longitudinally.....” (Illawarra Mercury, 12th May 1859)

On the 5th May 1859, Alexander Berry wrote to the Colonial Secretary.

A letter from Alexander Mackay appeared in the Illawarra Mercury, of 16th May, in which he takes exception to the report on the Election Committe, which had appeared on the 12th of May. The motion was formally put to the meeting but only two or three, of the 80 present, supported it. A counter motion which declined to express any opinion of Blakeney’s fitness as a candidate was carried by the great majority. John Garrett placed an advertisement, in this issue, that he would address the voters at Thomas’ Victoria Inn on the following Wednesday. He went on to outline his views on various relevant issues and will listen to the needs and local wants of the electors of the Shoalhaven. Andrew Aldcorn and John Hargrave, for Illawarra, also placed advertisements urging voters not to vote for Blakeney as “he is totally unfit to be your representative.)

The first address by Garret was duly held with John M’Arthur in the chair:

“THE ELECTION. - Mr. Garrett addressed the electors.....Two or three of Mr. Berry’s favorites put a long string of questions to Mr. Garrett, but they only humiliated themselves in striving to damage the liberal candidate.....Mr. Blakeney’s supporters have not been idle. He will receive the support of all those who admire the political conduct of Mr. Berry and his party, whose opinions generally follow the march of that antiquated family.....He will find that this is not a pocket borough of the Berry’s.....”

The New South Wales Government Gazette, 28th May 1859, carried a notice of the Counter Petition against the establishment of any Municipality in the district. It was signed by 362 householders from the Police District of Shoalhaven. The conservative element, or Berry supporters, all signed and amongst the names are; David and William Berry, Coollangatta, farmers; Ken. MacKenzie, Bundanon, farmer; Henry Gordon Morton, Numba, surveyor; P. de Mestre, Terrara, miller; Christopher Murray, Terrara, auctioneer; A. de Mestre, Terrara, farmer; W. Lovegrove, Terrara, Clerk of Petty Sessions; A.W. Elyard, Brundee, freeholder; James Thomson, J.P., Burrier, settler; and T. Tregenna Biddulph, Earee, farmer.

It was also advertised that James Aldcorn had been appointed as the Returning Officer for the Shoalhaven (Illawarra Mercury, 23rd May 1859).

On the 26th May 1859, Alexander Berry again wrote to the Colonial Secretary.

The Shoalhaven Correspondent reported that Mackay had been working behind the scenes:

“ELECTIONEERING MATTERS. - appear to engross much attention.....amd I understand we are to have another candidate, who has been written to by Mr. K. [sic] Mackay, J.P., and is expected here in a day or two.....Mr. Alexander Campbell, of Sydney.....ought not to interfere with the liberal interest.....” (Illawarra Mercury, 30th May 1859)

On the 9th June an advertisement for “Garrett for Shoalhaven Committee” Henry Moss is named as one of the Honorary Secretaries whilst in “Original Correspondence,” a letter from X.Y.Z., of Sweep’s Paddock took issue with a letter signed “Presbyterian”to which he questions the extraordinary conduct of A.K. Mackay in putting up his friend, Campbell, to contest the seat on religious grounds. “Why he is politically unknown, except to his friends of Comberton Grange; and what do we know about him (Mr. K. Mackay) [sic] - answer, ye electors of Shoalhaven.....We degrade ourselves in making it a religious contest.....” It is also claimed that Campbell had denigrated Dr. Aldcorn to an elector in public. Aldcorn also replied to untrue allegations stating that he had only agreed to support Garrett when he heard his address at Shoalhaven. In lieu of Garrett he would support a liberal who would in turn support the Cowper Government. Referring to Blakeney, a barrister not many months in the colony, he said

“the nominee of Mr. Berry, still less that John Hubert Plunkett.....” accuses him of plotting revenge against Cowper and stirring up sectarian strife to achieve it. On Mr. Campbell, a Sydney Merchant, he stated

“.....Mr. Campbell, in his communications to parties here, said that he expected requisitions from other places, amongst them, I believe, St. leonard’s and the Hamlets.....” and then goes on “I shall not say anything of Mr. Alley, as I am given to understand he has no chance whatever of being elected, but I must say, with the exception of some exaggerations and impracticabilities, I think his written address one of the best that has been issued, not only to the constituency of the Shoalhaven, but one of the best that has appeared in the colony, and I should be glad to see men of such talent and fearlessness in the Assembly.

“I sincerely trust that you, the electors, will not be misled but come forward to the polls in favor of Mr. Garrett, as the only way to prevent the very incapable nominee of Messrs. Berry and Plunkett being forced upon you.” (Illawarra Mercury, 9th June 1859)

The New South Wales Government Gazette, 13th June 1859, carried a notice of a counter-petition to any Municipality in the Shoalhaven District. It had 20 signatures, including James Graham, Green Hills, farmer.

The nomination for the seat of Shoalhaven was held and reported in the Illawarra Mercury, 20th June 1859 -

• W.C. Blakeney, Esq., Barrister-at-law proposed by Mr. Morton, seconded by James Murray.
• John Garrett proposed by Andrew Aldcorn, seconded by R. Seccombe, of Ulladulla.
• G.U. Alley proposed by A. M’Innes, jun., and seconded by James M’Guire.
• Alexander Campbell proposed by James Thomson, Esq., J.P., and seconded by James warden, of Ulladulla.

Dr. Alley protested, in writing, against Blakeney’s nomination on the grounds that he could not be on any Electoral Roll as he he only been resident in the Colony for less than six months. The candidates then addressed the meeting, of about 250 people, when it was said that Blakeney “could have spoken all day” before Garrett called on him to curtail his remarks. Alley then charged Blakeney with also running for the seat of East Moreton. At the end of all this the Returning Officer called for a show of hands, after which he declared for Garrett. A poll was then demanded and was scheduled to take place on Tuesday the 21st. The Shoalhaven Correspondent wrote in the same issue :

“ELECTIONEERING. - Some of the candidates have not been idle at all events. Mr. Campbell had a steamer, and a live piper, in kilt and sporran, and bare legs, to convey himself and friends to Burrier, on Saturday, where his success was but middling. he has since held meetings at Mr. Thomas’ Hotel and elsewhere. Mr. Blakeney had a meeting at the Royal Hotel, Numba, on Friday last, when about 70 electors attended, and applauded to the echo. The text of his discourse was Dr. Lang’s letter chiefly. No questions were put. On Saturday he held a meeting at Mr. Thomas’, his reception was no more than lukewarm. On Monday, in obedience to requests from Ulladulla, he started for that place, and will I believe return on Wednesday.”

The election was duly won by John Garrett.

On the 25th June 1859, Moss wrote to Rev. Lang.

With the election out of the way attention soon returned to the Municipal question:

“NOWRA MUNICIPALITY. - With regard to the other counter-petitions which appeared in a late issue of your paper, against the Nowra Municipality, I noticed the name of James Graham to show the imposition of which has been attempted on the rights of the people. Mr. Graham obtained several signatures to a petition against one municipality for the whole district, and to his astonishment he finds this counter-petition headed against the ‘Nowra and Greenhills Municipality’ ! Verily, I think this matter will be rather a serious one to the parties concerned in making a fraudulent use of names to suit a purpose. The people of Nowra, Gooddog, and Greenhills are the wrong people to allow such base work to pass with impunity. I know of about twenty names to the counter-petition against ‘Nowra,’ of persons who signed against a municipality for the whole district - names that have been headed ‘counter-petition against Nowra, Greenhills, and Gooddog,’ &c.”

It was also noted that money had been granted for the improvement and repair of the Shoalhaven to Braidwood road (Illawarra Mercury, 7th July 1859), whilst James Graham was intending to construct a new road to connect the township of Nowra with the ferry that crossed the river to Bomaderry and subdividing the land along the route into small lots for sale; “I perceive that Mr. Graham is busily falling and clearing timber.....”

On the 9th July 1859, James Graham wrote to the Colonial Secretary.

The issue of the status of Nowra was also raised:

“NOWRA V. TERARA. - A public meeting was held this day, Monday 25th, at Fry’s Hotel, Nowra, for the purpose of counteracting certain false statements against the government township of Nowra, contained in a petition to be presented to the Assembly, praying for the public buildings to be erected in the private township of Terara. This meeting was respectably attended, about forty persons being present. James Aldcorn, J.P., was called to the chair. Several gentlemen present addressed the meeting in support of the desired object. It was unanimously resolved ‘that a committee be appointed to reply to the falsehoods in the Terara petition, and that both the original petition and reply be printed in the form of a pamphlet, and distributed as the committee think proper.” The committee will meet next Saturday, to prepare their reply for the press.....a motions was then put to the meeting, with regard to inviting our representative to a public dinner, which was carried, and a deputation to wait upon Mr. Garrett with the invitation, at the banquet to Mr. Hargrave.

The same issue also reported that the roads in the area were now receiving some well needed attention :

“Great improvements are being made under the superintendence of Mr. Mackay, J.P., in repairing the local roads. I am glad to say the approach to Nowra is being made good, and hope it will be continued to Kinghorne-street. J.L. Biddulph, Esq., C.E., is being employed on the Southern road, in marking a line south from Mr. Brown’s road.” (Illawarra Mercury, 1st August 1859)

On the 5th August the Surveyor-General wrote to Mr. Licensed Surveyor Parkinson with instructions for the Boundary Survey of the new Municipality.

The Illawarra Mercury 8th August 1859 reported that the committee, organising the public dinner for John Garrett, was comprised of, J.L. Biddulph, chair; Dr. Aldcorn; Jas. Aldcorn; A.K. Mackay; A. Mckenzie; A. de Mestre; Dr. Warden; P. Sheaffe; J. Graham; W.C. Morrison; W. Myers; James M’Guire; John Gibson; M. Richards; M. Ryan; John Glanville; R. Seccombe; Andrew McKenzie and H. Moss, Hon. Sec. The following gentlemen were to be invited to the banquet, J. Garret, Esq., M.P.; The Ministry; the Surveyor-General; S.W. Gray, M.P., Kiama; D. Egan, Esq., M.P., Maneroo; Dr. Lang, M.P., Sydney; David Berry, Esq., Coolangatta; and J. Rowland, Esq., Government Surveyor.

It was also noted that Biddulph had finished the survey of the new road from Nowra to the Falls, Falls Creek.

The Berry’s had also begun some civic improvements of their own, possibly moved to action by a new found sense of civic responsibility, but more likely in an effort to prove that a Municipal body was unnecessary to provide for local needs :

“Mr. David Berry is also busy in the march of progress. He is opening the new road from Bumaderry [Bomaderry] to Broughton’s Creek, and from the number of men employed quarrying stone, and brick making at Bumaderry, Mr. berry appears at last to have an eye to the future advancement of the district. I believe it is the intention of Mr. Berry to erect several brick houses in the Bumaderry township. Mr. Berry in forwarding tis part of his estate is promoting the benefit of all, and the advancement of the district. Bumaderry in a few years must be a flourishing township, connect with ‘Graham’ town and ‘Nowra’ nothing can stop its rise and prosperity. Every liberal mind looking to the future cannot but wish success to Mr. Berry’s new town of ‘Bumaderry.’ I hear that Messrs. M’Arthur and Co., will occupy as a store the first building in course of erection.”

But it was a case of too little too late :

“The Nowra Municipality will, I am credibly informed, be proclaimed in a few days. The reason of the delay being, that the petitioners encroached on the Kiama electorate in the northern boundary. This ‘Geographical intrusion,’ is being rectified, so that very little delay will now take place. In the meanwhile the electors had better select their Aldermen - Nowra and suburbs return three and Gooddog returns three, making together six to be elected.”

Letter to the Editor from ‘Stutter’ :

“SIR. - It is a curious fact that since the commencement of July your Shoalhaven correspondent has found no news to communicate except abuse of Terara, and reports of so called public meetings which are so clearly contrived that we hear nothing about them till they are all over. The reports too of the doings at these sham public meetings are delightfully vague, because the speakers cannot afford to state facts, and will not risk their purses or persons by open libel. The object of all this is transparent enough, part of the Terara Estate is for sale on the 20th as advertised in your columns, and of these gents, some actuated by cupidity, wish to buy cheap, others urged by envy and hatred, wish at all events the next proceeds of the sale. At the tent of this respectable bird comes a bard [Moss ?] of the same feather who signs himself ‘Tatta’ whose letter provokes a tu quoque. He opens with a eulogium upon consistency, and then talks of the highway from the southward to Nowra, and the track to Terara. I suppose I am not wrong in believing Tatta to have signed the petition to incorporate ‘Nowra and its suburbs’ of three hundred square miles to a handul of seven or eight huts and a public-house. If so, how is it that Tatta’s mob now call that a track, which they therein specify as the southern road ? I pause for a reply.

“I will suggest a dodge to Tatta and his friends, which will not cost much, for making the track to Nowra look like a highway. Let them load a dray, and run it backwards and forwards on the said track on a moist day. The more the better. Let them also hire a man and horse and let him ride backwards and forwards, sometimes in jumper, sometimes in shirtsleeves, to produce the idea that he is an army of travellers going to and from Ulladulla.

“The abuse of Mr. Lovegrove is natural enough, and I don’t doubt the Bench by this time has given him a dressing if he deserves it.” (Illawarra Mercury, 11th August 1859)

The Shoalhaven Correspondent, in the same issue, reported that two land sales would take place; the first at the Nowra Police Office on 8th September. Approximately sixty lots were to offered that “Adjoin the reserve for public buildings and lie between the Catholic Chapel and Nowra Creek. The second was was to be a public auction, by James Graham, of all the land between the town of Nowra and the River as far as Kinghorne street.

Illawarra Mercury, 18th August 1859 :

“BRAIDWOOD ROAD. -” report of incresed commerce between Nowra and Braidwood, which would continue if the Gap section were improved.
“THE GARRETT DINNER. - A meeting of the stewards of the dinner to John Garret, Esq., M.P., was held at Mr. Hyam’s Inn, on Saturday last, and everything arranged to make this demonstration as brilliant and harmonious as possible; it will take place at Mr. Hyam’s Inn, on the eveining of the 2_ th inst.
“ROAD TO JERVIS BAY. -” A petition is being gotten up by the inhabitants of Tamerang [Tomerong] and Jerrawangala for a road, from the Southern road, out to Jervis Bay. This would enable them to ship their produce directly from the Bay rather than bringing it by raod to the Shoalhaven River for shipping.
“TERARA V NOWRA. - To my surprise I have just perused a letter in the ‘Mercury,’ signed ‘Stutter,’ in which the writer accuses me of ‘abusing Terara.’ I shall feel greatly obliged to ‘Stutter,’ to point to one single article of mine in support of this charge, which I consider a grave one; in the meanwhile, I shall leave him to rest on thorns, he cannot on down, for his conscience must be a briary one, to make so false an accusation, and will reply to him fully in the usual channel.”

A letter from ‘One of the People’ appeared in the Illawarra Mercury, 22nd August 1859. In it the author, whom I believe to be Henry Moss, makes some scathing observations about the fallibility of the nominated magistrates on the Shoalhaven Bench and presages a change in influence and power in the district :

“SIR. - In reply to a letter in your last number, signed ‘A MAGISTRATE,’ in which it is stated that the Clerk of Petty Sessions here is the owner of land near the southern road, ‘and that this qualification entitled him to enter into the discussion of the road question.’ I do not think so, Nor do I believe ‘the magistrates’ will admit this principle, which ‘a magistrate’ seems so interested in pushing forward.

“A magistrate tells us that. ‘the discussion was open to all who had an interest in the road to have their say.’ If such was the case, why do not the magistrates notify to the public, or to all interested, that a meeting or discussion will take place on a certain day for such a purpose. Then would they be able to get all the necessary information as to the proper direction for roads ! Then would everyone interested meet on equal ground, and every person’s opinion be taken for what it was worth ? Not that I, or any other person (I think), have reason to complain of the improvements made in road matters under the able superintendence of Mr. Mackay, but, taking it all for truth what ‘a magistrate’ states, ‘that every one interested has a right to take part in the discussion,’ if such is the case, the magistrates will be simply doing what they are entitled to do to give the public an opportunity of taking part in the next road discussion. perhaps the Bench at its next meeting will rectify this matter.

“With regard to the second part of a ‘magistrates’ letter, it can be very easily seen whether his sympathy for a certain individual is identified with his interest, or related to both. This poor creature is in an unhappy taking - a sad quandry _____ [page damaged] his howl alarms the welkin. Allow me.....Mr. Magistrate that fact of signing himself a magistrate, doth not necessarily imply the possession of any extraordinary powers of nerve or intellect, and pretensions to superior foresight, any exemption from low prejudice, credulity, private spleen, indecision, or, in short, any peculiar capacity or calling to think for other men. His vanity and assumption perhaps urged him to distaste. My independence and love of right would scorn to yield to his shallow pretensions. [My emphasis] The signature ‘a Magistrate’ has little sympathy now a days, coming in the present instance from so bright a source, moulded by that ever ready pen for Andy work. He seems so cut up with the fate of Caeser and Rome, that he cannot help giving a parting stab at Nowra. This is his last chance against the rival city, for he well knows ‘That when he falls, he falls like Lucifer, to rise no more.’”

Another letter in the same issue, signed “One who signed the Nowra Municipality Petition,” makes a reply to “Stutter.” He believes that “Stutter” was against the Municipality and really wanted to wait until Terara was ‘ripe enough’ to be the Municipal Centre. he rfutes much of the letter and believes that “Tatta’s” letter was very much called for.

Illawarra Mercury, 25th August 1859 announced :

“THE SHOALHAVEN INCUBUS. - A public meeting will be held here in a few days to take steps to assist the ILLAWARRA MERCURY and KIAMA INDEPENDENT in paying off the amounts of the respective verdicts in the great ‘Incubus’ onslaught. I have no doubt the people here will heartily respond to the cry of ‘Freedom to the press.’

“NEW LAND, - Surveyor Parkinson is surveying and marking off for sale a great quantity of land to the south of the Palma [Parma] Boundary. I hear it is good agricultural land.

On the 29th August 1859, the Illawarra Mercury reported on the banquet that was held for John Garrett at Hyam’s Hotel. On the dais were Dr. Andrew Aldcorn, chair; Mr. W. Lyndsay, vice-chair; Garrett; J.L. Biddulph; Alfred Elyard; S.W. Gray; James Aldcorn; T.R. Richards; and H.G. Morton. The vice-chair was assisted by John M’Arthur. “There were upwards of sixty gentlemen at the table, including the above and others of the most influential and intelligent of the residents of the Shoalhaven.” As secretary henry Moss read the apologies from Charles Cowper; Hon. R.C. Weekes; Hon. L.H. Bayley; J.F. Hargrave; Surveyor-General Colonel Barney; D. Egan, M.P.; and George Underwood Alley. Dr. Lang also sent his sincere regrets and apologies and explained that on his first attempt to reach the Shoalhaven, to attend, they were driven back to port by a storm; on the second attempt he was ‘spirited out of the steamer, whilst it was still at the wharf, after being aboard for nearly an hour, “your political opponents having perpetrated the contemptible trick as a good electioneering dodge.” This would imply that Manning had again acted at the behest of Alexander Berry. He was then prohibited from making the journey by his doctor after being diagnosed with influenza and had also had an Equity Case rescheduled which further required his presence in Sydney.

Herr Glogoski led the band with Madame Glogoski on piano. Garrett spoke on a variety of subjects and gave his full support to the township of Nowra. Dr. Aldcorn commented that despite great opposition the Electoral Act had been passed; “Before the passing of this Act, all political power was given to a man on account of his property, it being asserted that there was no property in a man’s life nor in his labor.....Then there was the Municipal Act, which he scarcely valued less than the Electoral Act, which was also wrung from the enemies of progress by Mr. Cowper, He (Dr. A.) looked upon Municipal Institutions as the very foundation of the freedom of America....” and he was moved to say that he was a general supporter of the present Ministry.

The Chairman then toasted “The health of Dr. Lang, the Press, and the People” whilst, responding to the toast, Henry Moss said “The electors of the South Coast District.” Mr. Hazelwood then proposed “Success to the Sydney Land League.....The first notion of such a League emanated from Shoalhaven, but circumstances had arisen which prevented the idea being carried out. He urged strongly the propriety, indeed the necessity, of a popular Land Bill was to be obtained, of forming branches of the League throughout the colony. If that was done, no one could doubt the success of the movement.”

Mr. Garrett responded and “He spoke in high terms of the Manifesto of the League, which was the production of Mr. John Black. he had no doubt that there would be a modification of the Government scheme approaching that of the League. He strongly urged the people to join together for the purpose of agitating this question, for it was only by such a course that public opinions could be aroused and brought to bear on the course of Legislation with effect.”

Baker (‘The Origins of Robertson’s Land Acts’, D.W.A. Baker in Historical Studies Australia and New Zealand, Selected Article First Series, Compiled by J.J. Eastwood & F.B. Smith, M.U.P., Carlton. reprinted 1967, pp. 117 - 118) states that the New South Wales Land League was formed in 1857, in Sydney, and was a working class organisation with its power base centered in the poorer suburbs. It was poorly organised and relied on the Land Convention of Victoria for its propaganda as it could not even produce its own pamphlets. Black was a whig and was elected into Parliament on the policies of the League and when offered the position of Minister of Lands quickly forgot his constituency; a betrayal which the League could not survive. In early 1860 it disbanded.

On 30th August Berry’s Solictors wrote to the Colonial Secretary.

On 1st September Berry’s Solicitors write again to the Colonial Secretary.

Having failed to convict Lang in the Criminal Court, Berry now began civil proceedings against Dr. Lang for reading the letters at at public meeting, held in Sydney, a short time ago. Movements for the support of Dr. Lang and the press had been held at Ulladulla, Moruya and the Braidwood Gold-fields, whilst they were planned for Shoalhaven, Goulburn, Mudgee, and other Gold-fields. (Illawarra Mercury, 8th September 1859). The same issue also reported :

“The Cowper Ministry has been defeated in the first business debate, and has believed itself under the necessity of resigning.....it is difficult to us to conceive a more impudent thing than the conduct of Mr. PARKES.....was supported through his election by MR. COWPER’S friends in the full belief that he was one of them.....MR. PARKES motion had on;y the intention to embarrass MR. COWPER.....The citizens of Sydney are now astonished that PARKES, the great liberal, the unflinching advocate of popular rights, is leagued with the enemies of these rights to prevent full ends of Responsible Government, and that he, the bitter opponent of the unprincipled writing of the Herald, and even of its proprietor, is now one of its staff, and gets his bread from its pages. They ought not to be astonished. They ought to have seen enough in his insolvency, in the sudden and strange extinction of the Empire.....

“We learn that Murray, announced in the Assembly on Tues. afternoon, that he had failed to form a ministry. The Cowper Ministry is to continue.”

A meeting was held in the Shoalhaven :

“THE SHOALHAVEN INCUBUS LIBEL CASE. - A meeting was held at Hyam’s Hotel, Nowra, on the afternoon of the 1st inst. Dr. Aldcorn took the chair. Messrs. James Aldcorn, J.P., and Dr. G.U. Alley, Messrs. Graham, Walters, Aldis, Mahuire, Hazlewood, and others were present. After some general remarks on the case, the following resolution was put and carried, ‘That, a circular having been read from the Sydney Committee, in support of raising subscriptions to defray the costs incurred by the press in the late libel case, Berry v. Garrett. It is the opinion of the meeting that, although they recommend a subscription be commenced, they are further of opinion that Dr. Lang should be requested to attend a public meeting here, as they consider his presence essentially necessary to the success of the object in view, and the still more important object of protecting generally the press from vexatious and oppressive litigation, and that the chairman be respectfully requested to communicate with Dr. Lang on the subject.’ This was proposed by Dr. Alley, and carried unanimously. The meeting then adjourned and it was resolved that lists should be instantly opened.” (Illawarra Mercury, 12th September 1859)

On 12th September George Underwood Alley wrote to the Colonial Secretary.

A public meeting was also held at Newcastle and resolutions were passed expressing support and sympathy to the newspaper proprietors and to appoint a committee to promote the objects of the Sydney Committee. Locally a new punt and ferry had been installed on the Shoalhaven River at Bomaderry and money had been placed on the estimates for the Tomerong to Jervis Bay road, a Court House at Nowra, and a daily mail service to Shoalhaven. It was also reported in the same issue :

“THE NOWRA MUNICIPALITY. - It is expected, will soon be proclaimed. I have enquiries as to who will probably put in nomination, for the two wards, and think, for ‘Good Dog,’ we shall have Mr. J. Bice, Mr. Thomas Dillon, Mr. Gibson, Mr. Hodgkinson, and Mr. D. Morris. For Greenhills, Mr. J. Graham, Mr. M. Hyam, Mr. M’Arthur, and Mr. Moss.” (Illawarra Mercury, 15th September 1859)

On the 25th September 1859, the Legislative Assembly printed “Legislative Assembly of New South Wales - Mr. Alexander Berry. (Petition in Reference to Proposed Municipality of Shoalhaven).

The problems in Parliament did not go unnoticed in the Shoalhaven :

“The news of the resignation of the Cowper Ministry caused some sensation amongst our political reformers, and their return to power - together with the hopeless and humiliating spectacle presented by the Opposition in the late petition campaign was a source of congratulation to the Cowperites in this quarter.....How the miserable, unworthy conduct of the opposition, led on by the renegade member.....The defeats of the Opposition are obvious.....Not so the uses to which they are subservient, they are very readilly made intelligible to vulgar and half-instructed minds.....”

A letter was also published from Thomas Hazelwood, of Nowra, asking had the Government reserved any land along the banks of any river or creek in the district, and when do these reservations date from ? (Illawarra Mercury, 26th September 1859)

The same issue also reported on land :

“LAND UNLOCKING. - Mr. Licensed Surveyor Parkinson is still measuring near Parma. A great many applications have been made for small farms at Tindyandy [Jindyandy] and Boogong, now occupied as a run by Dr. Mackenzie. The land here is very rich, and ought to be measured forthwith, to satisfy the demand and continual cry for ‘Land, Land, Land.’”

On the 27th September 1859 a Proclamation was made announcing John M’Arthur as the first Returning Officer of the Municipality.

Writing on the 27th September, the Rev. Dr. Lang stated that several residents who had signed the counter-petition, Graham, James Waddington, T. Biddulph, Oswald Hitchcock and De Mestre, had told him they had signed it against a municipality for the whole district and not against Nowra. He goes on the explain that the reason the north of the river was included was in consequence of the people of Good Dog requesting it and to give the Council a right over the Ferry and the new Gerringong road. he says Berry was lucky that Terara had ‘leagued’ with him or they would have taken in Numba as well. About a month before Nowra was eligible to be proclaimed Messrs. Biddulph, J.P. and Mackay had called on Berry to get his co-operation in Incorporating the whole district and the Nowra petition would have been withdrawn; but he would have nothing to do with it. (Mitchell Library, John Dunmore Lang, Petitions, addresses, agreements, etc., ML D293. Copy at Reel CY 2518)

Mackay had called on Berry, sometime in 1859, but Berry’s telling of the event does not quite fit with Lang’s. He says that Mackay had called and told him that they were getting a demonstration, of support, up for Berry as everyone knew that Lang’s accusations were false. Berry said that he could have nothing to do with it as it would need to appear spontaneous and the address, or petition, would need to be ‘numerous’ to have any value. Berry believed that Mackay was not very popular in the district and his efforts would be a failure. He reflects, bitterly, that it is only when he seeks to ‘punish’ Lang that a demonstration is thought of. Mackay also spoke of Incorporating Numba, Terara and Brundee into a Municipality which Berry felt was the real object of his visit. He concluded that Mackay would like to be Mayor and have ‘the siezing of our money.’ (Mitchell Library, Berry Papers, Manuscripts, including fragments, memoranda and notes, with related papers, 1822 - 1871, ML MSS 315/54, Item 4. Copy at Reel CY 2526)

The Illawarra Mercury, 29th September 1859, next reported :

“STRANGE IF TRUE. - Mr. Berry, with that public spirit and zeal for progress, for which he is so peculiarly remarkable, is determined, it is rumored, to sell his land at the new town of Bumaderry [Bomaderry], in small lots. If so, it will be to his advantage and interest, as Bumaderry only requires pushing a little to make it prosper.

“PROGRESS OF NOWRA. - I perceive Mr. M’Arthur is erecting a new store in Nowra township and Mr. Tory is erecting a new brick building for an inn, which will be a very fine structure. These improvements must tend to advance the township.

“SOUTHERN ROAD. - Tenders.....are invited for clearing the southern road.....

“THE NOWRA MUNICIPALITY. - Is proclaimed at last, and what a storm in a tea pot, in the Upper House. Mr. Isaacs appeared to be quite in his element in pleading for his client. As to there being fifty householders in the Nowra and Good Dog Wards, they will find nearer one hundred and forty; and with regard to forgeries and fictitious names on the Nowra petition, they will find two or three names which the committee have revised and wrote to the Colonial Secretary about long since. How about the great counter-petition ? Perhaps Mr. Isaacs will inform the public ‘If this counter-petition was originally got up against Nowra,’ as against one municipality for the district; - or if the heading ‘Counter-petition against Nowra’ was added after the said petition was found to be useless in consequence of no petition being got up against the Nowra one, when the Nowra petition was gazetted on the 17th of March, and Cook died on the 6th of Feb. 2 How about the letter sent by James Graham Esq., to the Colonial Secretary, stating that his name had been fraudulently made use of against Nowra, - ‘that he and others signed against one municipality for the whole district, but not against Nowra, and that the heading against Nowra was added after they had signed. Every person here is aware that, on the counter-petition there are not more than 50 residents of the municipality, some live from fifteen to twenty miles from Nowra. Out of the 300 names on the counter-petition, 250 are tenants and servants of Mr. Berry. With regard to Mr. Isaacs charge of forgery, perhaps he will tell his friends where he gets sixty-one names from, which I perceive on the counter-petition. I have searched the electoral roll and cannot find them, nor can I learn anything of the parties. They are down as farmers; I believe them all to be fictitious names. Perhaps Mr. Isaacs will explain where they ‘cultivate.’

“We have a branch of the Commercial Bank here in Mr. Holme’s former dwelling, at Terara.....I believe very small sums [if cash] will be received to account.”

It was also noted that Christopher Murray was building a bathing house. This was at Terara as an advertisement place on 13th October duly notified.

It was also reported that in the Assembly, in persuance of notice by John Hay, that Berry’s Petition against the Incorporation of Nowra be printed. The Shoalhaven Bench also came in for more criticism and W. Lovegrove, Registrar of the Court of Requests, wrote the following to the Editor:

“SIR. - Mr. Alley has written a letter which appeared in your columns of Thursday, containing remarks on a supposed partiality of certain Magistrates, based on entirely false premises.

“He says “I paid the amount, and applied to the Registrar for a promissory note, and he refused to give it, alleging that it was a record of the Court, but he had no doubt that if I applied to the Bench, I would get an order for it, in support of which he instanced the fact of Mr. Elyard, J.P., having so applied successfully.

“When I refused to give up the note as above stated, Mr. Alley told me he would force me to do so. I told him I would only give it up on an order from the Bench, and mentioned that Mr. Elyard had made a similar application which I had refused. Mr. Elyard did not apply to the Bench for the notes, and they are still in the Court House.

“So vanishes the foundation of Mr. Alleys charge of partiality !”

With the Municipality now proclaimed it was necessary to hold elections to return Aldermen for the first council. After so much turmoil the supporters of local representation must have been ecstatic when the following advertisement appeared in the Illawarra Mercury, 13th October 1859 :

“John M’Arthur, Returning Officer, Shoalhaven 5th Oct., 1859; gives notice of a public meeting of the Electors will be held at noon on Wednesday 19th Oct. at the Nowra Court House to nominate & elect six councillors & two auditors for the council. If more than six are nominated a a poll will be held at a time and place to be duly notified.

Another advertisement appeared in the same issue requisitioning Robert Lindsay, John Moses Murphy, James Graham, Michael Hyam and Henry Moss to nominate for the municipal election. Moss’ requistion stated that the electors of the Nowra Ward would give him “our utmost support and interest.....to ensure your return.....from your long and exemplary exertions in behalf of this Municipality, the universal existence you have given to every Measure beneficial to our district, that our interests will be honestly, vigilantly, and carefully guarded and attended to by your exertions that we enjoy the privilege of voting for Councillors to represent this Municipality.” The reply from Moss is a superb manifesto of his aims and beliefs and expands on many of the issues that he had hitherto just alluded to:

“To Messrs. James Graham, William Spain, James M’Guire, and the other Gentlemen signing the above requisition -

“GENTLEMEN. - I have to acknowledge the receipt of your Requisition, soliciting me to allow myself to be placed in nomination to represent your Ward in the forthcoming Council. I feel very much gratified for the honour you have conferred upon me, and have no hesitation on acceding to your request.

“Should I returned [sic] as one of your representatives, I pledge myself to discharge the trust reposed in me with the fidelity, and attention to your interest, and the interests of the Municipality generally. I shall at all times protect my fellow-citizens from unnecessary taxation, and assist to the extent of my ability in devoting the requisite expenditure for the permanent improvement and benefit of the Municipality, and the comfort and health of the inhabitants in a manner which shall include proper economy with real and substantial service. Having taken a very prominent part in gaining Municipal privileges for this division of the District, against the banded ‘land mammoths’ of Shoalhaven, I am proud to find my triumphant exertions appreciated by a majority of the electors of this Ward, and in return, I can only assure them, it will stimulate me to renewed exertions on behalf of the welfare and prosperity of the Municipality.

“I am surprised to find that the great opponent of Municipal Institutions here [Berry] would pursue such savage hostility against our Municipality, I can assure this ‘obstructionist’ that the originators of the Nowra Municipality are quite prepared ‘to give the lie’ to his false charges, which the public will find as unjust as his opposition. As Mr. Wilberforce once said with respect to to the advocate for the slave trade. ‘Interest can draw a film over the eyes, thick as that produced by total blindness.’

“This attempt of a few old colonists to get rid of the paltry assessment, being one of the duties of property to establish improvements - for property has it rights as well as duties - can not excite our sympathy, but our indignation; that men who possess such vast advantages over their fellow colonists in having obtained lands without purchase, lands which with a moderate degree of industry on their part should have long since rendered them wealthy and independent, and established homes for thousands, should now turn round, and petition to be relieved from the trifling - the too trifling - obligation attached to their tenure. Why should any Government give so unjust a preference to these spoiled children of the olden times - merely because they make their prejudices subservient to their interests. Let these land ‘mammoths’ be taught a lesson. If they will allow their vast territories to remain in a state of wilderness and of nature, let them be forced to follow the crooked plough in the march of progress for the benefit of the human race, and I shall always raise my voice in favor of taxation, when I see the arm of industry paralysed by these slaves of obstruction. New Municipal Institutions have always been instrumental in advancing the liberties of the people, as the present institutions will contribute to the security of those liberties. I have heard some of the opponents refer to the corruption and abuses into which the old corporations fell previously to being reformed, I defy the same party to point out a single human institution coeval with them, whether Monarchy, Republic, or anything else, that did not like them, degenerate. If this were an argument against modern corporations, it would equally fatal against all Government whatsoever - a plea for anarchy and confusion, and a persausive to renounce civilisation and embrace the savage state.

“Milton, Hume, Bentham, Jefferson, all eminent political writers, brought their minds to the consideration of the subject, under very different circumstances - all agree in their impressions of the policy of local institutions - Durham, De Tocqueville, Say, Dupin, Guizet, and M’Cullock. All speak of modern institutions for local government similar to our City and District Corporations, and I defy the opposers of Municipalities, to quote an author of eminence on the opposite side.

“I have been led to enter into rather a lengthy exposition than I intended, owing to some remarks made by two or three parties in the Ward against Municipalities, but I trust ere this they have altered their opinions.

“In complying with the Requisition, I beg distinctly to be understood, that I seek not, from my personal obligation, or other interests distinct from a just sense of the proprietory of your doing, the honour of your suffrages - freedom of election, in my opinion, being the exclusive privilege of the independent electors of this Municipality. Should I have the distinguished honour of representing my fellow-citizens of this Ward, I shall not only guard your interests, but defend your rights, and enforce your just claims.”

George Underwood Alley wrote to the Editor, in the same issue, due “to much evil speaking” in the district and explains his communication with the Government regarding the Municipal Boundaries. He objected to the inclusion of Meroo, Jasper’s Brush and Broughton’s Creek in the Good Dog Ward. “No one; no not one, has advanced the real interests of Nowra, more considerably, more faithfully, or more substantially, than I have, nor has any one more truly, or more seriously supported, and that for years, Mr. Cowper, and his Government, though my services to both are slighted and appear to be forgotten.....” A copy of Alley’s letter to Mr. Surveyor Parkinson, dated 6th September 1859, is reproduced. Copies of this letter were forwarded to the Colonial Secretary and Mr. David Berry. He objected to the north-east boundary of Good Dog Ward on several grounds including - “.....the proposed N.E. course runs wholly through a large portion of property, belonging to one person, unoccupied by tenants.....would appear more for the purpose of taking in a quantity of lands, than is necessary for the purpose of the public good.....would lead to the impression that to gratify the sinister purposes of a few, the Government had sanctioned it, or were entrapped into acquiescence against this protest, both on behalf of the Government, and of the many fair dealing persons who agree with me.....”

Another letter from “Boots” in Uladulla was printed and it is a rebuttal of a letter from “Romanus” which was printed in the Sydney Morning Herald, on the 8th of October. “Romanus” had attempted to cast a slur on John Garrett for the stand he took against “the renegade member Mr. Parkes, to abolish the tax on Tea and Sugar.” The aim of Parkes was not to benefit the people, but overthrow the Cowper Ministry. “Romanus,” it appears, was employed by the former Premier, and known to many at Ulladulla where he wants the job of C.P.S. and is a tool of the local J.P. “Romanus and all his would be aristocratic associates.....this disgraced clerk, play-actor, bailiff, flunkey, and a host of other honorable titles too numerous to mention.”

In another advertisement, in the same issue, John F. Hargrave announced that he had been summoned by the Governor-General to take a seat in the Legislative Council in order to represent the Government in that house. As a result he would be resigning his seat in the Assembly, reluctantly, because of his relationship with the electorate. “I shall still avail myself of every opportunity which may arise to show the deep interest which I shall always feel in every matter relating to yourselves or the Southern Coast Districts.”

John M’Carthy, late of the Steam Packet Hotel, also announced that he had opened a store in Nowra for the sale of spirits.

The Municipal Election drew closer:

“The all-engrossing subject of attention is the approaching election for the Municipality of Shoalhaven. For the Nowra ward, we have six candidates ibvited by requisition viz : Mr. H. Moss. Mr. M. Hyam, Mr. James Graham, Mr. Lindsay, Mr. Moses Murphy, and Mr. James McGuire. The contest it is expected, will be between Messrs. Graham, Hyam, and McGuire [my emphasis]. For Gooddog Ward there are sevral to be minuted; Mr. J. Bice, Mr. D. Morris, Mr. Gibson, Mr. Hector McKenzie, Mr. Thomas Dillon, Mr. A. McGrath, and Moss, Hodgkinson [sic], I cannot tell who are likely to be returned, but I think Mr. Bice will be one, Monro and Dillon probably the others. The nomination takes place in Nowra on Wednesday, when we shall hear the sentiments of these new-pledged candidates for Aldermanic honors. I hope everything will pass off quietly.....” (Illawarra Mercury, 20th October 1859)

Nomination Day for the Municipality dawned and Henry Moss was singled out as a target for the wrath of the ‘obstructionists’ :

“The Nomination of Candidates to represent Nowra and Good Dog Wards took place on Wednesday last, in the town of Nowra, from the balcony of Mr. Tory’s new hotel. There was a large concourse of people present. Everything went off very quietly. The Returning Officer, Mr. John M’Arthur, in a very neat speech, spoke on the objects of the meeting, and then called on the nominators to propose their Candidates. There were seven Candidates placed on Nowra Ward, namely J.M. Murphy, Robert Lindsay, James Graham, Richard Kemp, Henry Moss, Michael Hyam, and James M’Guire. For Good Dog Ward, - Mr. Bice, Mr. Gibson, Mr. Hector Mackenzie, and Mr. Donald Munro. Mr. T. Dillon was proposed, but refused to act if elected. The following gentlemen were named as auditors :- Mr. Hugh Taylor, mr. K. Mackay, J.P., Mr. david berry, and Mr. Thomas Dillon. The polling will take place on Wednesday, at Nowra, and Bomaderry Ferry. The Candidates addressed to the electors to a very late hour. Mr. Moss made a very lengthy address, as also Messrs. Murphy and Lindsay. All the Candidates acquitted themselves very creditably indeed. The great powers here that be, made a move to disqualify Mr. Moss, and resorted to every paltry artifice. Such conduct, I have no doubt, will do the Candidate more good than harm. The independent electors here will show this on the polling day.” [my emphasis] (Illawarra Mercury, 24th October 1859)

The day of the Election dawned and our correspondent’s prediction came to pass :

“This event took place on Wednesday last, and resulted as follows : For Nowra Ward - H. Moss, 51; James McGuire, 44; Richard Kemp, 30; James Graham, 30. The Returning Officer gave his casting vote in favour of Mr. Kemp. For Good Dog Ward : - Messrs. G. Bice, D. Munro, and H. McKenzie were elected. (We have been unable to obtain the figures of the Good Dog poll.) The elected subsequently chose Mr. Kemp as Mayor.”

Not only was Moss elected but he had polled the highest number of votes by far. The first Council Meeting was held on Thursday, 27th October 1859, at the Police Office, Nowra. It was also reported that Mr. Gordon had been elected as the Member for Illawarra, to replace Mr. Hargraves in the Assembly. (Illawarra Mercury, 31st October 1859)

The Illawarra Mercury, 10th November 1859, next reported :

“DISTRICT COURT FOR SHOALHAVEN, - A meeting is to be held here in a few days, convened by the Mayor, to petition Government to exclude the residents here from the Kiama jury list.

“THE CONDOLENCE ADDRESS TO MR. BERRY. - I perceive a string of names in the daily papers to ‘a letter of condolence addressed to the Honorable Alexander Berry, M.L.C. It would have been as well if the getter up of this letter had used more cautious language in giving expression to the very high regard in which Mr. Berry is estimated here. But people will overdo things, as in this instance, in again opening the ‘Incubus affair,’ by making the letter of condolence, the means under cover of attacking Mr. Garrett, Mr. Barr, and the Rev. Dr. Lang. Of course, the independent people of the Shoalhaven and Ulladulla will not submit to this, and I hear that, as letters of condolence be the order of the day, ‘a letter of sympathy’ is being signed to ‘Dr. Lang.’ It was unwise to allude to the Incubus affair - which coming events will prove, if I mistake not the feeling of the right-minded people here.”

Berry’s action against Lang was reported on, Illawarra Mercury 14th November 1859, and was heard in the Supreme Court on Friday November 11th. Lang had read the offending letters at a meeting in the Temperance hall which was called to raise funds to pay for the damages and costs awarded in Berry v. Barr. In the Court Berry’s counsel spoke for 4 hours whilst Lang represented himself. When the jury retired to consider their verdict it took them only 1 1/2 hours to find in favour of Lang; 11 to 1.

In the same issue Richard Kemp, Mayor, placed the following advertisement :

“To the Editor of the ‘Illawarra Mercury.’
SIR, - Will you favor me by giving insertion to the following letter, a copy of which I have sent to the Herald and Empire.

“To the Editor of the ‘Sydney Morning Herald.’
SIR, - The manner in which my name is paraded in the Letter of Sympathy to Mr. A. Berry, is to me, most distasteful. It is not as I signed it, and whoever prepared the copy for advertisement, has taken the most unwarrantable liberty in putting my signature as in an official capacity.

“As a private individual, feeling that the publications of Dr. Lang, are quite unwarrantable, undeserved, and uncalled for, I had no hesitation in affixing my signature to the letter, and I much regret that such use has been made of it.
                              I am Sir, yours &c.,
Shoalhaven, Nov. 7, 1859.                     RICHD. H.F. KEMP.”

At no time during the nominations had Kemp made his support of Berry public and can only suggest that his election and subsequent elevation to the prestigious position as the first Mayor clouded his better judgment. The publication of this show of sympathy for Berry, now the most reviled man in the District if not the colony, was political suicide as we shall see.

The following advertisement was also published in the same issue :

“THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL of Shoalhaven invite designs for a Corporate Seal, to be addressed to the Mayor, on or before FRIDAY, 18th inst.”

The Illawarra Mercury 28th November 1859 reported the case of Hyam v. Alley, heard in the Supreme Court. This was a libel case where “Plaintiff and defendant had quarreled in consequence of one of plaintiff’s children having died while under medical treatment by the defendant. I believe the child was Daniel Hyam, also Henry Moss’ nephew, who had died in 1859 at about one year’s age. As we have seen above Hyam had sued Alley for 2s, the cost of tea, and Alley had subsequently written an article in the Kiama Examiner, of which he was the Editor, commenting on the case and libeling Hyam. Alley stood on his past record and ‘the liberty of the Press.’ Hyam won the case and damages of L50.

Lang visited the Shoalhaven again and addressed a public meeting :

“’THE SHOALHAVEN INCUBUS’. - A public meeting was held here, on Saturday last, in the new room adjoining Mr. Ringland’s Hotel, called by notices posted throughout the district, for the purpose of hearing Doctor Lang explain the particulars of the great Incubus world-renowned libel; and of stating the agreement which existed between him and the editor of the Illawarra Mercury ‘which though not legal’ said the Reverend gentleman, ‘I consider myself morally bound to meet, and to do all I can to liquidate.’ The meeting was very numerously attended, the room being crowded, and a great number outside, who could not gain admittance. Alderman Moss was unanimously called to the chair. The doctor’s address was very lengthy, and was listened to in a very patient and orderly manner, and applauded throughout. At the conclusion, a committee was appointed to carry out the object of the meeting, in collecting subscriptions to meet the verdict and expenses in the case Berry v. Garret. Not a single interruption tool place; in fact, it was a triumphant meeting for the doctor, and I may say a regular ‘bearding the lion in his den.’ This meeting, I hope, will act as an incentive to the friends of liberal principles throughout the colony, and especially the sister districts, who, I hope, will come forward at once with their offer, however small, in making up the amount, which Dr. Lang, the great patriot of the colony, has made himself responsible for. Recollect ‘Principles may die, but the rights of the people are eternal.’” (Illawarra Mercury, 1st December 1859)

The same issue noted that the Council was working quietly, but well, for the good of the Municipality and called for the Shoalhaven River to be placed under the protection of Council :

“THE SHOALHAVEN RIVER. - Complaints have been made to the Sydney authorities against parties here falling timber in the river, thus obstructing navigation. This is a very serious matter, and as Mr. Surveyor Rowland here has been appointed to enquire into it, I trust he will give so important a matter his full attention, as parties guilty of such conduct ought certainly be made amenable to the law. I think the river ought to be placed under the protection of the Municipal body. This would save future reference to and from Sydney in the event of the river at any future time being obstructed from the same cause.”

The Shoalhaven Correspondent of the Illawarra Mercury, 8th December 1859, reported :

“POLITICAL. - Politically our eyes are fixed on the new performers on the arena of the political stage, and on the juggler behind the curtain. We have little hope for the country under such an administration, formed of such strange heterogenous elements, The new Premier must have great resolution, indeed, with his companion in arms (unknown to fame) to face the breach, for he, indeed, must fight against hope to command his unenviable position. The gladitorial struggle cannot long be delayed, and, sooner or later, the Premier Chief must rise or fall on the test of his own measures. But, if the ministry are unable to defend their causes by fair argument, founded on facts, let them spare us, at least, the mortification of being amused and deluded like children. In the words of an eminent writer ‘I believe there is yet a spirit of resistance in this country; which will not submit to be oppressed; but I am sure there is a fund of good sense in this country, which cannot be deceived.’

“OUR COUNCIL meets every Saturday, at 3 p.m., in a room adjoining Berry’s Wharf. The numbers appear to work very well for the interests of their respective Wards. They have been forming Bye-Laws to regulate the Bomaderry Ferry, which, I expect, will be proclaimed in a few days. Several very important resolutions have been disposed of. Mr. Moss’s resolution, ‘respecting the survey of the old road from Nowra to Greenwell Point,’ passed by a majority of 5 to 1. Another important resolution, by Mr. Moss, as to the adjoining reserves being placed under the control of the Council, passed by a majority. The resolution of Mr. Bice, ‘as to the necessity for the immediate survey of the road from Bomaderry to Kiama,’ which is very important to the district, passed unanimously. The Council here is proving itself a working - not a talking - body.

“DR. LANG’S RECENT MEETING. - I have just read a letter in the Express, in which the writer makes a vain essay to ridicule the meeting lately held by Dr. Lang in this district. The writer signs himself ‘Good Dog !’ I think it ought to have been ‘Black Dog.’ This is supposed to be the Sydney Morning Herald’s liberal, who has so frequently prayed ‘that Dr. Lang might die in a ditch.’ The liberal portion of the community can expect very little sympathy from such as him. This Good Dog, alias ‘rope maker,’ cut a very prominent figure in the late address to A. Berry, Esq. As to his insulting allusions to Dr. Lang and his moralizing son’s ‘conscience’ and ‘money-making,’ he ought to ask his own bosom if he has ever compromised his principles and love of money-making, and making use of his own words, only altering the sentence for the occasion. ‘The devil, they say, had a hand in that business,’ I shall now leave this Good Dog, alias Black Dog, to his growling reflections. The meeting alluded to was numerously and respectably attended, and the subscriptions list will show the estimation in which the Rev. Doctor is held, and how vain the Merlin-mouthed predictions of this growling quadruped.

“OPENING UP THE LAND. - Surveyor Parkinson has just completed the survey of 96 farms within about six miles of the town of Nowra, which I suppose, will be at once submitted to public competition by the Surveyor-General. These farms adjoin the Parma boundary, in the vicinity of Nowra Hill, and some of them are well worthy the attention of parties on the lookout for homesteads.”

Another letter, signed “Truth,” on the subject was published in the Illawarra Mercury 19th December 1859 :

SIR, - in a letter which appeared in the Express a few days since, signed ‘Good Dog,’ in which communication the writer reflects, in unmeasured vulgarisms, on the conduct of the country’s patriot, Dr. Lang. Now we pretty well know the author of this ‘torrent of abuse,’ - the would be dictator of our Forum - this meddling subordinate - who would now resort to the last extreme to vilify and abuse, after the fashion of his down-East intrigues.

“The signature ‘Good Dog !’ I consider very appropriate as expressing the Mean Dog, who would write in such a strain on the rev. gentleman - who has been attacked in so ruthless a manner, by this rabid wolf, or ‘dog,’ as he calls himself. The letter is full of untruths, and was written by this pestilent knave to misrepresent the feelings of the people here towards Dr. Lang. What delight to the hypocritical councillor to show up the foibles of his betters ! Let us, good people, give him the knout !

“Hear how he yelps - see how he fawns - crawls - creeps - and grovels, wriggling away like a slimy, but fangless, serpent, licking up bran and dust.

“Let this would be dictator of our Forum look to himself - to his own honorable purchases, ere he reflects on Dr. Lang’s worth, either in acres or otherwise. I might exclaim to this ‘Good Dog,’ with Massinger, ‘Is this your manly service ? - a devil to do it,’ for no man of feeling - or principle - having the least spark of the gentleman in his composition - could have ever so far forgotten the dignity of his character and his rank also to vent scurillities, after such a fashion, on Dr. Lang, the country’s patriot. No, no, no; all the man, all the gentleman, would have recoiled loathingly from the most distant conception of such vulgar meanness. It would have risen indignantly at the idea of breathing, as this bedaubed slobberer has done, the name of the rev. and much respected gentleman.

“The idea of Dr. Lang bribing people to attend his public meeting ! What a base falsehood ! How vile, and yet what a true index to the character of this scribbler. How doggedly, dogmatically, and disgustingly, the accusation. Yet, who could expect otherwise from ‘our would be dictator to the Forum,’ for he is renowned here for the most audacious and ingenious malignity. What a defender - how unscrupulous - ‘of the Great Czar, from high water mark to sunset.’ This bold ‘Good Dog,’ poor defender of the ‘Incubus,’ like the old Glasgow gander himself, with bottom here, wings plucked, and with a thud and a squelch, thought to establish some load asquat among the nettly ______ . But this union of quack, gobble, gobble, bubble, and squeak, and outcry, outdone him entirely, and that his goose is now plucked, his gobble stilled, and the only leg on which he was so fond of standing knock’d from under his clumsy bottom. So much for the ‘grinning ivory’ of this chivalrous dog - the champion for ‘the Incubus.’

“There is another of his nature here, but of a quieter disposition. Poor John, thy name shall be immortalised as one of the ‘petition-signing’ notoriety, and of ‘Machiavellian chicanery,’ in saying for truth, ‘what you believe to be the wish of the master.’ Thy feigning John, is as visible to the naked eye as thy fawning or cringing is in itself a betrayal of craft and cunning, such as a fellow who comes sneaking up to your side, with his hat in one hand, and his petition in the other. Ye may be sure, if he cannot swindle and compromise, he will insult you, and will tell you that you are no gentleman. poor John ! author also of many silly and vindictive reports, take care you do not prove yourself the silliest of semplis, not, even excepting ‘Snewell Snakes.’ Alas. for the ‘Good Dog,’ I pity thee; it sickens me with a sense of smallness in such a vapid foul, who thinks himself not only facetious and abusing, but sarcastic.

“I trust I have unmasked this ‘rabid dog,’ who would still domineer, with his acustomed bullying over the ‘curs’ he sometimes ‘courts.’

“I would say to this would - be - dictator - if you were Cerberus, the king of dogs, I would still unmask you, though in so doing it might prove (as of yore, the destruction of a monster) one of the twelve labours of Hercules.”

An advertisement was placed in this issue calling for tenders as assessors for the Municipal Council.

The controversy continued, Illawarra Mercury, 22nd December 1859 :

SIR, - Having seen in the columns of your provincial contemporary, the Conservative organ of the Coast Districts, the ‘Illawarra Express,’ a letter signed ‘Good Dog,’ reflecting on the meeting held here by our distinguished Australian patriot Dr. Lang, on the rev. gentleman himself, and on the chairman thereof, I take the liberty of sending you a few lines (believing, from your decided and well tried liberal principles, that you will publish them in your next issue.) So far was the meeting from being what your contemporary correspondent styles, it a disreputable and ill-attended affair, it was attended by all the members of our Municipal Council - Messrs. Moss, Bice, Monroe, M’Guire, and M’Kenzie, being inside, and the Mayor, Mr. Kemp, being unable to attend ‘for want of room.’ I also noticed Mr. Andre de Mestre, J.P., amongst the crowd. Many more of our most respectable residents were also present. Dr. Aldcorn, J.P., James Aldcorn, J.P., and Mr. James Graham, were unavoidably absent. This anonymous writer, this would be satirist, who fondly deems that his signature of ‘Good Dog’ will blind the eyes of a discerning public to his identity, is ‘well known’ for his frequent and infamous attacks on Dr. Lang. He is known to have expressed a hope that ‘Dr. lang would die in a ditch.’ Fortunately the Drs. reputation is far too high to be injured by the malignity of ‘Good Dog’ who seems like Aesop’s ass in the lions skin, to wish to rival our masters of satire - Juvenal, Horace and Dryden. Let him remember the fate of Daedelus, and beware. With reference ‘to his remarks on the chairman,’ Mr. Moss, I ask - Who, in spite of all opposition, on the part of this ‘Good Dog,’ of the ‘Cabal at Terara,’ of the Mammoth Autocrat of Coolangatta, obtained a Municipality ? To each question, I answer Henry Moss. Who discovered a practicable road from our river to Goulburn ? Again, Henry Moss. Had not Mr. Moss been well esteemed by his fellow-townsmen would they have placed him at the head of the poll at the recent Municipal election, and ‘Good Dog’ far below indeed ? But it seems here as elsewhere

‘Worth itself is but a charter
To be Mankind’s distinguished martyr.’

and thus, when the hero of Australian liberty is assailed by ‘Good Dog,’ Mr. Moss may scarcely escape his malice. If ‘Good Dog’ will condescend to be advised by so humble an individual, I would say ‘John’ return to your original obscurity, and then pray to be forgotten, that you may cease to be despised.
                        I remain Sir, yours obediently,
Greenhills, Dec. 13, 1859.                                 JUNIUS.”

The same issue of the Illawarra Mercury also reported :

“THE COUNCIL met on Saturday, and accepted, as assessors, Messrs. McClaren [McLaren] and Gibson. Mr. Moss asked a question of the Mayor - ‘if he signed the letter of sympathy to A. Berry, Esq., in his official capacity of Mayor, on behalf of Council, or personally.’ He replied ‘personally.’ I do not see this question in your correspondent’s report of the proceedings, which is the reason I now make up his deficiency.

“MR. BERRY’S REAPERS - The feelings of your contemporary [the Illawarra Express] must have been wrought up to a very igh pitch to give so flattering a report of the tribute of respect paid to Mr. Berry by his tenants, in reaping his field of wheat, and the ‘splendid dinner,’ which was served in the hall-room adjoining the Royal Hotel. O tempora, O mares ! From this time onwards let no man dare mention Mr. Berry’s name except with dignified respect. ye tenants, who have proved yourself so worthy of the name in sacrificing the sweat of your labour in gleaning his harvest, to do him honor. Worthy of the cause - worthy of so good and so highly respected a landlord. Ye are, indeed grateful, deserving of ‘applause.’ Gratitude is written on your foreheads. happy the tenants who have so good a landlord. But far happier still the landlord, who, having such a bold and independent tenantry - ‘their country’s pride’ - considers himself deserving of so much respect, so much voluntary homage.”