Charlotte Manning (1827-1858) - Warren and Ford Family History

Daniel Tree, publican, Crown and Sceptree, was charged with stealing a quantity of wearing apparel, the property of Thomas Bewick, of Goodwood, on the 20th instant. The prosecutor stated that about January his wife, with witness's consent, took service at the prisoner's as house-keeper at weekly wages, at the rate of £20 per annum. No agreement was signed, as Mr. Tree objected to sign any document. His wife left witness's home with a bundle of clothes. Witness went to see her on the Wednesday fol-lowing, and slept there. He went again on the next Satur-day, and on Sunday his wife came home to him. She re-mained in the service of the prisoner about three months, during which time witness was in the habit of going and and sleeping there, and his wife frequently came home to her own place.

Mr. Tree then told witness that he could not allow any man to sleep there, as he had lost several things. On the following Saturday he gave Tree notice that his wife should not remain in his service any longer than a week from that time. At the end of a week he went to Tree's to fetch his wife away. Tree said she should not go; she was his servant, and his wife refused to come away. Subsequently he met her in Hindley-street and persuaded her to leave the service.

They went up to Tree's in company with another man, and his wife demanded her clothes. He refused to give them up, but his wife said she should remain till she had them. Tree would not give them up. They threatened him to apply to the police, and he then gave them the property. There was a box belonging to witness full of things, two large bundles, and another box, which Tree told his wife he would let her have to take the things home in. They were all taken to witness's house about 12 days ago. His wife remained at home till Tuesday last; but on that day, as he was at work in a field near his house, he was told that his wife and a man had taken all the things away in a pony-cart.

He quickly repaired home and saw the cart going across the Park Lands. His wife had also gone across towards Tree's house. He ran after her, and dodged her about amongst a cluster of houses, and at last ferreted her out in a bed-room. He then went to Tree's, and saw the cart standing at the door empty. Tree was standing laughing at his door, and he (prosecutor) charged him with having his boxes in his possession again. He refused to deliver them up, and witness got a search- warrant.

The Bench (to the witness) — To make out this charge you must be able to prove that your wife has been living in a state of adultery with the prisoner.

The witness, in continuation, related some circumstances and repeated some conversations which he heard unobserved by the prisoner and his wife, which left no doubt of the adulterous intercourse carried on by the prisoner and prosecutor's wife. He also added that Tree advised her as to a plan to get away some money which he had secreted in his box in his own house. The clothes, consisting of several large bundles, were here produced, and identified by the prosecutor as his property.

The prosecutor stated that the reason his wife left her home was, as she stated, that she could get more drink at Tree's than he could afford to give her.

Remanded till next day.

Source : South Australian Register, May 23, 1851

MAYOR'S COURT. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS: THURSDAY. APRIL 16.

Fire in the open air.— Daniel Tree was charged with keeping a fire in the open air. There were two informations. Charles Smith proved that the fire was alight on Friday afternoon, April 10, and again at 4 o'clock on Saturday morning. Fined 20s., and 12s.

costs.

Source : South Australian Register, April 17, 1857

CORONER'S INQUEST.

On Monday an adjourned inquest was held before Dr. Woodforde, the Coroner, at the Rose Inn, Sturt-street, on the body of  Sarah Tree, the wife of Daniel Tree, whose death took place under the following circumstances.

Upon the Jury, who had been sworn in and who had viewed the deceased's body on the previous day, being assembled, the Coroner (addressing Mr. Tree and Mrs. Mundy, the midwife who had attended the deceased) told them it would be well for them to remain in

the room to hear the evidence, as it was possible something might occur to criminate them. He did not say it would be so; but it was right that they should have an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses if they thought fit.

The first witness called was Mary Hunt, married woman, who said she had been a neighbour of the deceased Mrs. Tree, whose body the Jury had seen. She was 38 years of age. Mrs. Tree was recently confined of twins a boy and girl. On Saturday, the 6th March, she sent

for witness about 8 o'clock in the morning. Witness went and found deceased, who thought she was in labour very ill. She asked that Mrs. Mundy, the midwife, might be sent for, and she was sent for. She arrived at about the middle of the day. Deceased from that time

seemed to go on very well, labour having commenced, until the next day at about 5 o'clock, when the first child was born. During the whole of the time she appeared as well as usual under the circumstances. There seemed to be no greater exhaustion than usual after the birth of the first child.

Directly after the birth of the first child Mrs. Mundy said there was another child. Witness was not present herself at the birth of the first

child, but went in directly afterwards. The second child was not born until Wednesday, the pains in the mean-time having been slow and lingering up to 11 or 12 o'clock on Tuesday night. Mrs. Mundy then sent for Mr. Tree to know whether a doctor should be fetched,

as Mrs. Tree grew worse, and the birth did not take place.

Mrs. Mundy told the husband that she should like a doctor sent for; but Mr. Tree said he did not see any danger, and he would give her a decided answer in the morning at 6 o'clock. He then went to bed again. At 6 o'clock he came back to the room and caught hold of

his wife's hand and felt it. He then called witness out-side and asked her if she knew what doctor Mrs. Mundy generally had to assist her. Witness enquired of Mrs. Mundy, who named Dr. Mayo.

Tree then caused Dr. Mayo to be sent for, and he came directly. He delivered the deceased of the second child in about 20 minutes or

half an hour. The deceased after that appeared to be very lively and not exhausted at all, as long as witness remained with her; that was a part of the day. Had seen her frequently since. Last Saturday morning she seemed pretty well and was not complaining. Was not aware that she had been complaining up to that time. On Saturday evening witness went to see her at about 7 o'clock. Saw no alteration in her then. She asked for drink, which witness gave her. AIso at her request raised her head higher on the pillow. She did not complain of

being any worse. Witness was going away, and she asked her not to do so. Witness went away, however for a short time, and when she came back at half-past 8 o'clock deceased was dead.

Previous to that— shortly after 7 o'clock— Mrs. Mundy went with witness to tell Dr. Mayo how deceased was getting on. Dr. Mayo then sent some medicine. Did not know what Mrs. Mundy told the doctor. Could not say whether or not the medicine was given. Witness never  aw any appearance of danger. Had had five children of her own. Believed deceased was treated with kindness both by  Mr. Tree and the midwife. They both did their duty by her. Had known Mr. Tree for nine or ten years; but not the deceased until her marriage with him, which was about nine months ago. Believed that deceased was a sober woman. The only medicine given to deceased before the doctor came was spirit of lavender and friars' balsam, two lots of the former— first 15 and then 20 drops ; and two lots of the latter— first 14 and then 15 drops. That was the only medicine given before Dr. Mayo was sent for. Witness counted the drops as Mr. Tree poured them out. Would swear there was no more than the quantity mentioned. Deceased, besides this, had a teaspoonful of  flour of sulphur in some peppermint water at her own request. She drank the liquid part of it; but the sulphur settled at the bottom of the glass. Deceased did not have too much intoxicating drink administered to her; no more than what witness gave her.

On the Saturday she had two small quantities of gin and half a nobbler of brandy in hot water. A wineglassful of spirit was as much as she had on either day. She had gruel and arrowroot given to her as she required them. Deceased only once asked her husband to send for a doctor to witness's knowledge. That was on Tuesday night. He replied, "My dear, nature must take its course. I will give Mrs. Mundy a decided answer to-morrow morning, at 6 o'clock. Mrs. Tree seemed satisfied at this. Mr. Tree spoke very kindly then. On one occasion he came home a little the worse for liquor. She remembered no other instance of the kind. He made use of no bad language, nor was he

violent in witness's presence. He went to take hold of Mrs. Tree's hand, asking her how she was getting on. She said, "I can't talk to you, Tree. Take him out, Mrs. Hunt." That was because she wanted to go to sleep. He went out quietly.

By the Coroner - Did not think it very kind of Tree to refuse to send for a doctor when his wife, in her agony asked him to do so.

By a Juror— The drink given to deceased last Saturday evening was cold peppermint and water. It was public-house peppermint.

Mr. Tree, in answer to a question from the Coroner, said it was essence of peppermint, with loaf sugar, made by himself. Some of the  peppermint was sent for. It appeared not to contain alcohol to any extent.

By a Juror— Never heard Tree make use of bad language throughout the confinement in the presence or hearing of deceased. Never heard him say, in reference to deceased, "I'll pull her out of bed by the hair of her head."

By a Juror— Both children were born dead.

By the Coroner— Mrs. Mundy assisted by all means to deliver deceased of the second child before Dr. Mayo came, but she used no violence, nor any instruments.

By a Juror— The nurse, Mrs. Duncan, was not in the room much during the labour. She came when she was called.

By the Coroner— Mrs. Mundy did not leave the house at all between the births of the two children. She sat beside Mrs. Tree the whole of the time, and had her meals in the room. Witness gave her assistance as a friend.

Ann Westbury, married woman, stated that she lived close to Mr. Tree's house. She corroborated a great deal of the preceding evidence, and said she first heard Mrs. Tree ask for medical assistance about half-past 3 o'clock on Saturday afternoon. That was previous to the

birth of the first child. Deceased asked Mrs. Mundy if she thought she ought not to have a doctor. Mrs. Mundy replied if she wished it Mr. Tree should be called.

Deceased said, "Do, dear," to witness, "call Mr. Tree directly." Witness went, and Mr. Tree came. He felt deceased's pulse and otherwise examined her. Then he said, "You are all right. D--n the doctors. I won't have a doctor in the house. They killed my other wives — two before you ; and I won't have one in my house."

Deceased then said, 'O, Mrs. Mundy, isn't he hard not to let me have a doctor." Mrs. Mundy replied, "He is hard, very hard." The  deceased told Mrs Mundy she must do the best she could for her, as he would not allow her a doctor. Did not hear her ask for a doctor at any other time. Never saw Tree the worse for liquor, nor heard him make any disturbance during the confinement. Saw no treatment on the part of Mrs. Mundy that she could disapprove of. She was very kind.

Elizabeth Duncan, the nurse who had attended deceased, corroborated the previous evidence as to the apparent absence of danger  during the labour, and stated that except on one occasion, when Tree was the worse for liquor, he was kind to deceased. On that occasion he said if she would not take care of some money he had he would pull her out of bed. That was on Thursday after the children were born. Heard deceased ask Tree to send for a doctor on Wednesday evening, when he replied he would give an answer at 6 the next morning.

By a Juror— Witness did not think there was any appearance of danger until between 2 or 3 o'clock, on Saturday last. Her breath was getting short then, Witness asked her if she was worse and she shook her head. Did not hear her speak after that. She gradually

got weaker till she died.

By a Juror— On Saturday afternoon last Mr. Tree was swearing in the room next to that where deceased was. He was rather the worse for liquor then. He complained that witness was not fit for a nurse, and that she did not sit up all night.

By a Juror— The medicine sent by the doctor was administered twice, according to directions. Tree also gave deceased some sulphur, once after the labour. Deceased took it at her own request.

By the Coroner— Never saw any danger in the course of the labour, but thought it strange that one child should be so long after the other.

George Mayo, a legally qualified medical practitioner, stated that he was called on last Wednesday morning, at about 7 o'clock, to see deceased. Mrs. Hunt called him,and said Mrs. Mundy wished him to bring the instruments and come directly. He went, and found Mrs.

Tree in labour. Having learnt all particulars he examined deceased, and saw that she was much exhausted from her protracted illness. Seeing her condition, he felt it necessary to deliver her immediately, which he did of a dead child. From the difficulties attending the state

of the deceased, she could not have been delivered without the instruments. A great deal of time had been lost, and deceased was very weak. The child had, apparently, been dead two or three days.

Witness treated deceased as usual, and then left her with the midwife, telling her to send for medicine, and to call him again if necessary. They never sent for the medicine, but the next day, feeling anxious, he rode up to the house and enquired how deceased was. The nurse then said she was getting on well, and he rode on. When he left deceased the day previously he thought she required medicine and great care for fear of puerperal fever. He told the midwife to send for the medicine.

The following day (Friday) he saw the witness Hunt in town, and she said deceased was doing very well. He did not call at the house again, because he was not expected, as the case was in the midwife's hands. Told Mrs. Hunt the medicine had not been sent for, and  expressed surprise that they had not sent to him. The same evening Mrs. Hunt and Mrs. Mundy called on him, and gave a favourable account of the state of deceased. He then sent some medicine, and promised to call in the morning. He called the next morning and found the deceased dying. No further message had been sent to him. Told Tree then that he thought she would die, and that he must send for some medicine in the hope of relieving her temporarily. The medicine was sent for. He did not again see her. When there he  complained of the state in which he found the patient. There was no one in the room with her. The nurse and Mr. Tree came in after-

wards. Deceased had the appearance of having been left in a neglected state, and he could get no information concerning her.

By the Coroner— Believed the cause of death to have been puerperal fever, induced by protracted labour and exhaustion. The labour was protracted improperly, and, if a medical man had been present, unnecessarily so.

There was nothing to prevent the delivery of the second child within two or three hours after the first. He met with no difficulty in delivering her. He could have delivered her with ease within an hour after the birth of the first child. Four hours should have been the longest period at which the second delivery should have taken place. From one to four hours should have been the utmost limit. Was confident the birth could have been brought about then with the greatest ease - as much ease as he experienced when he did deliver her. Had never heard of a midwife in this colony capable of using artificial means in cases of delivery. Never knew one profess to do so. It would have been culpable on the part of the midwife to have objected to call in a medical man. Believed that the midwife had used no improper treatment, and he must say that wherever he had met Mrs. Mundy she had shown great kindness and tenderness. He could state that no improper violence was used in this case and he believed no improper medicine was given from what he had heard, except that the friars' balsam might have burnt deceased's throat. Nor did he consider that death had been accelerated by any stimulants having been given. Had the patient been delivered sooner the puerperal fever might or might not have set in. In this case exhaustion and delay, he believed, induced the fever; but he could not assert it to be the case. Some times puerperal fever occurred when there had been no protracted labour. When he ordered the medicine he thought puerperal fever was likely to arise, therefore he ordered the medicine, but it was not sent for. Could not say whether the medicine would have prevented the fever or not ; but he considered the medicine as absolutely necessary to arrest the consequences which threatened. There was great culpability, he believed, in not sending for the medicine. Could not say where the culpability rested. Did not see Tree intoxicated at either of his visits. Deceased did not complain in witness's presence that medical assistance had not been sent for. She made no complaint.

Lucy Mundy, having been cautioned that her evidence might be possibly used against her, was sworn. She stated that she attended the deceased as midwife. After Dr. Mayo had been to the house she told Mr. Tree that Dr. Mayo had ordered the medicine to be sent for, and

that he (Tree) when he fetched it was to take the fee with him if he thought proper. Could not say whether Tree said he would go or not. Did not recollect his answer. She grumbled afterwards that the medicine was not fetched.

The Coroner told the Jury that he believed all the evidence that it was necessary to take was now before them, and the case was  therefore in their hands. His own opinion of the evidence was that it left no doubt as to the gross display of indifference and heartless

brutality on the part of Daniel Tree towards his wife. He was appealed to by the poor creature in her agony to send for medical assistance, and he refused to do so. That was conduct so cruel that he hardly knew how to characterize it. He felt bound thus to express his detestation of the man's behaviour, though at the same time he was aware there was no law which compelled a person to have a medical man in his house against his inclination. Such cases, therefore, it was hard to meet ; but he thanked God that its parallel did not often disgrace the colony.

With regard to Mrs. Mundy, there appeared to be nothing like guilt on her part, though she might be open to reproach. It had been shown that on the Sunday night, when the deceased expressed a desire for a medical man to be sent for, Mrs. Mundy did not object at all— indeed, she wished it. But the blame which attached to her was that she was not more decided. She should have insisted upon a medical man being sent for at any cost, as she knew the danger of the case. Her kindness, attention, and carefulness were not impeached; and perhaps it might be said she did not like to interfere against the decision of Tree, who was of a quarrelsome temper. She bore a great deal of fatigue herself, and her treatment of the patient was without violence of any kind. Still she should have insisted upon a surgeon

being sent for when it was necessary, and when she should have known it was necessary.

The Jury, after some deliberation, handed in the following verdict and opinion :—

"The Jury find that the death of Sarah Tree was caused by puerperal fever, induced by protracted fever and exhaustion.

"The Jury cannot separate without expressing their abhorrence of the brutal, unnatural, and unfeeling treatment evinced by the  husband, Daniel Tree, and of the neglect which it appeared he permitted the deceased to remain in during such an occasion.

With regard to Mrs. Mundy, the Jury recommend her to attend to the caution addressed to her by the Coroner."

The Coroner read the verdict to Tree, who had been present the whole time, seemingly quite uncomposed; and told him he hoped the time would soon come when he would be a reformed and better character than he was now. As to Mrs. Mundy, he would advise her for

the future never to remain in a house where a medical man was required and yet not sent for, as in this case.

If she committed the same error again, her offence would be much more serious than it had been.

Source : South Australian Register, March 15, 1859

EXTRAORDINARY CASE.- We cannot refrain from directing the attention of our readers to our report of the inquest upon the body of Mrs. Tree, deceased wife of Mr. Daniel Tree, of Gilbert-street. It is rarely that such horrifying details of brutality meet the public eye, nor

should we now seek to call notice to the case before us, were it not that justice and humanity plead for some consideration.

The unfortunate deceased appears by the evidence to have been abandoned in the most heartless manner, at a time and under circumstances when neglect is beyond description inhuman.

The Coroner very properly expressed his deep indignation at the brutal treatment experienced by the deceased ; but it is to little effect that Coroners express indignation, if Juries cannot give a verdict in accordance with the equity of the case. According to our report the Coroner stated that there was no law to compel persons to procure medical assistance; a doctrine which, if true, amounts to the legalization of murder. We need scarcely say that hundreds of cases occur in which patients, apart from medical aid, must be inevitably lost, who would as certainly be saved by timely assistance. We can scarcely believe it possible that the laws of the land sanction such fatal neglect as is implied in the wilful refusal to call in medical assistance at times of critical emergency. If a parent neglects to give his child food, he is chargeable, and justly too, with the murder of the child so neglected ; and no one can doubt that there are

cases in which medical treatment is as essential to life as food itself.

Such a verdict as the one recorded in the case adverted to, is the most extraordinary we ever heard of, and we have no doubt that the Jurors must have felt the anomaly of their position under the ruling of the Coroner.

Source : The South Australian Advertiser, March 15, 1859

WIFE DESERTION.

Daniel Tree, described as a laborer, but formerly a publican, was brought up charged by his wife, Eliza Tree, with deserting her on the 3rd 3rd of November, and with leaving her without the means of support.

The evidence of the complainant, given with a great deal of apparent truthfulness and candour, told a sad tale of cruelty on the part of her husband, the defendant, whose fourth wife she was. She said that before he was sent to gaol on the charge of deserting his children, he had threatened to break her (complainant's) head open; and that after he returned from there he took her wedding ring away from her, and asked her for a shawl, which he said belonged to his previous wife, and which she (complainant) had not.   After shaking her, he put out the candle, and pushed her into the yard; but she went round to the other door.

Afterwards Mrs. Hunt and she asked him to take her into the house, which he refused to do ; then asked him 'to give her shawl and bonnet on which he said he would see her d____d first She said to him that he had made an end of his other wives by his unkindness, and would do the same with her. He replied that he intended to do so.

He then locked the door, and set off, going over the Park Lands, and complainant following. In answer to the Bench, the complainant stated she had been married about May or Jane last Defendant had treated her badly before this occasion, but she had forgiven. Tiie prisoner tried to show by examination that complainant had ill-treated his children, but she denied the charge. This cross-questioning produced some 'interchange of recriminations, not very interesting to the public, and which were at last interrupted by the Bench.

The next witness, Mrs. Hunt, corroborated the statement of complainant, and said that in addition to the cruel expressions which the prisoner made use of when applied to the shelter his wife, he said he would make a little hell of her home too hot to hold her.  In  consequence of this refusal of shelter, Mrs. Tree asked witness to permit her to sleep for that night with witness, who said she could not, but afterwards despoke a bed for her at Boothman's, where she slept.

The prisoner contended that his walking away from his wife on a certain evening did not amount to a desertion. Mr. Beddome then replied that he had turned his wife out of doors, and threatened to make her home unfit for her to live in, which conduct amounted to a desertion.

He was ordered to be imprisoned for two months, and kept to hard labor, and to pay the costs of Court

Source :   South Australian Weekly Chronicle, November 12, 1859

DESERTING CHILDREN.— Daniel Tree was charged, on the information of Mr. T. W. Bee, Relieving Officer of the Destitute Asylum, with deserting his three children, all under 10 years of age.

Mr. Bee stated that the defendant came to him on Thursday morning and asked witness to take his three children into the Asylum.

Refused, and he went away. Shortly afterwards he brought them again. Left them there and ran away.

The defendant said nothing to defend himself. His Worship said that be had given no proof that he was unable to support his children. He must go to prison for two calendar months.

Source : The South Australian Register, August 6, 1860

SUDDEN ILLNESS.— On Thursday morning early Daniel Tree, an old colonist, who lives near Gouger-street, was sent to the Adelaide

Hospital by Dr. Davies, and treated for several internal complaints, but in the afternoon he left of his own accord, and was shortly after brought back by the police, who stated that he had become suddenly unwell near the Bell Inn.

He was insensible, and has not recovered consciousness, so that the cause of his later illness is not known.

Source : South Australian Register, January 26, 1872

FAMOUS LAST WORDS:

Two years ago Mr. William Griffiths Tree, of Old Warna homestead, Talia, had his headstone made. The stone, which

vividly outlined his background from swagman to farmer and' grazier, had a space left for the date of his death.

Mr. W. G. Tree died on July 31, aged 78. Here is his unusual epitaph:—

Ever Remembered Wiliam Griffiths Tree

Born Bramfield Sep. 26, 1880.  Died .:' 19

From Swagman, Worker, Shearer and Pioneer to Farmer and Grazier.

-A lifetime of service to the land.'

' ' Shearing Tallies—Blades : Year Sheep

1910 ..... 607  ..  4 days

1911 .... 825  ..  6 days

1911.... 2,052  ..  151 days

1911 .....6,762 for season

1912  ....6,167 for season.

Source : Port Lincoln Times, September 3, 1959