Redan shooting case

The Redan shooting case occurred in December 1920.

The case
The shooting was a terrible incident of carelessness with a loaded firearm: SENSATION AT REDAN. MYSTERIOUS SHOOTING CASE. MARRIED COUPLE SHOT. Redan, the southern suburb of Ballarat City, inhabited mainly by old-time miners and their descendants, was yesterday afternoon the scene of a shooting incident which nearly developed into a tragedy. It is not unlikely, according to appearances, that the more serious aspect may yet develop.

At about 3.45 p.m. the City Watchhouse-keeper (Constable Youdan) received a call from the Ballarat South Police Station to the effect that something had occurred in Talbot street south which necessitated the immediate attention of the police. Constable A. Daniels promptly cycled to the locality and was directed to the residence of Alfred Adams at 606 Talbot street, and learned that a shooting had taken place. In the adjoining premises, No. 604, Dr McGowan was busy attending to Lindsay Gordon Matthews, aged 27, who is said to be a lorry driver at Kitchen’s works, and his wife, Ruby Florence Matthews, aged 24, who is Adams’ daughter, both of whom were suffering from gunshot wounds. When Constable Daniels entered the yard of Adams' premises he found Adams seated on a tub. Daniels said, "What have you done now ?" to which Adams replied, "Nothing." The constable said, "What did you shoot the man for?" and Adams answered, "I did not shoot him—the gun exploded." Prior to this Daniels had been informed that at about 3.30 Adams obtained a gun from his room and went into the yard. He had previously said that he was going out shooting rabbits. His wife, and a single daughter rushed out and told him that he was not to go shooting that day. He replied, "Yes, I am." They tried to take the gun away, but Adams states that he held it above his head in both hands and it exploded.

Picking up the story from here Detective Hingston, Sergt. McLeod, Plainclothes Senior Constable Morgan and Constables Conybeare and Lloyd came on the scene. Constable Daniels handed Adams over to them and further investigations were pursued. It may here be pointed out that the residence of Adams and Mr Matthews adjoin each other with about 15 to 20 feet of space separating the buildings. Matthews is Adams’ son-in-law. It would seem that just at the moment of the shooting Mr and Mrs Matthews, who were going for a walk, left their home by the back porch, but were hardly outside the house when the explosion of a gun was heard. Matthews, who was facing towards Adams’ yard, received a large portion of a charge of No. 12 shot in his chest. He fell across a log in the yard bleeding profusely. His wife, who was standing side on, was struck by several pellets which entered her shoulder. She also fell screaming the while. This probably attracted the attention of neighbours and passers by, and a message reached Mrs McFarlane, wife of Sergt. McFarlane of Redan, who promptly notified Dr McGowan and the City Police. Dr McGowan having rendered first aid to his patients the City ambulance was procured and Matthews and his wife were conveyed to the hospital. Constable Conybeare taking charge of them. Both were admitted and the resident surgeons and Dr McGowan on examination found that Matthews had been shot through the lungs and was in a serious condition, evidently bleeding internally. Mrs Matthews was not so badly injured, but further trouble may ensue owing to the state of her health.

As may well be imagined the affair created an immense sensation in this quiet neighborhood, where the parties are all very well known, and in a very short time half the inhabitants of the neighborhood were soon congregated about the two houses, discussing the shooting from many and various points of view. Mrs Adams and her younger daughter, meanwhile, were subjected to lengthy examination by the police, while Adams himself was taken to the city watchhouse, and, after being warned, was questioned by Detective Hingston and Plain-clothes Constable Morgan.

Adams who appeared to be outwardly calm and collected, and showed no perturbation, made a statement to the police. He said that he left home between 12 and 1 o'clock on Tuesday afternoon, and had two glasses of beer at the Atlantic Hotel. He returned home about 3, and said to his wife, "I will get the gun, and a few cartridges, and go into the bush for a shot at a rabbit." Continuing, Adams' statement was, "I went into my bedroom and got a gun which was standing in a corner of the room, and went out into the yard. My wife and a daughter were in the kitchen. When I left the house they followed me into the yard. My wife said, "You are not going out shooting." I said, "I am going out. My wife and daughter, who were standing close by, tried to get the gun from me. I lifted it over my head with both my hands to prevent them from getting it, and it went off. I last used the gun about 10 or 12 weeks ago, shooting rabbits, and have not handled it since then till to-day, and did not know there was a live cartridge in the gun or in the house. When I took up the gun from the corner of the bedroom I removed the cover from it. I cannot say if the gun was cocked. I have had it for about 15 years, and have always been careful with it. It has never been my practice to leave live cartridges in the gun, and I cannot account for one being in it to-day. I did not see my son-in-law and his wife standing in their yard, which adjoins my premises. We were on the best of terms, and I never received any provocation from them." The gun was also taken to the police station. It is a weapon of Belgian make, a double-barrelled breech-loader with no maker's name on it. Both barrels seemed as though they had been recently fired, though such may not be the case. It may be stated also that the cartridge fired, presuming that one only was discharged, was a No. 12 Sley. The police found a number of pellets in the dividing fence. Portion of Matthews’ clothing was also taken to the watchhouse, the shirt being saturated with blood.

It is said that just prior to Mr and Mrs Matthews leaving their home they heard a call from Mrs Adams next door, and, wondering if anything was wrong, both hastily left the porch and went out into the yard. Just as they did so the gunfire was heard, and both fell. In addition to being struck in the chest, Matthews received some pellets in the face. Late inquiry last night revealed the fact that the condition of both Mr and Mrs Matthews remains about the same. The former's state is serious, but not at present dangerous.

"Redan Shooting Case.—The elderly man, Alfred Adams, who is charged with having wounded his daughter and son-in-law, will be formally presented at the City Police Court to-day, when an application will be made by the police for a further remand for a week. It will also he intimated to the Court that Mrs Matthews, accused’s daughter, has recovered sufficiently to leave the Hospital for her home, and that her husband is likely to be well enough to leave the institution in two or three weeks’ time."

Surprisingly, even though the accused was drunk with a loaded firearm, the court dismissed the case as an accident: REDAN SENSATION ADAMS BEFORE COURT. CULPABLE NEGLIGENCE NOT PROVED. BENCH BELIEVE ACCIDENT THEORY. Considerable interest was taken at the City Police Court yesterday morning in the hearing of the case against Arthur Adams, who was the centre of the sensation at Redan on 28th December. Adams was at first charged with having maliciously and unlawfully wounded Lindsay Gordon Matthews and his wife, Ruby Matthews, but at the request of Inspector Robinson, who prosecuted, the charge was altered to one of negligently using a gun, so that grievous bodily harm was inflicted on the persons mentioned.

Lindsay Gordon Matthews who stated that he was the son-in-law of accused, and resided next door to him, at 602 Talbot street south, said that at about 3.45 p.m. on the 28th December he and his wife and children were in their house, dressed, ready to go out. He remembered Mrs. Adams calling out to him. He went outside, and was followed by his wife and children. They were all standing near the back door. Between them and Adams' house was a paling fence. He remembered getting a “smack.” When he came out the accused was in his own yard, standing about 16 yards off. Witness saw his sister-in-law trying to take a gun from heir father, but did not remember it going off. He was hit in the face, and bled freely. The accused came to the fence and said something. To Mr Lazarus —There was no ill feeling between them. Adams was playing with witness’s children just prior to the shooting. The family was harmonious one. To the Bench—He did not see the gun pointed in his direction. Ruby Matthews stated that on the day of the shooting she was near the back door of her home. She heard her mother call out for Lindsay, and on going out saw her mother inside her own fence. The accused was in the yard with witness’s sister. He had a gun, which the latter was trying to take from him. Witness did not hear the gun go off, but felt the shots in her back. She saw her husband bleeding, and attended to him. She heard her father say, “I’m sorry, Lindsay; it was, an accident. I did not mean to do it,” They were all on good terms. To Mr Lazarus?—She did not know what led up to the incident.

Esperance May Adams stated that on the day of the shooting her father, mother, and herself, were all at home. Her father had gone out, and returned about 3 p.m. Witness gave him his dinner, and later he came back with his grandchildren and played with them for some time. After they went home he said he was going shooting. Witness’s mother told him not to go, but to have a rest. He, however, said that he would like to go, and he procured the gun from the back bedroom. Witness followed him into the back yard. She did not see the gun “broke.” Her father asked her for a shilling to buy cartridges, but she refused, so she did not think him responsible. Witness did not hear him say that he ad only one cartridge left. Witness asked her father give her the gun, and he replied, leave it alone; I won’t be very long.” The accused then walked in the direction of where a ferret was kept, and witness followed him. He said that he was going to take the ferret with him. She tried to get the gun away from him, and during the struggle the weapon exploded. She did not remember whether, she told the police any thing else. Mr Robinson —Why were you trying to get the gun away?—Because of his condition. He was terribly drunk; could hardly walk. The witness collapsed while her evidence was being read over to her, and was conveyed out of court until she recovered.

Dr Champion deposed that on 28th December, 1920, Lindsay Gordon Matthews and his wife, Ruby Matthews, were admitted to the Hospital. He saw them next day. The husband had gunshot wounds on the right side of the head and chest. There were 25 punctures, some superficial, but one had just missed the right eye, and others had penetrated the chest wall and injured the lung. He was suffering from shock, and was spitting blood, and for a time was in danger. Witness attended him up to the 15th inst., when he was discharged. With reference to Ruby Matthews, she was wounded in the right shoulder, back, and thigh. Her wounds were not serious. To Mr Lazarus—If a shot-gun goes off accidentally, does the shot spread much?—That would depend on the distance of the persons from the gun. John Fargher, bootmaker, who resides next door to the accused, said that the latter came to his shop twice during the day. The second time he appeared to have taken drink, but was not drunk. He got change from witness to give pennies to his grandchildren. Later in the afternoon witness heard the report of a gun. He went to Matthews’ house and was told that the latter had been shot. He saw he accused in his yard, and Adams said that it was an accident. Witness sent for the doctor and the police as quickly as possible. James Tresize, licensee of the Atlantic hotel, said that the accused was not drunk when he left the place.

Constable Daniel deposed to having been called from the watchhouse to Redan shortly after 3.10 p.m. On arriving he saw the accused sitting on a tub in the yard, and said to him, "What have you done now?" He replied "Nothing." Witness asked, "Why did you shoot the man next door, and he replied, "l did not shoot him", adding, "I went into the house and got my gun and said to my wife, "I am going out to shoot rabbits." She and my daughter said, "No you’re not going out." The girl tried to take the gun away. I put it up over my head holding it with both hands, and it exploded. I admit shooting my son-in-law, but I did not do it willfuly.” Witness said, “Did you have a row with your son-in-law?” and he replied, "No we have always been the best of friends. Witness asked “ "Where is the gun?" and Adams replied “In the kitchen." Witness found it there on the sofa. It had an empty cartridge in the right-hand barrel. The gun was a hard one to pull. Inspector Robinson— It has a seven pound pull. Mr Lazarus- It would go off in a struggle, though. Detective Hingston gave evidence of having removed Mr and Mrs Matthews to the hospital. Witness and Senior-Constable Morgan went to Adams’ house. Adams said, "l shot them, but it was purely accidental." Morgan said "How do you make it an accident?" and he replied with the same information as he had given Daniels. The accused said that he did not know that the gun was loaded or that he had a live cartridge on the premises. Plain-clothes Constable Morgan gave corroborative evidence.

This closed the case for the prosecution, and for the defence, Mr Lazarus claimed that the whole of the evidence was one way. The shooting was purely accidental, and though it was regrettable that the two persons were wounded, still there was not the slightest evidence of anything other than a mere accident. Mr Harris, P.M., said that the question of criminal or culpable negligence was a hard one to define. Criminal carelessness in the use of firearms was an offence on which the law was strong. It was the duty of all people to see that proper care was exercised with regard to the safety of other people. The most foolish thing possible was to leave a loaded gun in a house, or to point a gun at another person. In this case it may be taken for granted that Adams did not know that the gun was loaded and that it exploded in the struggle to get it away from him. Therefore it could not be said that there was culpable negligence, and the information would be dismissed in both cases.