Neild or Neil GILLIES
New South Wales Police Force
Regd. # ?
Service: From ? to ?
Died on: ?
Funeral date: ?
Funeral location: ?
Buried at: ?
Memorial at: ?
FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED ABOUT THIS PERSON, THEIR LIFE, THEIR CAREER AND THEIR DEATH.
PLEASE SEND PHOTOS AND INFORMATION TO Cal
Is often referred to as Neild Gillies in the news paper articles but Ancestry.com has a number of ‘hits’ from entries in NSW Police Gazettes up to 1930 with the first name being NEIL.
Evening News ( Sydney ) Thursday 23 September 1920 p 7 of 10
Constable Fired At
GEORGE’S RIVER CASE
George Thomas DAVISON. 66, was charged on remand at the Central Police Court to-day with shooting at Constable Neild Gillies, with Intent to do grievous bodily harm.
The evidence for the prosecution was that about 5.45p.m. on the 15th instant, the constable went to the accused’s residence, Castle-street, George’s River, a lonely spot surrounded by bush and scrub. Davidson was in a paddock about 30 yards from the house, and as Gillies approached he hurried inside and closed the door. The Constable knocked and called loudly, “Mr. Davison, I want to speak to you.”‘ Getting no response he turned away, and when about eight yards from the house he heard the door open. Looking back he saw the accused standing with the door partly open, and in his hand a double-barrelled gun pointing in his ( Gillies ) direction. Almost immediately an explosion occurred, and a shot passed close to the constable. Gillies ran back, and accused attempted to close the door, but he was overpowered, and the gun taken from him.
Evening News ( Sydney ) Friday 24 September 1920 p 4 of 8
Constable Fired At
GEORGE’S RIVER MAN ACCUSED
Examiner ( Launceston, Tasmania ) Friday 2 November 1928 p 8 of 14
An extraordinary application was made by George Thomas Davison, an elderly man, of Kogarah (N.S.W.), in the Full Court, Sydney, yesterday. Davison applied for a writ of mandamus, calling upon the Prime Minister of the Commonwealth requiring him to cause a referendum to be taken to ascertain whether the people of Australia would prefer military forces to be substituted for the police.
Three carefully written affidavits were filed by the applicant, who declared that a criminal in the police force had molested him to an alarming extent, that they had kidnapped him from his home and lands, and unlawfully imprisoned him in Kogarah for 14 days ; that the New South Wales police had held up a sure cure for cancer, and that the ‘keep to the left’ by-law was an absurdity.
The Chief Justice (Sir Philip Street), after reading the affidavits informed the applicant that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain his motion.
Mr. Davison then announced his intention of applying to the High Court.
Evening News ( Sydney ) Monday 13 May 1929 p 1 of 14
MAN WITH GRIEVANCE AGAINST POLICE
George Thomas Davison, a grey haired old man, has become a familiar figure In the Banco Court when the Full Bench is sitting. He appeared again to-day, armed with a bundle of legal-looking documents, and once more secured the attention of the Full Court for the consideration of a grievance which he has brought before the court on several occasions. Mr. Davison’s trouble is that he can not persuade the Full Court to grant him a writ of mandamus to compel the Premier to take a referendum on the questions of whether the military should be substituted for the police, and that the soldiers should be given land instead of increased pay, the money thus saved to be devoted to providing profitable work for the people.
In his affidavit in support of his application Mr. Davison declared that “Cancers have caused thousands of deaths to people and stock since 1902, through the stupidity and dishonesty of the N.B.W. police, who also ‘aided and abetted unbearable molestations against me, which the Premier did not reply to my complaint. So I hereby, for the safety and peace of all honest people of N.S.W, call upon the Premier and the N.S.W. Government to show cause in this Honorable Court within eight days of the filing of this affidavit, why a mandamus should not issue ordering that a referendum be placed before the people so that they may vote : Should the military be substituted for police or not.”
Mr. Justice James said the Court had no jurisdiction to deal with such a matter. “We have no power,” added his Honor, “to grant mandamus calling on the Premier to take a referendum. You will nave to put it before them as an election issue. That is the only course I can suggest’
And Mr. Davison, gathering up his papers, left the Court.