William WHITFIELD Born: 16 Mar 1812 – , Parish of Drumgoon, Cootehill, Co. Cavan, Ireland. Died: 12 Oct 1897 Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. Arrived 1826. Buried: Rookwood, New South Wales, Australia. Father: Jacob WHITFIELD (1774- ? ) – convict arrived Sydney 1822. A distant cousin, Bob Starling, has traced Jacob back to an earlier John Whitfield, born in 1695 in County Tyrone. Mother: Mary GOWRIE (1781-1841)

Married: 20 Jun 1836 – , St Andrews Church of Scotland, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. Wife Caroline Philadelphia WEST: Born: 12 Jul 1817 – Seven Oaks, Kent, England. Died: 21 Oct 1881 – Picton, New South Wales, Australia. Buried: Redbank Cemetery, Upper Picton, New South Wales, Australia.

And those times! From the Cavan Herald
Published in Cavan, county Cavan March 1825

On Monday the trial of Major MILNE, took place, for assaulting Elizabeth GARLICK as stated in our last; the Court was extremely crowded, and the trial appeared to excite much interest.

The Prosecutrix, Elizabeth GARLICK, then aged 11 years and 10 months, was the first witness; she proved the assault under aggravated circumstances having taken place, in the sentry box in the Barrack yard, immediately outside the officers apartments, within view of the windows of the married officers, and within hearing of the Mess-Room–she admitted that she made no mention of the circumstance for three weeks and then in the first instance to Major MILNE’s maid, who communicated it to him, and he immediately sent for the stepfather of the prosecutrix and informed him of it, under strong feelings of horror and indignation, at the report–The prosecutrix also stated that whilst in the sentry box, her mother twice passed it, and that the second time the Major called her saying "my Mama, my Mama." These were the principal features of the case, but as we would be obliged to violate not only the rules of morality but even of decency, were we to enter more fully into the particulars, we necessarily decline publishing our report of this trial.

The Mother and Step-father of the child were also produced and examined, and in the testimony not only of the prosecutrix, but between it and the testimony of her parents there was a considerable discrepance, so much so that the prisoner’s counsel declined examining any of the many witnesses they had in Court.

The Learned Judge charged at considerable length; he dwelt a good deal on the enormity of the offence as charged and the weight of punishment which should deservedly fall on the prisoner if guilty; while in feeling and impressive language he expressed his abhorrence of the wicked and diabolical attempt, which if innocent, was made to blast his honor…….he dwelt on the harmony which existed between Major and Mrs. Milne, the circumstance of her having been walking in the yard but a few minutes before, the interest they both manifested for the child, having had her instructed in the school established by the Major for the education of the soldier’s children; and on the testimony of the step father, who on his examination stated that he did not know any thing in the conduct of the prisoner, that was not highly honourable, and like a Gentleman–he entreated the jury to weigh the evidence maturely…He was satisfied their verdict would be a conscientious one, equally maintaining a respect for the laws and protecting innocence.

The Jury immediately returned a verdict of not guilty.

Two boys, named William and Robert HEISLIP, stood capitally indicted for violating a female named Catherine BIRD, the eldest, appeared to be about 18 and the youngest 14 years of age, the prosecutirx who was a maid servant in her father’s house, appeared to be about 15. Her evidence was so contradictory, that the Learned Judge (Baron M’CLELLAND) ordered the issue to be sent to the Jury before her testimony was concluded, and a verdict of not guilty was instantly returned. The Learned Judge lamented that so young a girl should have been made the instrument of wicked and designing persons, for motives which had not transpired, to expose and perjure herself in so dreadful a manner, and directed the boys to be discharged.

The prosecution, by a man named DALY, of some Cyprians, by whom he stated he was robbed, as noticed in a former HERALD, excited considerable laughter at the expense of the prosecutor, who is a tythe proctor, and was not calculated to shed much additional lustre on his character. Some busy wight advised the prosecutor to apply for his expences, with which advice he foolishly complied, and which excited the anger of the presiding Judge, who exclaimed "what you rascally blackguard, how dare you appear before me," which made the unfortunate Gallant retire rather expeditiously, while the auditory were convulsed with laughter at his sorry plight.


My grandnephew Nathan in Ireland – posted on Facebook yesterday! Is he the first to go back?