The Loughnan Affair again

A slightly different account of the Loughnan affair, and the matter of The Queen v. William Pearson was printed in the law columns of the Argus (Melbourne) on Tuesday, March 2, 1847 (p. 4), and gives an even more hairraising transcription of the crucial piece of evidence that was ultimately struck out and suppressed by Mr. Justice à Beckett (the italics are mine):

Friday, 26th February. Before his Honor the Resident Judge and the following Jury:— T. Armitstead (foreman), J. Barry, T. Armstrong, R. Alexander, D. Barry, J. Arthur, J.M’Ardlie, P. Annand, J. Allen, W. Bennett, P. Anderson, and J. Allee. Lachlan M’Alister, of Tarraville, Gipps Land, Esquire, was indicted for that he being a Justice of the Peace for the Territory of New South Wales, except for the City of Sydney and Town of Melbourne, and being of a turbulent, wicked, and malicious disposition, sent to one John Michael Loughnan a certain written challenge, in the words and figures following:— 

“Tarraville, 24th July. 1846. Dear Sir, Your reply to my note of this morning, of date the 24th July, 1846, I still consider as unsatisfactory, as yours previous to Mr. M’Alister; I have, therefore, to request that you will name a friend to confer with me for the purpose of arranging a meeting between you and Mr. M’Alister. I am, Your’s [sic] truly, W. Pearson” 

and the said John Michael Loughnan having refused to accept the said challenge, the said Lachlan M’Alister, to complete his wicked and evil purpose, stuck up and placed in front of a public inn, known as the Tarraville Inn, a placard in the words following:— 

“NOTICE. I hereby proclaim Mr. John Michael Loughnan, of Tarraville, to be a coward, a slanderer, and a liar. Against the peace, &c.” 

The second count charged the defendant with exciting the said John Michael Loughnan to fight a duel, to his great damage and terror. The Crown Prosecutor stated the case to the Jury. The case most lamentably failed, and defendant was acquitted.

The Queen v. W. Pearson.—The Crown Prosecutor said he should not prosecute this case. The Jury were then discharged, his Honor thanking them for their attendance, and the Court adjourned until Saturday, at 11 o’clock.

The outrageousness of this version consists in McAlister’s use of the word “NOTICE” and the concluding phrase “against the peace, &c.” by which he dressed up an already scandalous insult in the conceited disguise of an official public proclamation.

One final point may explain why Judge à Beckett contrived to make the whole problem go away. Only a little more than twelve months later, in the Port Phillip Government Gazette (number 34, pp. 334–339) Superintendent Charles La Trobe authorized forty-seven claims to leases of crown land in Gipps Land, “beyond the settled districts.” These amounted to a compendious accounting for the possessions of most if not all squatters on the entire length of territory stretching east of Melbourne and from the Murray to Bass Strait, and all three parties to the Loughnan affair were listed, viz.

No. 24. John Michael Loughnan, per Loughnan and Taylor [his Gippsland business partner, with whom, together with Commissioner Tyers, the whole sorry episode originated back in 1845] of Emu Vale (13,000 acres, 4000 sheep);

No. 25. L[achlan] Macalister of Boisdale (57,000 acres, 3400 head of cattle or 20,000 sheep) (the property adjoining Loughnan’s); and

No. 36. Helen Pearson (now W[illia]m. Pearson), Kilmary Park [sic] (12,800 acres, 1200 head of cattle).

Beyond his dubious official capacity as a justice of the peace for territories of New South Wales outside Sydney and Melbourne, already Lachlan McAlister’s great wealth was obviously a factor to be taken very seriously, if not an insuperable point of realpolitik.

The Loughnan Affair

A clearer account of the Loughnan affair is contained in the Maitland Mercury and Hunter River General Advertiser (Saturday, March 13, 1847, p. 4), along with an exact description of the sizzling evidence that was excluded from our great great-grandfather’s trial in Port Phillip for inciting John Loughnan to a breach of the peace.

John Michael Loughnan was born in England on June 11, 1806, and served in the 10th Bengal Cavalry. He was fort adjutant and aide-de-camp to the Governor-General, Lord Auckland, and left the Indian army with the rank of captain. In 1837 Loughnan brought his wife and rapidly multiplying family of seven sons and two daughters to Van Diemen’s Land. By 1842 he had also taken up Lindenow, some 40,000 acres on the Mitchell River, not long after William Pearson abandoned a much smaller portion of that run in favor of Kilmany Park, slightly west of Sale. With his brothers, Loughnan bought into other grazing properties in the district and presumably came into frequent contact with Pearson and his neighbor Lachlan McAlister, though Loughnan’s main residence continued to be Marionburn in Hobart Town. He was a reasonably able painter. 

The printed placard mentioned here was apparently affixed to the walls of the Tarraville inn, but copies were probably distributed much farther afield. No doubt the insult was made sharper by the conspicuous omission of Captain Loughnan’s correct military rank. Mr. Justice à Beckett’s curious handling of the case smacks of cronyism, and while there is no evidence that the judge (above) was in any way beholden to Lachlan McAlister or to William Pearson it is possible that à Beckett’s concern was that, in the absence of anyone more palatable, McAlister should not under any circumstances be disqualified from functioning as one of the only magistrates upholding the rule of law in East Gippsland faute de mieux—no matter how imperfectly. In any other context to dismiss Loughnan’s suit on the dubious grounds that there was no proof that William Pearson’s representations were actually authorized by McAlister was at best disingenuous, and at worst wholly fanciful:

Fighting Magistrates.—On the 26th February the case of Loughnan v. M’Alister, came on in the Supreme Court. In this case Mr. M’Alister, who was a magistrate, residing in Gipps Land, had challenged Mr. Loughnan, also residing there, to fight a duel, through Mr. Pearson, who acted as his second, and on Mr. Loughnan refusing, had caused printed placards to be posted up, as follows:- “Notice: I hereby declare Mr. John Loughnan, Tarra Ville, to be a coward, a scoundrel, and a liar. L[achlan]. M’Alister. 24th July, 1846.” On the information of Mr. Loughnan, Mr. M’Alister was now prosecuted criminally for inciting him to a breach of the peace. The case fell through, the Judge [William à Beckett] telling Mr. Pearson he need not answer any questions relative to a letter he had sent Mr. Loughnan desiring him to name a second to confer with him, and the Crown Prosecutor being prepared with no proof that Mr. M’Alister caused this letter to be written, or the printed notices to be posted. The jury, by direction of his Honor, acquitted Mr. M’Alister.—Abridged from the Port Phillip Patriot.