Carlo and the proposal to designate Laverton as the noxious trades area in 1917

This post  looks at the history of Laverton as the potential site of a noxious trades area. In 1917, Carlo Catani was invited to be on the panel of  three experts of high standing, to investigate and report on this matter (1).  Laverton, advertised as a new and model suburb, was sub-divided in 1886, a project of the Federal Investment Company of Australasia. The land sales were handled by Staples, Wise & Co and promoted by the publication of  a booklet Laverton, the new and model suburb : with a short history of Melbourne from its foundation to the present time,  written by C.R. Staples of the Estate Agents firm (2).

Laverton, the new and model suburb: with a short history of Melbourne from its 

foundation to the present time by C.R. Staples.

Digitised at the State Library of Victoria http://handle.slv.vic.gov.au/10381/119810

The booklet had a short history of Melbourne and then  a description of  Laverton - 
Laverton, the latest-born suburb of Melbourne, is situate on the main Geelong and Ballarat Railway, being the first station beyond Newport, from which by train it is only ten minutes journey. The new workshops at Newport, tenders for which have lately been accepted, will, when complete, employ some 3000 workmen all the year round, and as consequence land suitable for building purposes within easy distance must increase in value. Laverton has been laid out by the well-known surveyors, Messrs. Bruford and Braim, of 67 Chancery Lane, Melbourne, upon the most improved system, the owners taking pride in the endeavour to make it really model suburb. All the streets are sixty-six feet wide, reserves for public buildings have been set aside, and an area of over twenty-five acres has been dedicated to the inhabitants for park and recreation reserves. 

The site of Laverton is an admirable one, commanding extensive views in all directions, comprising the Bay with its shipping, the Dandenong Ranges, Plenty Ranges, Mount Macedon, and the You Yangs in fact, every prominent landmark within radius of fully thirty miles is plainly visible. The land itself is unsurpassed in the district, and has been known for years as one of the richest spots in the locality, and the owners guarantee that every allotment is suitable, without the expenditure of shilling, for the immediate erection of dwellings, it having sufficient elevation for drainage without any broken ground, cliffs, or other impediments. 

The price and terms upon which it is offered to the public are unequalled in the history of land sales, and have been arranged so that everyone may have chance of securing one or more allotments, and the owners, not grasping at every attainable shilling, offer the land at an absurdly low figure, leaving the unearned increment for the benefit of purchasers.....When it is considered that land at Caulfield, Surrey Hills, Brighton, and other older settlements practically as distant from Melbourne is worth from £2 to £10 per foot, the chance which is now offered of obtaining profitable investment must be apparent to all. The time occupied by the train in bringing passengers from Caulfield to Melbourne is twenty-six minutes, from Surrey Hills thirty-five minutes, from Brighton thirty-three minutes, from Williamstown thirty minutes, from Oakleigh thirty-seven minutes, whilst from Laverton it is about twenty-eight minutes. The Railway Station is in the centre of the northern boundary of the town, and, as already stated, the Newport workshops can be reached in about ten minutes (3). 

Laverton township - complete plan for private sale by Staples, Wise and Co.

Digitised at the State Library of Victoria http://handle.slv.vic.gov.au/10381/115262

In spite of the promotional booklet and attractive adverting posters the new and model suburb seemed to be slow to take off. In 1891 there were 33 dwellings housing a population of 156 and in 1901, 37 dwellings and  a population of 155. Thirty years later, 1921 the population was still only 195 (4). 

In 1917,  there was agitation to have a noxious trades area established and Laverton was suggested. Noxious trades included abattoirs, meat works and other businesses which used the by-products of the slaughtering process such as the blood, bones, fat, hair, wool, hooves, and the offal; the tanneries, cattle yards, fellmongers and wool washers.

Historian Dr John Lack (5) gives us this background to the noxious trades industry - Agitation against river and air pollution resulted in the Yarra Pollution Act (1855) and the discouragement of noxious trades above and opposite the city. Over time the trades tended to gravitate to the lower Yarra at Fishermans Bend and Yarraville, to Stony Creek and to the Maribyrnong at Flemington and Footscray, encouraged by the Sandridge (Port Melbourne), Footscray and Melbourne municipal councils. Their smells made the river approach to Melbourne notorious, and together with household drainage and nightsoil earned Melbourne the appellation 'Marvellous Smelbourne' (as opposed to Marvellous Melbourne). High levels of meat consumption, the rejection of offal except in hard times, and low levels of development and investment in preventative technology, together with the hot Australian summer, may have made pollution from noxious trades worse than in Britain.

West Melbourne ('Worst Smelbourne' or 'Worst Smelldom') was judged to be even worse, and the glue works, tanneries and bone mills of Footscray, through which the western and northern railway lines passed, gave that suburb a reputation as the Cologne of the Antipodes. The 1887-88 Royal Commission on the Sanitation of Melbourne recommended effective controls on pollution, but the sewering of the City Abattoirs at Flemington and the noxious trades along the Maribyrnong came only in the early 1900s, and it tended to anchor existing industries and attract others, including the Angliss Meatworks. In the long depression of the 1890s and early 1900s, councils in inner working-class Melbourne were reluctant to pressure industrialists to improve or move, and men like James Cuming and William Angliss of Footscray were powerful figures. New traders sprang up on old licences at Braybrook, discharging their wastes to the Maribyrnong River which barely flowed in summer (6). 

It was thus no wonder that some municipalities wanted to create a separate noxious trades industry and a municipal conference, convened by the City of Hawthorn, was held  in August 1917 on this matter as The Herald reported on August 22, 1917 (7) - 
Motions carried at a municipal conference convened by the Hawthorn Council, in favor of the creation of a special noxious trades area, were placed today before Mr D. M'Leod, Minister for Health, who, in his reply to the deputation, said that the Government had arranged for the appointment of three engineers of high qualification to report on the suitability of Laverton as a special site. Cr S. Pynor, Mayor of Essendon, Cr E. C. Rigby, of Hawthorn, and Cr A. C. Westley, of Oakleigh, were the principal speakers in urging that the Minister should remove the noxious trades from the residential part of the metropolis.

Mr M'Leod, in the course of his reply, said that an officer of the Department of Public Health had prepared a valuable report as to the suitability of Laverton as a site for noxious trades, but before the heavy expenditure involved was undertaken Mr C. Catani, formerly Chief Engineer of the Public Works Department, and probably Mr G. Kermode, the present Chief Engineer, and Mr W. Calder, the chairman of the Country Roads Board, would be asked to make an inspection of Laverton, which could be sewered and readily furnished with the necessary water supply and other essentials. More important still, there was a bed of brown coal, up to 47 feet in thickness, passing under the site. Electricity could be provided for power at a cheap rate, and as the bay was close at hand products could be shipped by sea. "If the Laverton scheme can be carried out," continued the Minister, "it would be unwise to have anything to do with a piecemeal scheme. The Government agrees, while it is anxious to encourage the establishment of industries in Victoria, that noxious trades should be removed from the residential area" (8). 

Cr Rigby spoke at the conference of the impact that government inertia had on this industry - The fear of removal had been having a retarding effect on them for some time, and had been keeping them back so far as improvements and extensions were concerned. Some of the structures had been up for 50 years and were dilapidated beyond repair. The municipalities did not feel strong or harsh enough to insist that they should be pulled down altogether or entirely remodelled in view of the hope and indeed the promise of the Government— that they would be removed outside the residential areas. They had no hot-headed desire to injure the trades concerned (9). 

The occupants of Laverton from the 1925 Sands & McDougall's Directory of Victoria.

It was still very much a  country town

State Library of Victoria collection.

The occupants of Laverton from the 1935 Sands & McDougall's Directory of Victoria. 

Click on image to enlarge. State Library of Victoria collection.

Carlo Catani, George Kermode (1873-1941) his replacement at the Public Works Department and William Calder (1860-1928) of the Country Roads Board were officially appointed on September 5, 1917 to inquire into and report on the suitability of Laverton as a site for noxious trades (10). The Health Minister, Mr McLeod was reported as saying that the board is not likely to take long over its report (11).  One newspaper report on the aforementioned noxious trade conference convened by the City of Hawthorn noted that Mr. Catani has given evidence that Laverton was suitable in every way - for water, rail and road transport, and situation (12), so you would assume that the report would have been in favour of Laverton being the location for noxious trades. However, the only information I have on the findings of the panel is from a letter Mr Henry Keiley of Brougham Street, Kew (13) wrote to The Herald  in July 1918 regarding the unrecognised possibilities of the textile industry in Australia and he said that a board of engineering experts-Messrs W. Calder, C. Catani and another were appointed to report at once on the suitability of Laverton as a noxious trade area. The board never reported on it; the matter is shelved (14). 

This was not the first time that this matter had been shelved. Mr Keiley had written another letter to The Herald in August 1917, where he said ...with regard to the noxious trades and the proposed site at Laverton. The Board appointed six or seven years ago drew up a report which, like many similar reports, was never acted on, as the Government would have had to pay heavy compensation to the various businesses affected (15). 

Yet another report was commissioned on the suitability of Laverton in January 1919. The Age reported that it is understood that Messrs. W. Davidson (late Inspector-General for Public Works), J. M. Reed (late Secretary for Lands) and E. H. Ballard (Chief Engineer for Railway Works and Ways), who were appointed a board to report on the technical practicability of the Laverton site for a concentration of noxious trades, are finding no insuperable difficulties, and their report, which is believed to be of a favorable character, will be in the hands of the Government very shortly (16). 

The Age report continued on an optimistic note - 

The definite approval of the Laverton site by the Government, and the presumably early commencement of the work of concentrating the noxious trades there will, it is stated, have a revolutionary effect upon the conduct of many of the industries concerned. Having uncertain tenures, owners of noxious works within the metropolis have not, in the main, attempted to erect buildings of a really substantial nature, suitable to the trade. Moreover, in many of the works up to date machinery, designed for the elimination of the personal factor in the more objectionable features of the trades and the reduction of the nuisance to the neighborhood, has been conservatively neglected. With the concentration of the trades at Laverton these undesirable features will, it is stated, have to disappear (17).

The Age also addressed the issue of the need for workers to move to Laverton as it 

follows that the concentration of noxious trades at Laverton will be accompanied by the growth of a not inconsiderable township there, at whose door the concentration of every noxious trade now in Melbourne, under present offensive conditions, would be intolerable. However, it is authoritatively stated that the measures which will be insisted upon to modernise the noxious trades, once they are concentrated at Laverton, will minimise the nuisances to an extent hardly conceivable by the unfortunate inhabitants who happen to be living alongside them at present. The Laverton scheme will provide for the erection of a model township, which will be at some little distance from the site of the noxious works, and in a direction away from the prevailing wind. Here, after his day's work in the noxious factory, the worker will while away his evening hours in his generous garden plot — amidst the roses, the geraniums and the sweet peas— and forget. Thus, paradoxically, optimists believe that the future noxious trades town of Laverton will become one of the sweetest and most beautiful towns in the Commonwealth. It is all, it is claimed, merely a matter of science and supervision (18). 

This was of course, the second plan for the township of  Laverton - as we saw, the 1886 land sales described the future town as  a new and model suburb, and in the 1919 scheme as a model township. However, once again the plan to move the noxious industries to Laverton, did not happen. As Dr John Lack writes -
During the 1920s there was agitation for the removal of the City Abattoirs and the noxious trades to a special outer site in either Braybrook or Werribee shire, and several inquiries were held. But vested interests, wary of the distances involved, the cost of new works, and the imposition of controls, succeeded in postponing any action. Eventually, after World War II the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works designated a noxious trades zone at Laverton North, and today the pungent odour of industry can sometimes be detected by commuters on the Western Ring Road. Closures of obsolete large abattoirs at Flemington, Footscray and Newport, the growth of country killing, the decline in the local tanning industry, the growth in the export of by-products, improvements in transport, storage and processing, and the substitution of synthetics for natural products have largely eliminated noxious trades odours from Melbourne's suburbs (19). 

Carlo's involvement with the decision to designate Laverton as a noxious trades area came after his retirement as Chief Engineer of the Public Works Department, but it is a testament to the esteem in which he was held that he was invited to be on the panel of  three experts of high standing, as The Age described it (20).  The fact that it seems that his panel did not make a report at the time was just symptomatic of the Governments longstanding inaction in this area.

Trove list - I have created  a list of articles relating to Laverton and the plan to turn it designate it the noxious trades area in 1917 and 1919, access it here.

Footnotes

(1) The Age, August 23, 1917, see here.

(2) Laverton, the new and model suburb: with a short history of Melbourne from its
foundation to the present time by C.R. Staples. Digitised at the State Library of Victoria http://handle.slv.vic.gov.au/10381/119810

(3) Ibid

(4) Population figures - Lost and Almost Forgotten Towns of Colonial Victoria: a comprehensive analysis of Census Results for Victoria 1841-1901 by Angus B. Watson (The Author, 2003) and Victorian Places https://www.victorianplaces.com.au/laverton

(5) Dr  John Lack author of A history of Footscray (Hargreen Publishing, 1991) and other works on Footscray.

(6) eMelbourne https://www.emelbourne.net.au/biogs/EM01069b.htm

(7) The Herald, August 22 1917, see here.

(8) Ibid

(9) The Age, August 23, 1917, see here.

(10) The Herald, September 5, 1917, see here.

(11) Ibid

(12) Footscray Advertiser, August 4, 1917, see here.

(13) Henry Loftus Keiley, listed in the Electoral Rolls as a wool classer. He was a regular letter writer to the newspapers in the 1910s, early 1920s.  His father, also called Henry, was the music critic at The Argus for twenty years (The Age, December 30, 1933, see here).

(14) The Herald, July 13, 1918, see here.

(15) The Herald, August 14, 1917, see here.

(16) The Age, January 14, 1919, see here.

(17) Ibid

(18) Ibid

(19) eMelbourne https://www.emelbourne.net.au/biogs/EM01069b.htm

(20) The Age, August 23, 1917, see here.

Carlo's time as an Honorary Justice at the St Kilda Court

On May 15, 1917, Carlo Catani, having just been appointed a Justice of the Peace, took his seat on the Bench at the St Kilda Court for the first time. The Prahran Chronicle of May 19, 1917 (1) reported on this occasion  -
Mr. Catani, having retired front the Public Works Department has been appointed a Justice of the Peace, and took his seat on the St. Kilda Bench for the first time on Tuesday. He was cordially welcomed by the chairman (Cr. Love (2)), who spoke of the splendid work of beautification which Mr. Catani had carried out on the St. Kilda foreshore. He congratulated Mr. Catani on his appointment as a Justice of the Peace and wished him a happy and useful future career in St. Kilda. Lieut.-Colonel Crouch (3), solicitor, said he had the extreme pleasure of knowing Mr. Catani's late son, Lieutenant Catani. The Assistant Clerk of Court (Captain Elspery), and he had served with him in the trenches at Gallipoli for some time. Such a noble son must have had a good father. St. Kilda Bench would be strengthened by the presence of Mr. Catani, J.P.

Captain Elspery (4), court clerk, also tendered congratulations to Mr. Catani. As to his son (Captain Catani), he had met him at the front, and could bear testimony to his high qualities as a soldier and a man. Sub-Inspector McKenna also tendered congratulations.

Mr. Catani, J.P., speaking in words of emotion, said it was a comfort for him to know that his son had died for liberty and righteousness.

Photo of Carlo Catani published in Punch along with other members of the 

Honorary Justices' Association of Victoria.

Punch, June 20 1918 https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/130036362

This post looks at some of the cases dealt with by Carlo and his fellow J.P.'s on the the St Kilda Bench, but before we do this we will look at the actual building where the cases were heard.  The Court building that was in use in Carlo's time was on the corner of Grey and Barkly Streets, in the old 1860 Town Hall building. The Chronicle reported on this building in February 1892 - 

The new court room for St Kilda, formerly the old Town Hall, has now been completely transformed for use as a court room. The room is the largest in the colony except the Supreme courts, being 55 by 35 feet, and is a noble and spacious apartment for the purpose. Lighted as it is at both ends, it is bright and airy, and affords ample room tor commodious arrangements. A long bench for the magistrates runs along one side, with the prisoners' dock at one end, and the witness box at the other. The solicitor's table stretches down the centre, and a seat the whole length of the room should afford ample room for witnesses and persons having business at the court. The walls and ceiling are handsomely panelled in neutral tints, and the room as a whole is unexceptionable in all its appointment (5). 

A new Court house in Chapel street opened in 1930 (6) and the old building was demolished in 1933 and as The Age reported in October 1933 - the first of three blocks of flats will shortly be erected on the site of the old St. Kilda court house. Of triangular formation, the land has a frontage of 50 feet to Barkly-street, 180 feet to Grey-street and 100 feet along the dividing line of existing properties (7).

The St Kilda Town Hall, c. 1860s/1870s. Photographer: Donald McDonald.

The St Kilda Council sat for the first time in this building on January 4, 1860. The Town Hall section, with the portico and colonnade, is the front section of the building. The original Court House is the section in front of the bluestone Police Station. 

In 1892, the Court House moved into the refurbished old Town Hall section of the building (8).

State Library of Victoria Image H87.91/11

On his first sitting, Carlo heard the case of  Giacomo Rando who was charged with having, on April 21, acted contrary to the regulations made by the Board of Public Health, under the Health Acts (for securing cleanliness and freedom from contamination of articles of food), to wit, bananas and apples, by storing them in places where things were kept which were likely to contaminate such articles of food or injuriously affect their wholesomeness or cleanliness (9). Carlo could speak to the defendant in Italian as the Prahran Chronicle reported - the  Defendant (in his native tongue) was asked by Mr. Catani, J.P., as to whether there was a child's cot near the fruit and defendant replied that he did not know whether there was or not. The  Court found that apples were stored in the bathroom covered with old bags and rags and a case of bananas were covered with rags. Mr Rando was found guilty and fined  £3 (10).

The following week they heard  a speeding case and these cases came before the Court on a regular basis - Dr Ernest Greenwood was charged with driving a motor car at  speed dangerous to the public. He was found guilty and fined £2 (11). In another case, Miss Kathleen Braithwaite was charged and found guilty of driving 28 miles an hour in High Street. She was also fined £2 (12). It wasn't just car owners charged with speeding, motor cyclists also appeared before the Bench on a regular basis. A more unusual charge of speeding was heard at Carlo's second appearance on the Bench - Charles Fewster and Leslie Westwood were charged on the information of Constable Rice with furiously riding ponies along the Lower Esplanade on May 6. Defendants stated that the ponies took fright at the band, and as they were fresh they got beyond control. A fine of 20/- was imposed, in default seven days (13).

We know that Carlo was very involved in establishing gardens all throughout Victoria and in those days theft from public gardens was taken very seriously. This report of  a case heard before Carlo is from the Prahran Chronicle of May 26, 1917 (14) -

Arthur Kirk was charged by Sergeant Kennedy, under By-law 8 (15) of the City of St. Kilda, with having plucked a flower in Blessington-street gardens. James Robarts stated that on April 29 he was on duty in the gardens, and saw defendant pluck two roses. Plain Clothes Constable Hall stated that he was keeping watch, and saw defendant pluck a red rose and put it in his pocket. He also plucked a second one. When spoken to defendant said he did not think he was doing any harm.

Defendant: I did pluck one flower. I don't think there were two.

The Chairman: The witnesses say there were.

Defendant: I feel my position keenly. I am very fond of flowers.

Captain Wills, J.P. (16): Why didn't you put the rose in your coat?

Defendant: It was very cold at the time...

Captain Wills: Flowers won't keep  you warm.

The Bench said they were sorry to see defendant place himself in such a position.

A fine of 10/- was imposed, with 8/6 costs. 

There were, of course, many other theft cases including this one concerning a theft  from Luna Park in June 1917 - 

George Shaddock was charged with having stolen 250 yards of copper wire, valued at £25, the property of the Luna Park Proprietary Limited. It was stated in evidence that Shaddock had charge of the key to Luna Park. When questioned by the police, Shaddock admitted having stolen two lots of copper wire, which he sold to a dealer named Johnson for £5/13/-. Shaddock for whom Mr. H. Barrett appeared, pleaded guilty, and his counsel stated that the man had acted under the influence of a master mind.

A sentence of three months' imprisonment, with hard labor, was imposed.

John Johnson was then charged with having received the copper wire, knowing it to have been stolen. Shaddock, the accused in the previous case, said he had told Johnson that the wire was "under the lap," meaning that it had been stolen. Johnson denied having purchased any wire from Shaddock, and said Shaddock had a grudge against him. He was committed for trial (17). 

There were other men who appeared before the St Kilda Bench under the influence, but of alcohol. The charges were drunkedness, often coupled with using offensive language.  There were also charges of illegal detention - one case in August 1917 involved furniture. Ethel Kemp had engaged Henry Ford to cart her furniture to the wharf so it could be shipped to Sydney. The furniture wasn't delivered to the wharf and nor would he hand the furniture back to Miss Kemp. In the end,  Ethel was told she must pay Henry 35 shillings when the furniture arrived at the wharf, but he had to pay 21 shillings in Court costs (18)

Another case involving illegal detention concerned a dog, an Australian fox terrier. This case was reported in The Argus in July 1917-

Women Dog-owners in Court. Pointed comments from the bench.

At the St. Kilda Court yesterday, before Messrs. Love (chairman), Captain Wills, and Messrs Smithwick (19) Catani, Hartley (20), Curtis (21), and Mitchell (22), J.P's - Idalia May Seaberg (23) of Mary street, charged W.G.R. Sprod (24) of York Street, with having illegally detained an Australian fox-terrier dog, value 12/6. Mr. Hoare appeared for complainant, and Mr. O'Dwyer for defendant. 

Complainant stated that she bought the dog in dispute at the South Melbourne Market for 12/6 in May last. She dyed some white marks on its body. Subsequently Mrs Sprod, supported by members of her household, claimed the dog as hers. On the advice of Constable Davidson, and for the sake of peace, she (complainant) handed the door over to the Sprods, and Mrs. Sprod, for her part, promised to restore the dog when, after the dye stains had disappeared, she found it did not belong to her. Further evidence was given on both sides, and three dogs were in court as "exhibits'' in the case, two of them alleged to be the mother and sister of the dog in dispute. The defence was an emphatic denial that the dog in dispute belonged to the complainant.

The Bench ordered defendant to restore the dog to complainant, or to pay its value, 12/6, whereupon Mr O'Dwyer handed over the money on his client 's behalf and retained the dog. The Chairman speaking with warmth, said that it was a standing disgrace to see women showing such great interest in mongrel dogs. If they could not have children of their own to care for they should get somebody else's. 

As the parties to the case were read in the court a scrimmage occurred owing to complainant making a fruitless endeavour to obtain possession of the dog. The Chairman reminded complainant think it was her duty to abide by the decision of the Court. (25). 

Interesting and insensitive comment on the part of the Chairman, Cr Love, about the women, at the time of the trial Mrs Seaberg was 34 and Mrs Sprod was 44 years old.

We will finish off with an assault case reported in the Prahran Chronicle in October 1917,  where the Chairman, Mr Smithwick, also made an interesting comment - 

Charge of Assault. Man's strange act.

At the St. Kilda Court on Tuesday, before Messrs Smithwick (chairman), Catani, Mitchell, Rowan (26), Hartley, Curtis, and Captain Wills, J's P., a man named Wm. Cherry was charged with having unlawfully assaulted Marie Allen, employed in the household of Brigadier-General Hughes (27), of Kantaka, Alma road. Sub-Inspector Harley conducted the prosecution. 

Marie Allen, the complainant in the case, had the bridge of her nose and the region of the left eye dressed in plaster. She said - About a quarter to 12 on Friday night last I was returning home along Alma road, and when near the house I saw the accused coming from the opposite direction. He stopped me and said, "I know you." I said, "Oh, do you? Let me pass." He then tried to take my bag from me but I prevented him. He threw his arms round me, and bit my face. I screamed, and accused ran away. I was afterwards taken to Dr Davenport's surgery for treatment. I am quite positive that accused is the

man who assaulted me.

Accused - Was I in any way under the influence of liquor?-- don't know, because you caught me so suddenly. 

In answer to the Bench, complainant said she had never seen accused before in her life. 

Dr A. F. Davenport said the complainant had a lacerated wound over the left eye, in addition to other marks. The wound was caused presumably by a full set of teeth in the lower jaw and two stumps in the upper jaw He had examined the accused's teeth, and considered that they were consistent with having caused the wound described. Constable A. Gamble stated that he saw accused in High street at 2 o'clock on Saturday morning. Asked what he was doing out at that hour, accused said he was waiting for a friend. Accused had a bruise on his cheek, which he said was a "secret affair." Witness arrested accused on a charge of drunkenness.

Plain Clothes Constable Hall said that accused told him he had been walking about during the night, but did not know where he had been.

Accused said - I do not deny that I had a few drinks during the day. Wherever I have been I have never known myself to be objectionable to women and children. I hold them in the utmost respect. I never knew that I could be guilty of such an offence. I have a wife and three children. I do my best for them. I greatly regret that I have to answer a charge of this kind. Although the evidence seems black against me, I cannot see how I could stoop to do such a despicable thing as that with which I am charged.

The chairman informed accused that he was liable to six months' imprisonment. He had committed the act of a cannibal. Accused was sentenced to three months' imprisonment, with hard labor and ordered to pay £2/2/ costs (28). 

As the Prahran Telegraph reported in their obituary of Carlo Catani, who died  on July 20, 1918 that he was occupying his accustomed seat as honorary magistrate on the bench a the the St. Kilda court only two or three  weeks since (29). 

Trove List - I have created a list of articles connected to Carlo's time on the St bench,  access it here.

Footnotes

(1) Prahran Chronicle, May 19, 1917, see here.

(2) Cr Love - John Jeremiah Love. St Kilda Councillor 1911 to 1917 and  Mayor of St Kilda 1915/1916. Died 1937, aged 69.  You can read his obituary, here.  I have a bit of an interest in Church Architecture and Cr Love's son Allan was an architect with the firm of Scarborough, Robertson and Love and they designed, amongst other buildings, the Presbyterian Church in Elwood which opened in 1939, which I have written about, here.

(3) Lieutenant Colonel Crouch - Richard Armstrong Crouch (1868-1949) - read his Australian Dictionary of Biography entry, here.

(4) Captain Elspery - surname is actually Elsbury. This is James Ross Elsbury, he enlisted in AIF in January 1915, fought at Gallipoli, and was discharged on medical grounds - neurasthenia - in March 1916. His occupation was a Civil servant. In the 1917 Electoral Roll he was at 'Erinvale' St Kilda Road, Melbourne. He had married in December 23, 1916 to Eileen Reilly, but the marriage ended in divorce in April 1920 - due to constructive desertion - petitioner had to leave respondent on account of medical reasons, for which he was responsible. Seems a bit sad really. Marriage and divorce reports from Shepparton Advertiser, February 1, 1917, see here and The Age, April 14, 1920, see here.

(5) The Chronicle, February 20, 1892, see here.

(6) Prahran Telegraph, January 24, 1930, see here.

(7) The Age, October 10, 1933, see here.

(8) Cooper, John Butler The History of St Kilda from its Settlement to a City and after 1840 to 1930, v. 2 (St Kilda City Council 1931), chapter XXII, pp 39-64.

(9) Prahran Chronicle, May 19, 1917, see here.

(10) Prahran Chronicle, May 19, 1917, see here.

(11) Prahran Chronicle, June 2, 1917, see here.

(12) Prahran Chronicle, September 22, 1917, see here.

(13) Prahran Chronicle, May 26, 1917, see here.

(14) Prahran Chronicle, May 26, 1917, see here.

(15)  The by-law number is illegible, it is 8 something, but not sure.

(16) Wills - Richard Wills, listed in  the 1917 Electoral Roll at 26 Scott Street, St Kilda; occupation 'Independent means.' He was Secretary of the St Kilda South Ward Progress Association.  You can read his obituary in the Williamstown Chronicle of January 14, 1922, see here.

(17) Prahran Chronicle, June 16, 1917, see here; there is another account of the case here Prahran Telegraph, June 16, 1917, see here.

(18) Malvern Standard, August 4, 1917, see here.

(19) Smithwick - This is possibly Christopher Richard Smithwick. He was in the 1913 Electoral Roll at Queen's Mansions, St Kilda; 1914 Roll - 11 Park Street, St Kilda; 1919  Roll at 38 Grey Street, St Kilda. Occupation listed each time as 'Independent means'.

(20) Hartley -  Prahran Telegraph of September 5, 1914 (see here) reported that G.W. Hartley of St Kilda was appointed a Justice of the Peace. The 1917 Electoral roll (and other years) lists a George William Hartley, corner Park and Fraser Streets, St Kilda; occupation printer. I presume that are the same man. 

(21) Curtis - the Prahran Telegraph of February 10, 1917 (see here) reported that W.H. Curtis, Gurner Street, St Kilda was appointed a Justice of the Peace. the 1919 Electoral Roll lists William Henry Curtis at 16 Gurner Street; occupation 'Independent means.' Again, I presume that they are the same man.

(22) Mitchell - I believe this is Walter Whitelaw Mitchell, listed in the Electoral Rolls from 1914 - 1924 at 60 Canterbury Road, St Kilda, occupation 'Independent means.' When he died in 1936 a short obituary in The Age of September 1, 1936 (see here) said that he was a J.P and was the returning officer for St Kilda for many years.

(23) Idalia May Seaberg - also in the Electoral rolls as Ida May Seaberg. Married to Leonard Arthur Seaberg, listed as an Engineer. Ida (nee James) died in 1966, aged 83 and Leonard died in 1967, aged 85. 

(24) W.G.R. Sprod -  William George Rodney Sprod, his wife was Emma. He died in 1947, aged 87; Emma (nee Murray) died 1948, aged 75. They had  a son William Rodney born in 1888.

(25) The Argus, July 11, 1917, see here.

(26) Rowan - I believe this was Joseph Rowan, J.P. He died at his home in York Street, St Kilda in February 1920. you can read his obituary in the Malvern Standard, of February 21, 1920, here.

(27) Brigadier General Hughes - Frederick Godfrey Hughes (1858-1944). His wife Eva (nee Snodgrass) established the Australian Women's National League in 1904. They share an entry in the Australian Dictionary of Biography entry, here.

(28) Prahran Chronicle, October 6, 1917, see here.

(29) Prahran Telegraph, July 27, 1918, see here.

The Bridge over the Murray River at Koondrook-Barham

The communities of Koondrook and Barham had been agitating for a bridge across the Murray River between the two towns from as early as 1892 when the local member, James McColl,  raised the issue in the Victorian Parliament (1). There was a punt which serviced the towns, but it was inadequate. Over a year later, October 1893,  the Koondrook Progress Association drew up a petition to the Minister of Public Works, praying for the erection of  a bridge over the Murray at Koondrook (2). 

The issue moved slowly with more enthusiasm for the bridge from Victoria than from New South Wales but as the Murray River 'belongs' to New South Wales they were responsible for bridge construction. In March 1898, the Victorian Minister for Public Works was to present a proposal for the bridge to the Cabinet, with the cost of the bridge estimated at £7000, to be divided equally between New South Wales and Victoria (3). However, at the same time Robert Hickson, the  New South Wales Under Secretary for Public Works and Commissioner for Roads presented  a report which dismissed the need for a  bridge essentially because the main portion of the traffic is served by river while that using the crossing is almost entirely local, it does not seem to me that there would be any justification for the erection of a bridge at this place, the cost of which may be estimated approximately at £8,000 to £9000, exclusive of the approaches on the Victorian side of the river.  Hickson described the two towns as Barham, which consists of besides the residences of three officials stationed there, less than half a dozen houses, and Koondrook, which is the Victorian town, of somewhat greater pretensions (4).

In response to Hickson's report a joint meetings of the  Barham Progress Association and the Koondrook Bridge League was held. They considered the report to be inaccurate in parts. They argued that if there was a decent bridge over the Murray then traffic would increase as wool from Moulamein and the stations north of Barham would all be sent to Melbourne by road to Barham and hence by rail from Koondrook, but currently the punt owners refuse to cross any loads exceeding 6 tons in weight except at owners' risk (5).

The Koondrook-Barham Bridge, c. 1909.

Barham Bridge. State Library of Victoria Image  H90.140/1040

There was more agitation over the next few years and in June 1900 real progress was made when Victoria and New South Wales each sent an engineer to the towns to make an inspection and take evidence in connection with the construction of the proposed Koondrook-Barham bridge (6).  Carlo Catani was sent from the Victorian Public Works Department and Ernest Macartney de Burgh, the  Assistant Engineer for Bridges,  from the New South Wales Department of Public Works. Carlo had previously worked with Ernest de Burgh on the Union Bridge at Albury, read about this here. The Kerang Times reported on this momentous event -
The public here at once recognised that the sister Government [N.S.W.] meant business. Mr De Burgh is the most eminent authority on bridge building in New South Wales. Of the ten bridges across the Murray he has built eight, and is thoroughly familiar with the river from Forest Hill to the South Australian border. During the past twelve years he has never superintended the construction of less than 50 bridges per year, and in some years the number was over 100. Mr Catani's reputation as an engineer is well-known in these parts. It was not surprising then that the hope which springs eternal in the human breast should rise in full tide at the advent of these distinguished officers (7).

 
The requirement for the bridge was all the more urgent because on June 5, 1900, two weeks before the arrival of the Engineers, the punt that serviced the towns sunk, as The Age reported -
The necessity of a permanent bridge across the Murray, between Barham and Koondrook, the site of which was inspected by the Minister of Public Works on a recent visit, was forcibly illustrated yesterday, when a punt, together with a valuable traction engine sank in 40 feet of water. The engine, the property of Messrs. Hackett and Wells, was being conveyed across the river from Barham, New South Wales, for log hauling at Arbuthnot's saw mills, Koondrook. Upon reaching deep water the punt, in consequence of the engine not being placed in the centre, tilted, and the engine canted over and disappeared in the river, while the punt also sprang a leak and sank. One end of the punt is visible. It is assumed that its back is broken. Fortunately, the men in charge escaped. The punt owner obtained an indemnity from the proprietors of the engine prior to attempting to cross. The obstruction is likely to endanger the river traffic. In consequence of the accident a large consignment of sheep from Riverina for the Melbourne market, intended for transmission via Koondrook, was diverted to Swan Hill. This means a serious loss to the local tramway, and there will be further instances until traffic is restored (8). 

Carlo and Mr de Burgh arrived in Kerang by train on Tuesday June 19, 1900. That night they took evidence at Kerang regarding the need for the bridge. On the Wednesday, they took the train (9) to Koondrook and inspected the proposed sites of the bridge, from both sides of the river and then took evidence at Koondrook.

What sort of evidence was presented in support of the bridge? 

The punt was unreliable - Mr Andrew O'Keefe, pastoralist and owner of Barham Station, said if there were a bridge at Barham he would entrain all his wool at Koondrook and other adjoining pastoralists would do so too. He had had five breakdowns on the punt with wool. There was no man with a valuable team who would risk the punt (10).

A bridge would open up settlement - From Mr. J. W. Chanter, stock inspector at Barham - About 160,000 acres of Crown land in the area mentioned would be made available for selection within the next three years, the lessee falling in. He considered all this would be eagerly applied for. Recently about 16,000 acres had been thrown open south of Moulamein and there was an average of 58 applicants for each block. He considered the demand would increase and the land become more valuable if a bridge were constructed. He anticipated a much closer settlement with in the next two years. The land was equal to and, in his opinion, superior to that on the Victorian side. The population of the area he referred to was about 2000. Three townships would be served by the bridge, Barham, Moulamein and Maude, in all of which there were town lots to be sold (11).

Stock Routes - Cr O'Donnell - The port of Barham had superior claims for the construction of a bridge than either Echuca or Swan hill. Drovers who came direct from Queensland and New South Wales said that the Moulamein-Koondrook stock route was the best watered, and best grassed, and 100 miles shorter (12).

Lack of a bridge impeded agricultural activities - R. J. Eagle, farmer and grazier, and secretary of the Barham Progress Association - Two seasons running he had carted his wheat to Barham a distance of 13 miles, and could not get a boat to take it away. It cost him 9d per bag for cartage 13 miles, and 6d per bag to take it across the punt to the tram. Carters would not trust their teams on the punt. If there were a bridge all the wheat to Sydney or Melbourne would go that way. If a bridge were built large areas would be put under wheat and another important industry, dairying, would flourish as the

land was suitable for it (13). 

The Koondrook-Barham Bridge.

Murray River & Bridge, Koondrook. Photographer: Rose Stereograph Co. 

State Library of Victoria Image H32492/7863

Statistics were presented at the sessions at Kerang and Koondrook by the Customs Officers at Barham and Koondrook. This was in the days before Federation when States had their own Customs Offices.  The statistics tell us a number of things - firstly that the trade was mainly from New South Wales to Victoria i.e. that the main market for the Barham farmers was Melbourne, not Sydney. Which meant that the bridge was more important for the people of Barham than the people of Koondrook. Secondly, the importance of sheep and wool to the local economy. The huge number of sheep exported through Barham to Victoria is interesting - over 90,000 sheep per annum in 1898 and 1899. 

Figures presented by Mr Chas. E. Johnson, acting Customs officer, Barham (14).  

Imports

General Goods - 1897 £7455; 1898 £5008; 1899 £4795.

Cattle - 1897 (20) £202; 1898 (80) £330; 1899 (17) £117.

Horses - 1897 (58) £848; 1898 (47) £396; 1899 (91) £897.

Sheep - 1897 (4324) £1338; 1898 (3441) £1155; 1899 (8548) £2728.

Total Value - 1897 £9823; 1898 £6979; 1899 £8537.

Exports

General Goods - 1897 £3472; 1898 £2421; 1899 £4497.

Cattle - 1897 (60) £190; 1898 (276) £1274; 1899 (652) £3260.

Horses - 1897 (31) £182; 1898 (111) £756; 1899 (158) £1152.

Sheep - 1897 (10,620) £4574; 1898 (92,453) £2897; 1899 (93,977) £41,668.

Pigs - 1897 (20) £27

Total Value - 1897 £8445; 1898 £32,563; 1899 £50,577.

Figures presented by Mr J. P. Madigan, Victorian Customs officer, Koondrook (15).

Imports

Cattle - 1897 (61) £162; 1898 (316) £1416; 1899 (726) £3937.

Horses - 1897 (15) £68; 1898 (86) £703; 1899 (152) £1130.

Sheep - 1897 (10,502) £4192; 1898 (93,118) £33,434; 1899 (96,885) £41,531.

Pigs - 1897 (20) £26; 1898 (1) £1; 1899 (2) £8.

Other imports —

(principally wool) 1897 £3555; 1898 £3588; 1899 £7386.

Total Value - 1897 £8003; 1898 £39,141; 1899 £54,093.

When the proceedings finished the Kerang Times reported that a vote of thanks to the two Engineers was moved and -

Mr De Burg (sic)  in responding said he would go carefully through the evidence and make a straightforward report to his Government. Mr Catani also responded and expressed pleasure at the straightforward way in which the evidence had been given. He thought his friend Mr De Burg by this time must be almost convinced that it was his duty to recommend his Government to return the compliment paid by the Victorian Government at Cobram and build the Barham bridge right away (16).

The bridge was approved and in December 1900 Mr de Burgh produced a sketch showing the design of the proposed bridge, with an estimate of cost, [which] has been forwarded to the Victorian Government for their convenience (17). After receiving this news from Mr de Burgh, Mr D. G. Rattray, the secretary of the Koondrook Bridge committee wrote to Mr Catani of the Public Works department, urging him to expedite the approval of design (18). However, Carlo had no control over the process and it wasn't until February 1902 that the specifications were completed and tenders could be called (19). In June 1902 it was reported that a tender from Monash and Anderson had been accepted (20). In July 1902 this letter was  sent from the Premier of Victoria to the premier of New South Wales - 

To the Hon. the Premier of New South Wales. Premier's office, Melbourne, 29th July, 1902. Sir, - In continuation of my letter No. 3422 of the 2nd inst., I have the honor to inform you that this Government concurs in the acceptance of the tender of Messrs Monash and Anderson for £9,473 14s 6d for the erection of a bridge over the Murray River at Barham and Koondrook and that it will meet progress payments as required from time to time. - I have, etc, W. H. Irvine, Premier. (21). 

But by the September still nothing had happened and it appears that the New South Wales Government had not formally accepted the tender and thus in December 1902 the tender process was re-opened. Finally, at the end of January 1903 the tender was awarded again to Monash and Anderson this time for £10,345 17s 2d (22). 

The firm of Monash and Anderson was formed in 1894 by John Monash and J.T. Noble Anderson (23). They were granted the Victorian rights to the Monier reinforced concrete construction system from Carter, Gummow & Co of Sydney and worked with them on the Anderson Street Bridge (also called the Morell Bridge). This bridge was completed in 1899 and was the first bridge in Victoria to use the Monier system. Monash and Anderson were responsible for many concrete bridges after this including the Fyansford bridge and the St Kilda Street bridge in Elwood (24). 

As you can imagine, after waiting so long for a bridge, the day the first pile was driven into the river for the new bridge was a day of celebration in the area.  It was Tuesday April 7, 1903 and the shire president (Mr. P. J. O'Donnell) drove the first pile of the Koondrook-Barham bridge across the Murray on Tuesday. A special train was run from Kerang, and a large number of leading citizens were present. Having started the pile driver from a barge in the centre of the river, Cr. O'Donnell returned to the shore where appropriate speeches were delivered and toasts honored (25).

The bridge under construction.

Kerang New Times, September 23, 1904 https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/221079816

The bridge was not a concrete bridge it was of steel construction. The local paper, the Kerang New Times, had  a very detailed report of the bridge provided by the engineer in charge, Mr. J. R. A. Reed, C.E.  - here's an abridged version of their report, which you can read in full, here. 

The river at the point where the bridge is being constructed has a width of 270 feet, with high ground on each side, which obviates the necessity of any lengthy approaches. The bridge consist of two plain timber spans (each 30 ft.) at the shore ends, followed by two 104 ft. composite (wood and steel) truss spans, and a central or lift span of 58 ft. 4 in. in the centre. The shore end trusses are each carried on a group of 12 ironbark piles, strongly braced and strutted, while the trusses of the 104 ft spans and the lift span are borne on four massive cylinders filled with and bedded on concrete, which again is supported by piles driven a distance of 25 ft. into the river bed. Rising from the four cylinders are as many towers of steel which carry the appliances for raising the central span to allow the passage of the river boats, the total height of the tower and cylinders being 46 ft. 6 in. The centre, or lift span, is raised by means of a hand winch which carries the power by means of a wire rope attachment to the centre span, the weight of which is counterbalanced by leaden weights enclosed in cast iron boxes...The method of elevating is thereby rendered so simple that the span ran be raised or lowered by one man with only ordinary exertion. 

The decking of the bridge, which is placed 6 ft. above the highest known flood level consists with the exception of the short spans at the shore ends, which is decked with red gum, of tallow wood planking. ...The material for the iron and steel work was imported in the rough from Scotland and was built by Cowley, of the Eureka Iron Works, Ballarat, and is considered by experts who have examined it as being of first-class workmanship.

The bridge is an exact counterpart of the one recently erected at Cobram, also under the supervision of Mr Reid, and is a marked advance on the Swan Hill bridge, the truss spans of which are composed entirely of timber. The lift is also much lighter and more effective in design, and the mechanism less complicated (26).

Even though Koondrook did not get their bridge until seven years after Swan Hill, theirs was better! The Swan Hill bridge had opened in 1896.

The Koondrook-Barham bridge was formally opened on Saturday October 8, 1904 by the New South Wales Minister for Public Works, Mr Lee and his Victorian counterpart, Mr Cameron. Over 1,500 people attended the ceremony with a host of politicians and government officials, including Mr Davidson, the Inspector General of Public Works. Carlo was not listed amongst the guests, but  I wonder if he was there? A special train was run from Kerang for the occasion. The officials and the town band boarded the steamer, Rothbury, at the wharf which then sailed down the river and when nearing the bridge, the central span was raised and the boat steamed through to the strains of the band and the hooraying of the bystanders (27). 

The bridge with the centre span raised for the paddle steamer, Marion, c. 1950.

Paddle steamer 'Marion' on river at Barham. Victorian Railways photographer. 

State Library of Victoria Image H91.50/1984

The Koondrook bridge, which is heritage listed,  is still in operation. Between 2012 and 2018 the New South Wales Department of Transport carried out major restoration works, including mechanical repairs to the lift span (28). 

Trove list - I have created a list of articles on the agitation for and construction of the Koondrook-Barham bridge, you can access it here.

Footnotes

(1) Kerang Times, July 29, 1892, see here.

(2) Kerang Times, October 31, 1893, see here.

(3) The Argus, March 9, 1898, see here.

(4) Kerang Times, March 22, 1898, see here.

(5) Kerang Times, March 25, 1898, see here.

(6) Kerang Times, June 19, 1900, see here.

(7) Kerang Times, June 22, 1900, p. 2 Barham bridge article, see here.

(8) The Age, June 7, 1900, see here.

(9) Train was sometimes referred to as a tram. There was a Victorian Railways line to Kerang and then from Kerang to Koondrook  a tramway being a public one, owned by the Swan Hill Shire Council with money borrowed from Government, the gauge being the same as that of the Victorian railways, according to the Kerang Times of March 25 1898, see here. 

(10) Kerang Times, June 22, 1900, p. 2 At the Murray article, see here.

(11) Ibid

(12) Kerang Times, June 22, 1900, p. 2 Barham bridge article, see here.

(13) Kerang Times, June 22, 1900, p. 2 At the Murray article, see here.

(14) Ibid

(15) Ibid

(16) Kerang Times, June 22, 1900, At the Murray article, p. 3 see here.  

(17) Kerang Times, December 4, 1900, see here.

(18) Ibid

(19) Kerang New Times, February 28, 1902, see here.

(20) Sydney Evening News, June 17 1902, see here.

(21) Kerang New Times, September 19, 1902, see here.

(22) No action re tender - Kerang New Times, September 19, 1902, see here; Tender re-opened - Daily Telegraph, November 15, 1902,see here;  Tender acceptance - Sydney Evening News, February 2, 1903, see here. 

(23) Sir John Monash (1865-1931) - read his Australian Dictionary of Biograph entry, here. Joshua Thomas Noble Anderson (1865-1949)  read his entry in the Encyclopedia of Australian Science and Innovation, here.

(24) Vines, Gary National Trust Study of Victoria’s Concrete Road Bridges - National Trust of Australia (Victoria) Funded by VicRoads and Heritage Victoria (Biosis Research Pty. Ltd, 2008 revised 2010)

(25) The Age, April 9, 1903, see here.

(26) Kerang New Times, May 13, 1904, see here.

(27) Kerang New Times, October 11 1904, see here. There is another account of the opening in the Riverina Recorder of October 12, 1904, see here.

(28) Restoration works -  https://roads-waterways.transport.nsw.gov.au/projects/barham-bridge/  You can read the Engineers Australia report on the heritage significance of the bridge here https://portal.engineersaustralia.org.au/system/files/engineering-heritage-australia/nomination-title/Barham_Koondrook_Nomination.pdf

Carlo Catani is sued in Warrnambool County Court

The Age newspaper of April 10, 1902  (see here) reported on a Court case where Carlo was sued in the Warrnambool County Court. The plaintiff, William John Murray, was unsuccessful. The case was in connection with the Merri River drainage scheme. The Merri River is to the west of the town of Warrnambool and I will write about the drainage scheme one day.  Over the years, Carlo gave evidence at committees and inquiries in a professional capacity and he was on the other side of the Bench after he was appointed a Magistrate at the St Kilda Court, where the first case he heard was on May 15, 1917, but this is the first court case I have found involving Carlo as either a plaintiff or defendant.

The Court House at Warrnambool, where the case involving Carlo was heard.

Warrnambool Court House, Timor Street. Photographer: John T. Collins, taken November 22, 1981.

State Library of Victoria Image H98.251/2516

Here is the report from The Age of April 10, 1902 -

A Peculiar Claim. A Public Works Officer Sued.

Warrnambool, Wednesday.

At the county court, before Judge Hamilton, William John Murray, owner of land near the Merri River, sought to recover from Mr. Catani, of the Public Works department, £19 19/ for certain work alleged to have been done on the authority of the defendant in connection with the Merri River drainage scheme.

Plaintiff stated that he had an interview with defendant at Warrnambool, and that the latter arranged with him to interview all the land owners interested in the Merri drainage scheme, with a view to inducing them to buy from the Government all the land between their holdings and the river which had been reclaimed. Defendant told plaintiff that he would be handsomely paid if he undertook the work, and after considerable demur he consented to undertake the task. He sent in two or three reports to the department, showing the results of the interviews, and defendant had on two or three occasions assured him that "he would be paid all right."

Some time afterwards, Mr. Catani and the Surveyor-General called on witness at his house, and in the course of conversation the Surveyor-General asked plaintiff what authority he had for doing the work for which he claimed payment. Plaintiff thereupon produced a letter he had received from Mr. Catani, and the Surveyor-General, after reading it, remarked, "Oh, he has been employed all right." 

At a subsequent stage, however, plaintiff received a letter from Mr. Catani, in which the latter stated that it was understood that plaintiff undertook the work "because he owns so interested in securing a river frontage for himself." At a later stage the Government repudiated the action of Mr. Catani in engaging his (plaintiff's) services.

In reply to Mr. S. F. Mann, of the Crown Law department, who appeared for defendant, plaintiff admitted having received certain amounts from land owners for his instrumentality in securing the drainage of their land.

Mr. Mann submitted that the action was an improper attempt to reach the Crown. The department should have been sued, and not one of the department's officers in a private capacity. His Honor coincided with Mr. Mann's view.

Mr. Chambers, who appeared for plaintiff, pointed out that the department had repudiated Mr. Catani's action. His Honor: Then there is all the stronger ground for an action against the department.

Plaintiff was non-suited, and costs were allowed to defendant.

The Union Bridge, Murray River, at Albury-Wodonga

On September 2, 1861, the Union Bridge over the Murray River between Albury and Wodonga was opened, replacing a punt. It was a day of great celebration and a procession which wound its way down the main streets of Albury to the new bridge was watched by over 1,200 spectators (1). The local newspaper the Albury Banner described the bridge -
Victoria is now united to New South Wales by one of the finest bridges in all the colonies - by the  "Union Bridge," at Albury a bridge which is most commanding in appearance, and, as to its workmanship throughout, may be regarded as - and is, in fact - one of the neatest pieces of joinery that any practical hand could wish to criticise; some of the large beams being so nicely spliced as almost to defy detection. The bridge is one hundred and fifty six feet long by thirty wide; it is supported on two piers composed of triple rows of piles, with similar abutments on either side the river: there are consequently three spans of eighty feet each from centre to centre of the piers. The superstructure is composed of three rows of trusses or framework (commonly known as the "double queen" truss), thus dividing the Bridge into two roadways. This portion of the work gives the idea of great solidity, being supported by numerous suspension bars of great strength and rigidity. Heavy American wagons passed over the Bridge, while several hundred persons were congregated upon it, and yet there was scarcely any sensible vibration (2).

View of the first Union Bridge over the Murray.  Photographer: John H. Jones.

Mr Jones, the photographer, died in 1872, so this was taken sometime between 1861 and then. 

State Library of Victoria Image H2017.75/83. Image has been cropped , this was a stereograph, see the full image here http://handle.slv.vic.gov.au/10381/4193730

This bridge served the community well for many years but eventually became unsafe and thus the Colonies of New South Wales and Victoria started working towards a solution. To this end in January 1894 Mr. Catani, Victorian Engineer of Roads and Bridges, was sent up to inspect the Union Bridge, and reported that in his opinion a comparatively small expenditure would be sufficient to make the structure safe for another four or five years. This view being altogether at variance with the opinion of the Public Works Department of the New South Wales Government, it has been decided that Mr. Davidson, Victorian Inspector-General of Public Works, should make a special visit of inspection (3).

On Saturday, February 17 1894, Mr Davidson paid a visit to Albury and inspected the bridge with the grandly named Edmund Caswell Bowyer-Smijth, the Albury District Roads Engineer (4). Mr Davidson admitted the bridge was in a unsafe condition and also admitted  that 30 years was the lifetime of the best constructed timber bridge, and with the Union Bridge, which has been in position over 30 years, there were several conditions justifying the conclusion that the structure had run its length of time (5).

A month after the visit of Mr Davidson, The Argus reported that - The worn out bridge at Albury, known as the "union bridge", continues to stand while the two colonies, Victoria and New South Wales, are engaged in discussing whether it should be repaired or replaced by a new one. New South Wales favours a new one to cost about £14,000 and requests this colony to bear half the expenditure. Victoria, seeing the necessity for practising economy would rather act on the opinion of Mr Catani, of the Public Works department, that the old bridge can be repaired to last for three years at a cost of £300. Mr Davidson, the inspector general of Public Works, who has seen the bridge, agrees with Mr Catani, but suggests as an alternative that as the present bridge was erected 33 years ago for £7,500 a bridge of equal strength might now be erected for about £4,000 if New South Wales insists on a new structure (6).

It was more than two years later before the two Colonies agreed on the new bridge. In August 1896, The Age reported Mr. Taverner, the Victorian Minister for Works, has had an interview with Mr. Young, Minister of Works in New South Wales, with reference to the erection of bridges over the Murray. The  "union bridge" at Albury is in an insecure condition, mainly on account of its age, and an understanding was come to between Victoria and New South Wales that they shall conjointly bear the expense of erecting a new bridge, New South Wales to call for tenders for the work and to supervise the construction. There has been some delay in calling for tenders, owing to a difference of opinion between the colonies as to plans and cost. These have been settled, and Mr. Taverner has received an assurance from Mr. Young that no time will be lost in proceeding with the work (7).

Mr Ball, the local M.L.A., receives notification from Mr de Burgh of the N.S.W. Public Works Department, that work on the new bridge will start shortly.

Albury Banner & Wodonga Express, July 9, 1897 https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/99414054

Even after the two Colonies agreed,  it wasn't until nearly one year later that the contractors were ready to start and that was in July 1897 (8). All this time the locals and everyone else who used the main road from Melbourne to Sydney were inconvenienced with an unsafe bridge with severe load limits of which notices to that effect have been posted for some time on the main road in the vicinity of Albury. Heavily-laden wool teams have today been turning back from the bridge, the drivers being afraid to cross (9).

The Albury Banner had a full description of the new Union bridge -
The bridge, when completed, will be one of the finest in Australia. It consists of two truss spans of 110ft. each, two beam spans of 35ft. each, and one of 30ft. The width of the approach span is 28ft., and the main spans are 24ft. This is from kerb to kerb. These spans rest on three sets of cylinders, one set on each bank, which is solidly set on foundations of piles and concrete. The centre pier is placed in the middle of the stream, and in order to secure a solid foundation the contractors had to sink to a depth of 48 feet below the bed of the river. On the up stream side of the bridge there is a footway constructed over four feet wide. This will permit foot passengers to cross at any time independent of other traffic.... The timber used for trusses, girders, &c, is ironbark, and for the decking tallow wood has been used. All this had to be brought from the North Coast. Considerable difficulty has been experienced in getting the larger timber for girders, and it this that has caused the unfortunate delay in getting on with the work. It was thought that the bridge would be opened for traffic before the close of the year, but as the approaches on the Victorian side will not be finished until some time in January, there is no possibility of the new bridge being available for traffic until the latter end of that month. The bridge has been built at the joint cost of the two Governments, and will amount to close upon £7000. The Victorian approach will cost £900 extra, the contractors for which are Messrs. Toner and Mongan, who are pushing rapidly on with the work. The contractors for the bridge are Messrs. J. B. and W. Farquharson (10). Farquharsons were experienced bridge builders and in the 1890s had also built bridges on the Murray River at Swan Hill and Tocumwal (11).

The second Union Bridge. It appears to be still under construction.

Photographer: John Henry Harvey.

State Library of Victoria Image H2009.100/473

On December 21 1898, Ernest Macartney de Burgh, the New South Wales Department of Public Works Assistant Engineer for Bridges, together with Mr Bowyer-Smijth, made the final inspection of the bridge (12).  On December 30, Mr Davidson went to Wodonga to take over the work on the Victorian side from the contractor (13).  The bridge was thus at long last finished and was opened for traffic on December 31 1898 (14). Demolition of the old bridge began in early January (15).  As a matter of interest Carlo Catani and Ernest de Burgh were also both involved in two other projects - in 1900 on the bridge over the Murray between Koondrook and Barham ( read about this here) and in 1912 when Victoria was developing a policy on outer ports in towns such as Warrnambool and Mallacoota. At that time (1912) de Burgh was the Chief Engineer for Harbours in New South Wales (16). 

The locals wanted a grand opening ceremony, in fact they wanted a ceremony with befitting eclat (17) and the Shire of Wodonga and the Borough of Albury agreed that the day should be January 26, Anniversary Day and the 111th anniversary of the foundation of the mother colony (New South Wales) (18).  They hoped to invite the Premiers of both Colonies.  The Albury Banner said the opening ceremony would be a good opportunity to keep claims of Albury well to the front, and it should not be allowed to pass by unnoticed. Albury is destined to become an important inland city of Federated Australia, and that whether it is made the capital or not of the new nation (19). 

Alas, the hopes for a grand opening of the new bridge were dashed when the Premier refused to attend.  The New South Wales Premier, Sir George Houston Reid, is reported as saying that - he understood the bridge had not been opened for traffic when he was first communicated with. He had since been informed that this bridge had been opened some weeks ago for traffic. Under those circumstances he declined to come, and it would be absurd in the face of it to ask a representative lot of gentlemen to come all the way to Albury to take part in a second hand ceremony. If the mayor and aldermen wanted an opening, it was their own fault they did not find out when the bridge was to be finished, so that the Government of each colony might have taken part. They could have obtained that information very easily by walking to the bridge and asking the Government officer in charge, or by writing to the department in Sydney (20). 

Union Bridge, Albury, 1950

State Library of New South Wales Image 006556

The second Union Bridge was replaced in 1961.The Premier of New South Wales officially opened the replacement bridge on April 7, 1961 and the old bridge was later demolished (21).

The Age, April 6 1961

From Newspapers.com

Trove list - I have created a short list of articles on Trove about the Union Bridges, you can access it here.

Footnotes
(1) Albury Banner & Wodonga Express, December 9, 1898, see here.

(2) Albury Banner & Wodonga Express, September 4, 1861, see here.

(3) Albury Banner & Wodonga Express,  February 2, 1894, see here.

(4) Edmund Caswell Bowyer-Smijth was born in Norfolk in England in 1853, the third son of the Reverend Bowyer-Smijth of Attleborough, Norfolk. He married Annie Elizabeth Gray in Woollahra in Sydney in December 1884.  After 16 years as the Albury District Roads Engineer he retired in 1900.  Some time after he retired he returned to England where he died in 1921.

(5) Wodonga & Towong Sentinel, February 23, 1894, see here.

(6) The Argus, March 19 1894, see here.

(7) The Age, August 13, 1896, see here.

(8) Albury Banner & Wodonga Express, July 9, 1897, see here.

(9) The Argus, October 11, 1898, see here.

(10) Albury Banner & Wodonga Express, December 2, 1898, see here.

(11) Farquharsons - Sydney Morning Herald, December 4, 1896, see here; Sydney Morning Herald, December 29, 1925, see here.

(12) Albury Banner & Wodonga Express, December 23, 1898, see here.

(13) The Age, December 30 1898, see here.

(14) Albury Banner & Wodonga Express, January 6, 1899, see here.

(15) Tuesday, January 3, 1899 was when demolition commenced. Wodonga & Towong Sentinel  January 6, 1899, see here.

(16) Carlo Catani and Ernest Macartney de Burgh (1863-1929). List of articles on the Koondrook - Barham bridge, here and list of articles on the Outer Ports, here. De Burgh's entry in the Australian Dictionary of Biography, can be read here.

(17) Albury Banner & Wodonga Express, January 6, 1899, see here.

(18) Wagga Wagga Express, January 17, 1899, see here.

(19) Albury Banner & Wodonga Express, December 2, 1898, see here.

(20) Wagga Wagga Express, January 28, 1899, see here.

(21) I found out it was demolished from this Facebook post from the Albury & District Historical Society, here.