FELONS' APPREHENSION ACT (ACT 612)
Kelly "enforced outlaw"
The Felons' Apprehension Act was not enough in its own right to outlaw
an individual, but was used in conjunction with bench warrants, and a
declaration of specifically named outlaw/s. In November 1878, it was enacted
against all four members of the newly formed 'Kelly gang' (Ned and Dan
Kelly, Steve Hart and Joseph Byrne). It was speedily passed through the
Victorian parliament in response to the shooting of three police at Stringybark
Creek on the 26th of October 1878.
i. The Felons' Apprehension Act
ii. Its main purpose
iii. Kelly gang become outlaws - how and when?
iv. Why did the government make the gang outlaws?
v. The rights of an outlaw. What did it mean to be an
vii. How long were the gang outlaws? (Nedkellybushranger
viii. Were they aware of when it ended?
ix. Was the Act justified by the Government?
x. What was the gangs' reaction to being made outlaws?
xi. Did it work?
xii. Sources Consulted
is the Felons' Apprehension Act?
'Felons' Apprehension Act' was a modification of the 'Outlawry Act' used
by the New South Wales government against Ben Hall and his gang in 1865.
The Outlawing of Ben Hall was perceived to be expedient, and so a quickly
drafted Bill (which was an amended version of the NSW Act), was presented
to and passed, by both houses of the Victorian parliament, in the hope
of an efficient capture of the Kelly gang.
Be it from ineffectiveness, or the appearance of barbarity, this type
of Act had been unused in Britain for many centuries. So it was surprisingly
archaic that as recently as the latter half of the 19th century, the Victorian
and New South Welsh Governments revived this implacable and obdurate law.
It was the most
serious law any parliament could enact against an individual. (Notably
it was a law that was not necessarily supported in every respect by all
parliamentarians). Normal rights under the law, including 'assumption
of innocence', were revoked for those persons named by a Supreme Court
warrant under the Act. The offenders were legally considered guilty without
the usual pre-requisite of a trial, and in 1878 the crime of murder was
punishable by execution. Therefore the lives of an 'outlaw' were considered
forfeited, and so once the Act was in force against an individual, killing
that person became a 'legal' action. There were 10 clauses within the
Act, one of the most significant being clause 5, which effectively made
a criminal of any person providing any form of assistance to the gang.
part of the Act, along with the status of outlaw, a large sum of reward
money was placed on the gang member's heads, dead or alive, starting at
£200 each, and eventually reaching 10 times that amount. Despite
such a large sum the gang eluded police until capture at Glenrowan, 20
months after the incident had occurred by which they were proclaimed outlaws.
was the main purpose of the Act?
In an address
to the Legislative Council on the 31st of October, the Hon. H. Cuthbert
implored that the Bill be passed that evening. He explained, "
Bill is framed for the purpose of enabling the ends of justice to be carried
into effect against a gang of ruffians that have committed grave and serious
outrages during the last few days
sometimes occasions arise - and
the outrages lately committed form one - in which we may fairly assume
from the facts revealed that the accused is guilty and we may come to
that conclusion even before conviction
Now this Bill is to enable
every well-disposed subject of Her Majesty, whether a police officer or
civilian, to take and apprehend these men - to take them alive or dead."
Sir B. O'Loghlen had, the previous day in the Legislative Assembly, moved
that the Bill be introduced, in order "to facilitate the taking
or apprehending of persons charged with certain felonies, and the punishment
of those by whom they are harboured."
So at its
most basic, the Act was a reversal of the assumption of innocence for
the outlaws - markedly it was also a reversal of an assumption of innocence
of those assisting, or even suspected of assisting, the outlaws.
It enabled a member of the police force, or indeed any civilian, to
capture or kill the outlaw/s within the limits of the Colony, without
fear of being held legally accountable for the method used in the apprehension
or death, of said outlaw/s. The use of any deadly weapon was permitted
against the outlaws without its use being preceded by a warning, (such
as demand for surrender).
Those with warrants issued against them under the provisions of the
Act, were treated as though they had already been found guilty. It was
presumed that apprehension would be made easier by removing the normal
laws of protection, and thus increasing the odds by allowing anyone
to capture or kill the outlaws, by any means. By placing the gang outside
the pale of the law, it was also presumed they could be captured in
such a way that would minimize the risk of further loss of police or
The objective of the Act was
to make evasion of the law for the Kelly's more difficult, and to facilitate
their pursuers in their capture.
when did the Kelly gang become outlaws?
Parliament was in session
at the time the news of the Stringybark killings was made public. The
outrage of the general public didn't take long to filter through to the
government. Thereafter it was a relatively simple matter of presenting
the Felons' Apprehension Bill to the Legislative Assembly for parliamentary
debate, 3 readings of the Bill and tabling a vote. The Bill was passed
the day it was presented. The following day the same process was repeated
through the Legislative Council. The day after it was passed the Bill
became an Act of parliament, when it received assent from the Governor
of the Colony, Sir George Ferguson Bowen.
The Bill, although urgent, was thought by some to have been passed with
incongruous haste considering it was such serious and punitive legislation.
Regardless of the opposition or uncertainty by some MP's, the act was
passed in both houses and assent received, all within 3 days. The shootings
had occurred only one week prior.
Frequently provisions would
not come into effect until they were proclaimed. Proclamations were made
by the Governor, specifying the date or dates of operation, and were published
in the Government Gazette. A number of proclamations may have been given
over a period of time for just one Act, with different sections commencing
at different times. This was the case for the Felons' Apprehension Act
612 of 1878. This Act required the issuing of a bench warrant, a public
demand for surrender by a certain date, after which, if the demand was
not complied with the second part of the Act would be made active, and
those with warrant issued against them would be declared outlaws.
- Stringybark Creek shootings.
29th October - Notice of reward for murders was distributed amongst
local police stations. The reward of £800 was to be offered by the
government for the arrest and conviction of the accused, (at £200
Prison photos of Ned and Dan were distributed to various police stations
(including Adelaide and Sydney).
30th October - Felons' Apprehension Bill introduced, and passed
by Legislative Assembly.
31st October - Felons' Apprehension Bill introduced, and passed
by Legislative Council.
1st November - Felons' Apprehension Bill given assent by Victorian
Governor Sir George Ferguson Bowen. The Governor's formal assent translated
the Bill into an Act of Parliament.
4th November - Bench warrants issued and gazetted.
On the testimony of the witness Constable McIntyre, the Crown Solicitor
made an application to Chief Justice Stawell, who then issued bench warrants
under the Felons' Apprehension Act, and ordered a summons to be inserted
in the Government Gazette calling upon Edward Kelly and Daniel Kelly to
surrender themselves to be tried for murder. Similar warrants were issued
against two men whose names were unknown, but were supposed to be 'identical'
to Charlie Brown and Billy King. Notice was given that if the 4 accused
did not surrender on or before 12th November 1878, they would be proclaimed
The reward was increased at this time to £2,000, (at £500
for each offender).
12th November - Deadline for surrender.
A telegram was sent to Sub-Inspector J.Pewtress, from Superintendent Sadlier,
informing him that the gang had not capitulated. "The Mansfield Police
court was open from 9am till 11 pm this day and I was in attendance during
the time and the men mentioned in the annexed notices did not surrender."
15th November - Act enabled fully. Under its provisions, the Kellys
were proclaimed outlaws from this date.
(*Clause 9 provided that the Act should continue in force 'until the end
of the next session of parliament'.) Joe Byrne's identity known by police.
10th December - Euroa bank robbery. Steve Hart formally identified
as the forth member of the gang.
12th December - Telegram sent by Sergeant Burland to various police
stations with correct names, and detailed descriptions of all 4 members
of the Kelly gang.
13th December - Reward published in Government Gazette at £2,500
- Jerilderie bank hold up.
15th February - NSW issue reward totaling £4,000, (or £1,000
for each outlaw). The Victorian Government increase its reward to match.
With the inclusion of the NSW reward the combined total increased to £8,000.00,
(or £2,000.00 per outlaw), which was an astronomical sum at the
18th February - New South Wales Government Gazette proclamation
of reward. The Victorian warrants had been endorsed in NSW. Along with
the gazetting of the reward, the New South Welsh government proclaimed
the Felons Apprehension Act to have force in the colony of NSW.
20th December - 'The Expiring Laws Continuance Act 1879', Act 648,
was passed. This Act included, amongst others, Act 612 (The Felons' Apprehension
Act), which would otherwise expire. Act 612 therefore continued, "in
full force and effect until the end of the next session of Parliament",
(i.e. June 1880).
- 'Notice of Withdrawal of Reward' posted by Government. It stated that
after 20th July 1880 the Government would "absolutely cancel and
withdraw the offer for the reward".
26th June - Prorogation of winter parliamentary session resulting
in the expiry of the Felons' Apprehension Act 612. The
gang's outlaw status is no longer in effect after the prorogation.*
Aaron Sherritt murdered.
27th - 28th June - Glenrowan Siege. Death of Joe Byrne, Dan Kelly
and Steve Hart. Ned Kelly captured.
what basis did the Government place the Kelly gang outside the law?
To use such a
severe law, a major felony needed to have been perpetrated, or believed
to have been perpetrated. During the period that Ben Hall's Gang had operated
in NSW during 1865, The Outlawry Act had been passed by the NSW legislature.
Its use was seen to be effective and so the Victorian administration was
quick to pass an Act modeled along similar lines in Victoria against the
Kelly gang. Parliament believed that the general outrage felt by Victorians
required a dramatic and forceful supportive response. The Felons' Apprehension
Act of 1878 was certainly that.
In the case of
The Kelly Gang, the Act was enabled as a result of eyewitness testimony
before a justice of the peace, from Constable McIntyre, regarding the
shooting deaths of three police at Stringy Bark Creek, (Sergeant Kennedy,
and Constables Lonigan and Scanlon). McIntyre was a credible witness,
three police were dead, and the general public wanted justice and protection.
did an outlaw have?
the criminal was offered the right to surrender in order to be tried.
If they did not surrender by a given date, then they would be declared
outlaw and 'normal' rights as a citizen were then removed.
An outlaw was an individual specifically declared by an act of parliament
to be 'outside the law'. Laws that normally protected a citizen no longer
applied, effectively making the subject named in a bench warrant to be
considered and treated separately to other citizens. Once a person was
officially declared an outlaw, in the eyes of the law their lives were
'forfeited' and thus they could be killed without challenge.
During Victorian Parliamentary
debates of 1878 MP Dr. Madden was recorded as saying, "
this Bill a person may stalk them; he may steal upon them, and shoot them
down as he would shoot kangaroo."
The Age Newspaper (issue 16/11/1878) explained to its readers, "An
Outlaw may be shot down whenever and wherever found within the limits
of the Colony." In other words, shot on sight by anyone who cared
to do so, without that person being subject to prosecution in any way
for the killing.
Thus with the outlaw status imposed upon them, Ned and his gang were subject
to the very real possibility of being killed at any time by anyone, without
demand for surrender or any process of arrest or trial.
One right, however, that was
not affected under the provisions of the Act, was the subject's right
to self-defence as it applied to accused persons, (Judge Barry acknowledged
this in a ruling he made during Ned's trial in 1880).
Kelly gang 'sympathisers' held under the Felons' Apprehension Act?
One important and deliberate
part of the Act was that any person harboring the outlaws, or aiding them
with information or supplies, or withholding or giving false information
to the police, made him or her susceptible to a heavy prison sentence.
During the Parliamentary debate 31st October 1878, it was explained that
Clause 5 provided that "
any person shall voluntarily or knowingly harbour, conceal, or receive,
or give any aid, shelter, or sustenance to such outlaw, or provide him
with fire-arms or any other weapon, or with ammunition, or any horse,
equipment, or other assistance
" or directly or indirectly
give information to enable to him to commit further crime or to escape
from justice, shall be liable to imprisonment "for a term not
exceeding 15 years, as the court shall determine."
(It goes on to say, "But there is a safeguard. If any person has
been compelled to harbour, conceal, or to give assistance to the outlaw,
as soon as the compulsion is removed, he can clear himself from the consequences
of his act, by going to a justice of the peace or a police officer and
detailing the facts.")
The Kelly gang had many sympathisers
and a very effective 'bush telegraph'. They were supplied with information
and provisions, and in return paid their supporters from the proceeds
of their bank robberies. The Government had to find a way to cut this
supply of information and food. They attempted to use a loose interpretation
of clause 5 of the Act to break this supply.
Beginning on 2nd January 1879, the police arrested 30 'suspected' Kelly
sympathisers and detained them in Beechworth gaol. 23 were subsequently
charged, and over the next four months many of them were repeatedly remanded
in custody while the court awaited the presentation of police evidence
against them. By 22 April, eleven men were still inside the gaol without
having a police case laid against them, or an opportunity to defend themselves.
The suspected sympathisers were farmers and incarcerated at a time when
crops needed harvesting. However the Police disregarded such concerns
in the belief that the higher priority was to capture the gang, and they
believed they had arrested the gang's essential resource suppliers. It
was thought that by breaking their supply line, the gang would need to
find alternate sources, and that in doing this they would need to come
out of hiding. Undoubtedly the police were also mindful of the example
they were making for any other persons who might have been considering
giving assistance to the gang.
Neither of these objectives
appeared to have worked. It did not take long for the injustice of remanding
prisoners without evidence, to be publicly questioned. The action gave
the impression to the general public that law and its usage was not always
fair and equitable. In fact the police and government's perceived misuse
of the power given to them by the Act, ultimately managed to influence
public opinion against them. Thus by default, sympathy was increased for
the gang, including from people who might otherwise not have been supportive.
Clause 5, however, did leave
the gang in somewhat of a quandary. They knew that they put at risk anyone
whose assistance they accepted, and would almost certainly have made the
gang somewhat more cautious about whom they approached. For the gang however,
receiving help was a matter of basic survival, and fortunately for them
they had enough supporters who disregarded the personal risk.
Overall the measure was therefore wholly ineffective, as not only did
public opinion alter, but also the action did not inhibit the gang's supply
of information or provisions.
If assistance were provided
to the gang after the Act expired (26/06/1880), prosecuting a person under
section 5 of the Act was not actually legally plausible. Interestingly,
the day Ned was executed, Mrs. Jones (proprietor of the Glenrowan Inn)
was arrested and charged under clause 5 with aiding and abetting the outlaws.
This was the last time that the provision was used, and ultimately she
did their outlaw status cease?
The gangs outlaw status ceased
at the same time as the Felons' Apprehension Act.
As previously indicated, the
status of 'outlaw' was not indefinite. Initially when passed, the duration
of the Act was approximately one year. Clause 10 held that the Act was
effective until the prorogation of the following sitting of parliament.
No doubt the idea that the Kelly gang would evade capture for any longer
than a year was not thought likely, however the option to extend the Act
was considered. If found advantageous the Act could be either continued
by a further Act of Parliament, or allowed to expire. It was continued
by another Act (648) in December 1879, 'until the end of the next sitting
of parliament'. The prorogation of the sitting of parliament referred
to, was June 26th 1880.
In the case of the Kelly gang,
J.J. Kenneally argued that because of the dissolution of the Berry
government in February 1880, the Act and outlaw status lapsed. There was
no provision for such a circumstance in the Act however and so this is
incorrect. From the Parliamentary papers of December 1879, we can see
the Act was still in force, and further extended until the end of the
next session of Parliament.
Frances Hare was therefore more correct in his belief that the gangs'
outlawry status lapsed from the prorogation on Saturday the 26th June
1880, (that evening Sherritt was shot). He told the commission board of
his understanding that the Felons' Apprehension Act became inoperative
as soon as the parliament dissolved. (The Governor gave the dissolution
on the Saturday, and on the Monday morning all 4 outlaws were captured
or killed.) The majority of the police engaged in the Kelly pursuit therefore
presumably also held the same belief as Hare, that the gang we no longer
outlaws at the time of the siege.
Ned and the gang aware of when the Act was due to expire?
This is a question that is
impossible to answer definitively. The behavior of the gang tends to indicate
that they did not know when, or even if, their outlawry expired. It is
unlikely that they would have paid intimate attention to the details of
Parliamentary debates, particularly if they believed that their outlawry
was not likely to alter. Yet, it is of course possible that they were
aware that by Glenrowan they were no longer legally outlaws, however their
behavior around this time does not reflect this.
If perhaps the Kelly's, and
their sympathisers, as well as the police, were all aware that the gang
were no longer outlaws - it would have been reasonable for the gang to
assume that they were still in danger from members of the general public
and bounty hunters, who most likely would not have been aware of the Act's
expiration. Notably along with the Act their bench warrants would have
expired. Ned and Dan still had prior warrants issued for their arrest
for attempted murder of Fitzpatrick, although technically Steve and Joe
did not. It is reasonable to assume however, that the police would have
promptly issued further warrants for them. So for all intents and purposes
the gang remained hunted outlaws, regardless of their resumed legal status
of protected citizen under the law.
John McQuilton suggests evidence that the gang knew nothing about
the expiry of the bench warrants, "With the reward and the Felons
Apprehension Act due to expire in July (if the latter had not already
done so), the gang's emergence from hiding in June 1880 is something of
Government justified in declaring the Kelly gang outlaws?
It has been argued that the
Act was an admission of the inefficiency of the police, who theoretically
should have been able to apprehend four young criminals, without the need
for such excessive proclamations.
In response to this assertion, one needs to consider a number of factors.
It was suggested during the reading of the Bill to the Legislative Assembly,
that the "haunt" of the murderers was mountainous, rugged, inaccessible
and thinly populated. The degree of difficulty in apprehending them was
therefore increased and therefore despite the Bill being a "very
stringent one", the government would not have been "justified
in neglecting any conceivable means of putting an end to the outrages
Also, where information had been made under oath that a felony punishable
by the law of the day with death had been committed, it was presumed that
person would resist all normal methods of arrest, and the Act would therefore
allow more drastic measures for apprehension.
The Victorian government had the example of that same course of action
being seen to be effective in NSW only 13 years earlier. The public's
outraged reaction to the police shootings, their subsequent fear, anxiety,
and impatience for the gang to be apprehended, would have put added pressure
on the authorities. The basic intention of the Act was to capture the
criminals as quickly as possible, while limiting the chance of further
loss of police and civilian lives.
The act of multiple homicide at Stringybark Creek of police officers no
less (only later argued to be self-defence), certainly gave apparent justification
to the Government's decision to evoke the penalty of 'outlaw' against
the four perpetrators. It was a harsh law, but was designed to capture
them quickly and stop the assistance they received. In the line of duty
three police were killed at Stringy Bark Creek and a credible witness
had testified to the gangs guilt, leading the Government to Outlaw the
gang. When taking all these factors into consideration, and viewing the
situation through 19th century eyes, it could be fair to say that they
were in fact justified in evoking the Act and declaring the gang outlaws.
the counter argument that has also been put forth, that the Act and
proclamations were made without appropriate regard to the possibly dangerous
repercussions of choosing such a zealous course, has considerable merit.
It would be fair to claim that all possible repercussions and alternatives
were not considered thoroughly. Certainly the Bill was passed with unnecessarily
haste. A clear indication of this premature action was that the identities
of two of the four men accused were still unknown, with only vague descriptions
given. In concrete terms what this meant was that, at the time of the
gang's outlawing, it was more or less 'legal' to shoot dead anyone simply
seen with, or known to Ned and Dan. In other words anyone who was merely
'suspected' of being their accomplices was at serious risk. The actual
fact was that such persons might have been entirely innocent with no
evidence against them.
Additionally, as it was not apparently effective, more consideration
could have been given to the extension of the Act in December 1879.
did Ned and the gang have to being made outlaws?
In 1929 J.J. Kenneally argued
that the Felons' Apprehension Act was a declaration of war against the
gang. Something to consider about this argument is that much of Kenneally's
opinions were formed from information he obtained from Thomas Lloyd, so
it is plausible that the gang and their active sympathisers did see the
Felons' Apprehension Act as an Act of war.
Following this line of reasoning, the actions of the gang become better
understood. In order to survive and fight this 'war', the gang required
funds. What the gang could do to survive was limited by the Act by clause
5. Anytime they accepted funds or supplies from friends or sympathisers,
they put those who helped them at risk from harsh punishment by law. So
the subsequent bank robberies at Euroa and Jerilderie, could therefore
be justified as necessities of war. In addition the gangs' failed plans
for June 1880, as we understand them, are therefore made clearer, as 'war'
would mean that Glenrowan was a deliberately chosen battle site.
Although we have no documentation
to determine how the other members of the gang reacted, Ned clearly resented
being outlawed. In the Cameron letter in December 1878, he said, "
was outlawed without any cause and cannot be no worse and have but once
to die." This statement indicates he considered himself to have
been judged unfairly, and that the only outcome he could foresee was that
of his own death. Then expressing his desperation and obvious belief that
he had nothing further to loose, he goes on to warn, "
the public do not see justice done I will seek revenge for the name and
character which has been given to me and my relations
A month later, in a letter to Chief Secretary supposedly written by Ned
it states, "Beware, for we are now desperate men."
Then in March 1879, the New South Welsh Premier Sir Henry Parkes, received
a letter written by Ned. In it he declares, "I do not intend to
be taken alive".
The reaction Ned particularly had to being made an outlaw was predominantly
one of anger. No doubt it was a rancor intermingled with a certain amount
of understandable fear. However, they were not the first Bushrangers to
have been made outlaws in Australia. So after the homicide of three policemen,
although not welcoming the government's decision, even Ned would not have
been entirely surprised by the enabling of the Act.
the Act achieve its objectives? Was declaring the gang outlaws effective?
Considering the gang were
not caught until what was arguably by their own error, some 19 ½
months after being made outlaws, it would be fair to suggest that the
Felons' Apprehension Act did nothing to shorten their freedom. Notably
the gang's destruction was in fact after the Act was no longer in effect.
Additionally the loss of lives at Glenrowan belied the assumption that
the Act's instigation would reduce the chance of further loss of innocent
The Act pre-determined the
fate of the outlaws, giving them all death sentences before any jury
could consider their circumstances, and in this way, the outlaw status
effectively put them immediately in a position of desperation. Had the
gang actually been the cowardly murderers they were believed to be,
by making them outlaws the government could have provoked them into
a disastrous retaliation. After all, after being made outlaws, nothing
they could have done would have made their positions any worse.
We do not have details of their plans of Glenrowan, but it would be
fair to assume that they would not necessarily have chosen attack as
their best form of defence, had they felt they had any other option
than that of death, which was placed on them by their outlaw status.
If one assumes that if the plan for Glenrowan had been successful, it
could have resulted in great loss of lives, then one must also consider
whether or not the gang would have chosen that course of action had
they not been hunted outlaws. The bottom line was that, assuming they
managed to protect their families and friends, once made outlaws, Ned,
Joe, Dan and Steve personally had nothing further to loose by their
choice of actions thereafter.
In the book 'Kelly Hunters', Frank Clune eloquently said of the
Act, "If they were outlawed their position could not be any
worse than it was
The legal rigmarole had no reality for them.
A man who is proclaimed an outlaw with a price on his head, dead or
alive, can only be made more desperate by that proclamation than he
Apprehension Act was meant to make pursuing the Kelly gang easier by empowering
their pursuers who were not required to consider that gang member's legal
or humane treatment. This presumably gave the pursuers the advantage,
however, the concept that the gang had nothing to loose was not lost on
the police. The perceived danger from the gang would have therefore been
increased, effectively managing to disempower the pursuers, particularly
as the gang's legend grew over time.
The main objective of the Act was to make circumstances more difficult
for the Kelly's, and in addition make conditions easier for their pursuers.
Therefore considering all these factors, it would be fair to say that
not only was declaring the gang outlaws not effective, it was ultimately
* I am happy to have provided the first in-depth
clarification of this issue.
Parliamentary Papers 1878 - 1881
Victorian Acts of Parliament 1878 - 1880
The Royal Commission into the Victorian Police 1881
Carroll, Brian 'Ned
Kelly Bushranger' Landsdowne Press 1980
Clune, Frank 'The Kelly Hunters' Angus and Robertson 1955
Dean, Gary & Balcarek, Dagmar 'Ned and the others' Glen Rowan Cobb
& Co.Pty.Ltd. 1995
Kenneally, J.J. 'The Inner History of The Kelly Gang' Kelly Gang publishing
Malony, John 'I am Ned Kelly' Penguin Books 1980
McMenomy, Keith 'Ned Kelly The Authentic Illustrated Story' Currey
O'Neil Ross Pty Ltd 1984
McQuilton, John 'The Kelly Outbreak 1878-1880' Melbourne University Press
Meredith, John & Scott, Bill 'Ned Kelly After a Century of Acrimony'
Landsdowne Press 1980
Nunn, Wannan & Prior 'A Pictorial History of Bushrangers' Landsdowne
Phillips, John H 'The Trial of Ned Kelly' The Law Book Company Ltd. 1987
Seal, Graham 'The Outlaw Legend' Cambridge Press 1996
White, Charles 'The History of Bushranging' Lloyd O'Neil Pty.Ltd. 1970
Researched by N. Cowie
(additional directed research assistance from D.White)
Data compiled, analysed, written and presented by N.Cowie
Published July 5th 2002
to Top of Page>>
| Quick History | Time
Line | Gang Details
| Assorted Facts & Glossary
| History in Detail |
Armour | Outlaws | Ned's
Grave | Hanged | Married
| Studying History | Oral
History | Editorial & Opinion
| Books |
News and Events | Movies
| Kelly Documentaries |
Links | Contact us | Copyright