Jersey Reform Day.
This site is dedicated to the day, now officially recognised annually by the States of Jersey, to mark the anniversary of the events of 28 September 1769.
Jersey's own Independence or Bastille Day.
It surprised me
that Jersey’s new Children’s Commissioner has made 20 trips outside the Island
since her appointment in January 2018 “learning on the job and staying
I should have hoped
that she might bring sufficient knowledge with her.
After all, there is
a very full Independent Jersey Care Inquiry Report already published to guide
her and she is “an ex police officer, teacher and director of children’s
services from the UK” where more than enoughhas been researched and written about child welfare and safeguarding in
the past 50 years to satisfy any thirst for theoretical knowledge.
And it’s not as
though she has to do the job in Jersey on her own because there is a Children’s
Minister, a Director General for child welfare and Charlie Parker to support
her besides which there is a virtual army of trained social workers,
psychiatrists, medics, teachers and carers etc working out of several interlocking
government departments with specific duties towards children besides a myriad
of official groups and committees designed to catch any who fall through the
Not to mention that
all 49 elected States Members are supposed to have an individual responsibility
for children in Jersey and they have been invited to sign up to the Chief
Minister’s “Pledge to Jersey’s Children and Young People”…and of course there
is a multitude too of voluntary and semi-voluntary supportive net-working
organizations who are in position to observe - and if necessary influence - the
healthy development of children from the moment they are born.
Besides which the
welfare of children is now the “number one priority” in the Jersey Strategic
Plan and the Island has even signed up at long last to the highest standards
laid down in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child which already have
attracted a lifetime of wise application by reason of their acceptance by most
countries across the world.
So what could
possible go wrong now?
Sadly of course,
the recent international record demonstrates that the welfare of children is in
a very serious state of neglect across the world.
Even within the UK the
mammoth Child Abuse Inquiry for England and Wales has only just managed to
publish its first interim report.
If that Inquiry
does ever complete its task this will be several years in the future.
The Scottish Child
Abuse Inquiry established in 2016 is also rumbling on - whilst the N. Ireland
Inquiry looking at the years 1922-1995 has now reported but it is not clear
what might happen next.
And the particular
role of the Church in N. Ireland is also a factor in other territories which
many are reluctant to deal with.
In Jersey, the Independent
Care Inquiry has reported (as referred to above) but already there is a plan to
extend the terms of reference of the “compensation” scheme to include about 75
more people whose ill-treatment as children in the care of official agencies
has been previously omitted.
initiative for this latest action arises from the work of a UK lawyer pressing
for justice within the Island and not from Jersey lawyers or agencies of the
Now, so far as
Jersey is concerned, shall that finally be the end of the matter?
Clearly not, after
all, seemingly every week new cases are reported of the abuse of children in
Jersey, with some cases appearing in the Courts whilst the AG has declared that
he is not satisfied with the low rate of conviction of abusers and he has
promoted law revisions.
because the general public is largely excluded from official hearings in Jersey
where children are concerned and public reporting is minimal, very little
factual knowledge is made available.
along with the secrecy.
However, it is
significant that the abuse of children takes place especially where conditions
of poverty, limited education, social deprivation and neglect prevail.
From Pitcairn and
many other Pacific Islands, the Falklands, St Helena, throughout the Caribbean,
off shore Australia, the problem of child abuse is common-place and in some
instances excused as “part of the culture.”
In the Isle of Man,
the Knottsfield Children’s Home has been exposed as a place of abuse over
several decades and is an interesting example to cite in the context of Jersey
where UK style professional standards have supposedly been followed over many
same standards have proved wholly ineffective in so many places in the UK but
the failures of care do not by-pass cities or areas of industrial activity any
more than finance centres….
Guernsey does not seem to have produced a comparable institutional child-abuse
Why should this be?
Has Guernsey’s child-abuse
scandal yet to be revealed or should the Children’s Commissioner and her
multi-layered team be better employed seeking guidance in the other Bailiwick
rather than Scandinavia or Scotland?
Has the much talked
about CIs mutual co-operation more to offer then we realize?
Civil Servants "strike" Liberation Square, St Helier, Jersey 7 December 2018
There is no doubt
that many States’ civil servants and public employees have been treated very
That they have been
left behind and neglected so far as wages and conditions of employment are
concerned is evident.
On that basis they
deserve general public support and they have been forced into a strike by a
particularly uncaring management otherwise known as “our government.”
To rub salt into
their wounds, the recently appointed CEO Charlie Parker has proudly announced
that’s “It’s my way or the highway” and proposes to reduce the workforce by
many hundreds as the continuation of a policy that has been in place for some
BUT not all civil
servants are angels.
Bullying and harassment
has been a feature within many States departments for years and Charlie’s
micromanaging “do as I say” ultimatum might seem to be ideally suited to that.
As I write this,
Deputy Mike Higgins is speaking on the radio about the many senior managers in
the civil service who have been devious, unduly authoritative, even lying in
court and how some have been “defaming the public.” He claims to speak on the
basis of personal knowledge
Only this week the Jersey
Complaints Board has published its findings re Mr. B. Huda and the “unjust,
oppressive or improperly discriminatory” treatment that he received at the
hands of Health and Social Services staff.
His case is not
timber windows saga with “bullying Planning Officers” was deemed to be “oppressive
and improperly discriminatory” too by a Complaints Board and he has received no
The Royal Court has
also this week decided the amount of damages to be paid re “Family X” – one of
the largest personal injury claims in British legal history - where the
children were subjected to a catalogue of abuse in their home “years after it
should have been obvious that they needed to be removed.”
Yet, this case
needs to be considered in the context of the “Jersey Independent Care Inquiry” which
reported 18 months ago on decades of abuse of hundreds children in care and the
criminal, negligent, inadequate or otherwise defective behaviour of far too
many adults employed, supposedly, in positions of trust to safeguard them.
When civil servants
are being abusive or bullying in the workplace to each other that is bad enough
and it has been researched and reported upon in the “HR Lounge Report”
published (in secret initially) this year. This Report says that employees have
been left “feeling like lepers about making allegations or complaints” and how “there
is a culture of fear” and also of too much “gossiping.”
But what of the
treatment of the general public who have to deal with these civil servants?
If bullying is so
commonplace in schools, for example, how might bullied children or their parents
expect to be treated if they complain?
Or, how might claimants
at the Social Security department be enabled to ensure that they are treated
fairly and with consistency and shall staff ever “blow the whistle” on their own
colleagues whose behaviour towards the general public is not appropriate?
If civil servants
are not prepared to blow the whistle to protect each other – what chance that
they might take any action in support of a member of the public?
of a “whistle-blower hotline” has been proposed for the use of bullied or abused
staff in their workplaces, but it does not seem to be intended to protect the
public too or even to be accessible to them.
Of course, some
staff are abused by the public but the proliferation of “our staff are entitled
to respect” notices are themselves often intimidating and hardly likely to
encourage a friendly dialogue when differences of opinion or lack of
I could list many
instances of failings in the services provided by civil servants and the antagonisms
that arise with the public. Some have reached the “official complaints” stage
as already referred to and have been found to be valid.
Some complaints are
often claim to provide an excellent service in difficult circumstances which
may be true – but it s not always so.
There is reluctance
in the service to be supportive of the public. When things go wrong the public
employees invariably defend “the system” and their colleagues.
This current “strike”
by civil servants is seen as justified by many members of the general public.
But that support
needs to be reciprocal.
Civil servants and
other public employees must be encouraged to promote the rights and best
interests of the public as well as their own.
or government is a common enemy and needs to be recognized for what it is.
I am not sure that government has much relevance to Jersey farming.
It's a diminishing economic activity which occupies a very large part of Jersey land and of course government and admin is being reformed under the CEO Charlie Parker's grand plan.
But here are two Ministers in the current Jersey "government" speaking at the farming conference.
Senator Farnham "Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture" appears first;
Next its Deputy John Young - billed on the programme as "Minister for the Environment" but that changes daily it seems in accordance with Charlie's plan so he is more certainly "Minister for Planning" I think;
The video starts a bit confused because John Young spoke from the floor and not the rostrum provided....
See you all again next year - perhaps Charlie will talk then....
This interview and discussion continues with the theme of previous postings and considers, among many things, whether Cyril Le Marquand deserves to be remembered with a public monument...
whether the Report of the Independent Care Inquiry is being adequately implemented...
why it is proving so difficult to reform the "Jersey Way"...
and whether Jersey can afford to preserve a "green countryside" or if the land is too valuable to use for farming...and more.
This is the time of year when Jersey's memorials - mostly to those who died in war - receive a deal of public attention.
But how is it decided which events or individuals should be "remembered" at all in public places?
As I keep posting here, the events of 28 September 1769 - Jersey Reform Day and all that - have no plaque, statue or street name although it is supposedly an "official" date in the Jersey calendar.
The Piratical Bailiff George de Carteret has a statue and pub in St Peter whilst war-time Bailiff Lord Coutanche warrants a small bronze bust that serves as a resting place for pigeons in the Royal Square and he can oversee the Peirson pub, the statue of King George II and the "V" sign in the square..
But what of more recent heroes or people of "significance"?
Cyril Le Marquand "the founder of the Jersey finance sector" is currently remembered with a Soviet style inscription on the States office building opposite the Cenotaph. But this building is planned to be demolished soon. Shall Cyril have a replacement statue erected in his honour? Would he want one?
He was a "political leader" of course and founder of the Progressive Party after the Occupation and was elected with 10 others of that party to the States in 1948.
On the other hand Norman Le Brocq, was also elected to the States and founded a political party of the left in opposition to Cyril's after the Occupation.
Norman has no memorial on land that I know of and once described the "finance sector as a "parasitic activity."
But does he deserve a memorial now?
Jersey cows have their own bronze memorial in St Helier and various other sculptures are scattered about the Island and Geraint Jennings has described the history of some of these in the past.
Most places have their military heroes mounted on horses cast in bronze and Jersey has produced plenty of warriors - but is the whole memorial thing just an historic dinosaur now in the 21st century?
I am not proposing to answer my own questions but attach this interview link with Cyril Le Marquand which is interesting in the context of Jersey politics and government today. Whether it or he or his views are relevant today are matters to be considered elsewhere.
BUSKERS are usually
anonymous but there have in the past been several well known street performers
They have often had
a difficult relationship with the authorities and sometimes the public.
“Tommy” Bagwell the
blind barrel organ player was granted a licence in 1907 by the Constable to
play in the streets of St Helier.
Jersey born “Tommy”
had been blinded whilst working on the quay so his work-mates had subscribed to
provide the instrument and he became a popular sight and sound around the Town.
In fact he became
something of an entertainer and raised funds for charitable events such as the “picnic
for the blind” in 1909.
In 1917 he suffered
serious injuries when a horse bolted in Mulcaster Street and collided with him
and the organ and he spent some time in hospital. He died in 1936 aged 81.
He was not Jersey’s
only blind organ player. There were complaints in 1888 of such a player who “perambulated”
the streets of St. Helier accompanied by a little girl “eliciting alms from
passers-by” and he had no permit.
This was probably
Anthanese Marcourf (?) who was already “an old familiar face” in the “Court of
Corrective Police” in 1884 and was well known in Guernsey too. He was usually
charged with vagrancy and begging in the streets “without visible means of
Typically he was
fined 10 shillings or 2 days in prison.
organ-grinders had been “found begging” in 1879 and had insulted people who
refused to contribute. They duly appeared before the court to be fined the usual
amount but presumably they would have been deported too.
In April 1857 it
was reported that 3 barrel organs were playing such tunes as “Home Sweet Home”
and “Cherry Ripe” to an appreciative crowd outside 21 Hue Street but the nature
of the occasion was not clear.
otherwise 3 barrel organs were offered for sale at auction the same year but
there was a wedding reception in Hilgrove Street in 1862 and a barrel organ was
stationed at the doorway “to crown the day at the home of the happy pair.”
However, it was not
a Jersey person turning the handle but “a grinning Italian who owned the
instrument of torture…”
Cesidio Volante was
another Italian musician who arrived in the 1880s and was not deported although
his career started with the usual difficulties. Thus he appeared before the
Magistrate for playing “in the streets of St. Helier without the necessary
permission” in February 1888.
It must have been a
very fragile way to make a living because the Viscount had been ordered in 1883
to dispose of the property of Antonioni Qazy the “peripatetic organ grinder”
who had died without next of kin and he was also instructed to pay for the
burial. But Cesidio, more
usually known as Joseph, somehow survived and founded a Volante dynasty which thrives
in Jersey. When he died aged 61 at his Castle Street home in 1923 after a long
illness the JEP obituary described him as “the Italian organ grinder, a popular
and well known figure in this town.”
It continued “there
is an old saying that it’s the poor that help the poor” and how he lent the
organ during the Great War “to swell various charities.”
His Italian born widow
Ann re-married and died in 1968.
There were visits
from German bands and other musicians and entertainers trying to make a living throughout
the century so it was inevitable that the authorities would try to exercise
more control. They also saw it as a tax raising opportunity.
By 1899 it was
being proposed that every show man, acrobat, player, accordionist or street
musician or other performer should pay 1 shilling per week for a licence. Thus
a German band consisting of 9 musicians would have to pay 9 shillings. But the
proposal, designed to contribute to the £800 p.a. granted by the States was
viewed as “humiliating, mean and unworthy of a legislative assembly” by
The Constable of St
Helier was reported ;
“It is absurd that
the owner of a performing bear or an organ-grinder must pay to the Bailiff and
every member of a German Band who would play the National anthem in the streets…”
And so the
discussion continues into the 21st century and there is not a
barrel-organ to be seen or heard on the streets of Jersey today….
Following on from yesterday's Scrutiny hearings today it was the turn of
John Young the recycled Environment Minister and
Dominic Jones of JP (Jersey Potteries) Restaurants
to appear before the public Scrutiny Panel hearings.
I have recorded the first 5 minutes only of each hearing as posted below.
John Young says he will be more interesting in 6 months time and hopes to be invited back then.
The Infrastructure Minister Deputy Lewis and his Team appeared before a scrutiny panel today 1 October 2018.
Deputy Raymond was part of the team but did not speak
The hearing was in two parts - firstly to discuss Reducing the use of Plastics in Jersey and in part two a more general discussion of Infrastructure's work in hand and in the near future.
This is just a taste of the proceedings since my recording is limited to a max 5 minutes at the start of the hearings.
Scrutiny are still experimenting with "live streaming" of hearings but this should be available soon.
Podcasts and Transcripts of the full hearings should be available soon too....refer to the Scrutiny Website for information.
The Scrutiny Panel - Infrastructure, Housing and Environment - consists of Constables Mike Jackson, John Le Maistre, Sadie Rennard ( who was absent) and Deputy Morel.
There were just a few members of the public present. Presumably the reduction of the use of plastics and the many other issues raised are of little general interest .
As always, the sound on my recording is not very good and some speakers simply refuse to talk into the mics provided.
At long last the "planning office" in Jersey has scrapped the dreadful and dangerous public access to its South Hill offices.
Now there is a newly created access through the old Public Services/Infrastructure building next door and it seems to be much better.
At least there are no stepped barriers in front of the entrance door.
The short video below shows the exterior improvements so far.
I have not yet looked to see how the facilities inside might comply with the anti- disability discrimination law standards now being introduced - regarding a hearing loop at the reception desk or interview rooms and suchlike - but I understand that there are no public toilets at all.
So it is far from perfect and eventually the whole facility will move into Charlie's new central States' office block at La Motte - but this is how it is today....
The "Planning Minister" John Young I gather is now at Cyril Le Marquand House well removed from the general public
The new States term really got under way today 17 July 2018 with the first open to the public scrutiny hearing.
But although there is a new smart table in Le Capelain Room - there were some empty places and Senator Moore and her new Scrutiny Panel members were not amused.
The new supremo Charlie Parker, Treasury Chief Richard Bell and Kate Nutt, Chief of the External Affairs Department had all been invited but failed to show.
CM Le Fondre thought that Charlie was interviewing yet more senior civil servants but although the Panel had some questions ready - they must wait for another day - except that there is a secret briefing planned for Friday and the CM suggested that Senator Moore might get some answers then.
Hard luck on the public who cannot even be told where the new Central States Offices are to be sited. Is it a new or existing building? We could not be told....
So its a new table but still the same lack of respect being shown for the Scrutiny process and as the Q & A session progressed it became obvious that this is not the only problem. There is a galaxy of new boards, commissioners, accounting officers, chief officers, renamed departments and scrutiny panels not to mention ministers and assistant ministers all being released from their "silos" but hoping not to get in each others way - or conflict - as they call it in this business.
In fact it was obvious in the public seats that this must be a formula for certain failure and PLAN B cannot be far away....
It was not all bad. Bloggers were allowed to video the initial few minutes the same as the laughingly called "accredited media."
Unfortunately the new table keeps the Panel at a distance from the Minister and his team so if an improved standard of "cooperation" and engagement is to be encouraged then something might need to be done about that. We don't want them getting too close of course but the House of Commons rule about two swords lengths apart should not apply in Jersey and I don't know where Charlie and his colleagues might have been sat if they had turned up. It also makes it difficult for the public to follow all the proceedings in such a small room but the "ear phones" are still working and the "hearing loop" is marked as available.
The standard of discussion was
high which came as a surprise since this was the first public appearance of the two teams. It all rattled along at a good pace and many topics were raised
if not always answered.
Evidently there is much still in the planning stage and such important subjects as "disability" responsibility were yet to be sorted. Very worrying.
Also to be decided is the latest "population policy" which still needs more consideration (there is a COM meeting tomorrow) besides more data and "modelling". For certain is that the planned 11 September debate will not take place.
In the meantime the CM wants to proceed with police checks - if a way can be found - and he is still keen on "work permits" of some sort but apparently there is an imminent threat from something called BREXIT....
The transcript and podcast should soon be available for anybody wanting more details and "streaming" is still proposed.
One subject not discussed was democratic reform following the CPA Observers Report but there were several States members in the public seats so not all have flown off to Trumpland or other exotic places for their hols....
A promising start but as we all know the proof of the pudding is in the eating etc and there was not very much to sink the teeth into. Maybe just the recipe book image today with better and more substantial dishes yet to be served up....
The "Lord Nelson" is in St Helier for a few days and is open to the public. I went down to have a look since she is a fine vessel and always delights the eye....
but this time I was a bit unlucky because she is always moored in the least visible place and it was a low spring-tide due and she was already a long way down from the quayside...
However, by chance I met a couple on holiday who had also come down to see her and had a particular interest since the "Lord Nelson" flies under the flag of the Jubilee Sailing Trust and is specifically designed for people with disabilities to enjoy.
This elderly couple had managed to reach the quay - the wife pushing her husband in a wheelchair from their hotel near the Howard Davis Park - a considerable distance - on a very hot day.
The ship was not open until 2pm for the public (it was about 12.30pm when this was recorded) so no on-board visits were possible but I was very saddened at the poor access standards on-shore and the lack of information or directions.
Access down to the vessel is via a very steep ramp to the pontoon which could be very dangerous to many and if this couple had managed to get down, I don't think they would have climbed up again without the help of a crane.
It is all very sad especially since this vessel is all about access for all and the new Disability Discrimination laws are arriving in Jersey soon.
Also very sad is the state of the whole quay under management of the Ports of Jersey. This is certainly not a location to spend any time to enjoy the ships - a family day out at little cost. Parking is a nightmare if the signs are to be believed. This is potentially a great place for people to come and spend a few enjoyable hours....the couple of holidaymakers were last seen hurrying back towards St Helier....
DAISY SOUTHARD WARREN - Jersey crime and punishment in 1924.
Daisy Southard appeared before the
Jersey Royal Court on 16 August 1924.
She was 35 years of
age, an “Exonian” - that is born in Exeter - and the widow of Jersey man George
Over the next few
days her name and details would be published in newspapers throughout Britain
and many places overseas too.
George had been
serving as a private with the Devonshire Regiment but was a 35 years old
railway station master and bachelor living at St Lawrence when they married on
5 April 1916 at St. Helier.
His father was
George a farm labourer who had various manual jobs over the years and had
raised a family with his wife Elizabeth at several addresses throughout the
Daisy was born in
1889. She was a 27 years old spinster
and brush maker when she married George William the station master in 1816 but when
or why she had moved to Jersey is not known.
Her father Thomas
Southard was described as a railway labourer on Daisy’s marriage certificate.
Thomas had married Evangeline
and there had been at least five other children in their Exeter home.
The First Devon Regiment
was stationed at Fort Regent and St. Peter’s Barracks and many local men had
enlisted. They were sent off to the war in 1914 initially to France but then to
campaigns much further away. George was awarded the 1914 Star for his service
in France and Belgium.
The Regiment did
not return to Jersey but George William had been injured or otherwise made
unfit for further military duties.
He was presumably sent
from the war zone back to Jersey where he was considered well enough to blow a
whistle and wave a flag on a station platform and to marry.
There were several
children born of the marriage. These might have been William George born in
1917, Daisy Doreen in 1920 and a Jesse Maud in 1921 but there were many Warrens
in Jersey, especially in and around St Helier.
Elizabeth Warren a spinster of No 1 Dorset Street had died in 1868. She
left her possessions to the six children of her deceased brother John Warren
and her nephew George Henry Warren.
It was probably not coincidental that Daisy Southard/Warren lived predominantly
at 4 Dorset Street subsequently although she entered nearby 41 Clearview Street
on the false birth registration in 1924.
George William the
former station master died at the Jersey General Hospital on 5 August 1921 from
heart failure but was still described as a “soldier in the Devonshire Regiment”
on the certificate.
Edward Warren, an ex soldier, had died in St. Helier of “heart disease”
too in 1917 and might have been related. Charles George Warren from St Lawrence
also served as a private in the “Devons.”
survived from Daisy and George’s five years of marriage so it was a strange
decision when the widow Daisy registered the birth of her own baby daughter,
born on 12 July 1924, as being his child, three years after George had died.
This was not true of
course, but nevertheless, the false information was duly entered into the
Registry of births by Registrar Arthur Hamon where the infant was named as
Evelyn Muriel Ellen Warren on Tuesday 29 July.
However, somebody –
presumably the Registrar - blew the whistle so that Daisy duly appeared in the
Jersey Royal Court on Saturday 16 August 1924 charged with making a false declaration
on a birth certificate, contrary to Article 5 ( among others) of the Law on the
Registration of Births, Marriages and Deaths of 1842.
This was a criminal
matter and was evidently considered serious enough to present before the
Island’s Royal Court rather than before a Police Court Magistrate.
That decision to
prosecute had been made by Crown Officer Mr C. E. Mallet De Carteret the
“acting” Attorney-General who was also the Solicitor-General.
received a visit at her home “Kendum”
4 Dorset Street or 41 Clearview Street, St. Helier from Parish Centenier Cabot (a
police officer) to be charged and warned to appear in court although it was the
newly elected Constable Ferguson of St. Helier who appeared there for the
Bailiff Sir William
Venebles Vernon was the 71 years old presiding Judge for the Saturday Royal
Court and he happened also to be chairman of the Jersey Railway Company.
Sitting alongside him
were Jurats Crill and Renouf.
Solicitor-General prosecuted and Advocate Duret Aubin defended.
Aubin might have
been engaged to defend in accordance with the Advocate’s oath to represent the
poor and widows of Jersey – a traditional form of legal aid.
For Daisy this prosecution
must have been a frightening development.
She had just
recently given birth and her financial resources were most likely limited,
especially if she was already caring for the three children from her marriage.
She had no
immediate adult family of her own to support her in Jersey and that of her
former husband might not have been very sympathetic to her situation.
there were three legitimate children of George to be cared for it is possible
that the Warren family rallied round to keep them out of the care of the Island’s
In the grandiose,
sombre court room, the 4 feet 11 inches tall, brown haired Daisy, weighing just
104 pounds (7 stones 6 pounds), equipped only with an “imperfect” education
would have presented a weak and vulnerable figure before the intimidating and
elevated judicial officers in their scarlet robes.
For some reason,
the trial had attracted a large number of “onlookers” into the court.
The May Assizes in
the same courtroom had included a major criminal trial before the Bailiff, eight
Jurats and a lay jury of 24 men which was reported in the Jersey Morning News as “An Innovation” :
“For the first time
in history the whole of the evidence, Public Prosecutor’s conclusions, Counsel’s
pleadings and Bailiff’s summing -up were in English which should prove a
welcome precedent at future Assizes when the accused have only knowledge of
language of the courts and judicial system was French and the acoustics were
dreadful so it was traditionally difficult to follow the proceedings.
It was not the only
challenge that Jersey was facing to its “traditions” either.
Not only was the
constitution being tested over the “Imperial contribution” question but in
February the Jersey States had agreed that women could be elected as “People’s
Representatives” to the Legislative Assembly “but not as life members.”
It was to be 1948
before the first woman was elected.
This trial was not “an
assize” but since Daisy was English with an “imperfect education” the court
might have followed the recent precedent. The court proceedings were written in
After the charges
were recited by the Public Prosecutor, Defending Advocate Aubin entered a plea
In court H.M.’s
Solicitor-General described George, the late husbandas a “Private in the Devon Regiment” rather
than a station master and explained that the law called for a fine of £50 or 12
months imprisonment but asked that a fine of £2 be imposed or one month’s
imprisonment “without hard labour.”
argued that the Prosecutor was compelled by law to ask for a fine and imprisonment
but “was sure that if he had his choice he would not have done so.”
He continued :
“The case was a sad
one. There were three legitimate children. The accused had acted in ignorance.
If the Court did wish to impose imprisonment he hoped they would grant the
benefit of the First Offenders Act.”
explained that the father of baby Evelyn Muriel Ellen was a married man who was
prepared to hand his name to the Court and that he had been abandoned by his
wife 5 years ago.
He was also willing
to marry Daisy “but could not do so.”
the report in the Morning News which
was published on Monday 18 August ended :
“The Court granted
the conclusions asked for and the accused was accordingly sentenced.”
This simple and
incomplete statement not only failed to record what the sentence actually was
but also omitted any reference to the issue that turned Daisy briefly into a
The report of the
case in the late Saturday edition of the (Jersey) Evening Post – owned and edited by the Methodist Walter Guiton - did
carry an account of the court case and sentencing but it was the UK Weekly Dispatch (aka Sunday Dispatch) that really exposed the
most disturbing detail on Sunday 17 August.
This account was
copied in the Evening Post on Monday
18 August and was headed:
WOMAN IN IRON CAGE – Exhibited in Court After Sentence.
old-fashioned practice that smacks of the Middle Ages, a woman sentenced by the
Jersey Royal Court was placed in an iron cage and subjected to the gaze of a
large crowd of visitors who out of curiosity had come to watch the proceedings.
In her despair the poor woman went into hysterics and had to be removed.”
explained that Daisy was sentenced to pay a fine of £2 and to go to gaol for
one month but was then “placed in an iron cage situated in a corner of the
court for all to see, until her shrieks, compelled her removal.”
Who had ordered
that she should be placed in the cage was not recorded.
The newspaper had
explained that: “In England the practice
of publicly exhibiting minor offenders in the stocks fell into disuse about a
hundred years ago.” (Weekly Dispatch
- August 17)
Jersey’s pillory had stood in the Royal Square (formerly the Market
Place) just outside the Court until 1836. It had been removed then following a
scandalous case when three Jewish traders – Bersham, Myers and Cohen - had been
tried and sentenced for frauds with counterfeited Guernsey bank notes They were
sentenced to be jailed, had their property confiscated, stood together in the
pillory for an hour and were banished from the Island.
Guernsey had a cage with a pillory attached so it was probably similar
in Jersey with this being sited near the market place where the public could
obtain suitable vegetable missiles to throw at the unfortunates on display.
The Guernsey cage was eventually mounted on a cart so that it could be
stored and brought out as needed.
In London, It was not at all unusual for those pilloried to be killed
by the violent actions of the mob until that facility was scrapped in 1816.
The Guernsey cage had metal rings attached which were used to restrain
those sentenced to be whipped or mutilated in public. It was still used during
The Jersey cage was originally sited in the market-place and used to hold
prisoners for trial in the adjacent court having been marched in from detention
at Gorey Castle.
After a town prison was built in 1693 at Charing Cross those awaiting
trial were kept detained there and the cage was removed from the market place
It seems that a “cage” was then installed in the Royal Court to contain
criminal prisoners during and after their trials. The pillory continued in use and was sited just outside the court in the Royal Square (Market Place) and
under the constant gaze - after 1751 - of George ll’s gilded statue.
The Charing Cross prison was demolished in 1812 to be replaced by a
newly built structure adjacent to the General Hospital in Newgate Street.
It was only after the campaigning of Elizabeth Fry the Quaker prison reformer
that this unsatisfactory prison was in turn demolished and replaced in 1837 in
a similar location with a “House of Correction.”
This was finally demolished and a new prison built at La Moye, St
Brelade in 1975.
This prison too has been subject to several critical reports by the UK
Prison Inspectorate and a UN Committee concerned with “torture or inhuman and
degrading treatment” causing further improvements and extensions to be
Appended to the Evening Post report was a letter from
C.T. Maine of 35 King Street, St. Helier also dated 18 August.
Charles Maine was a
silversmith, jeweller and clock maker whose premises were situated in the main
retail street of St. Helier a just a few hundred yards from the Royal Court
It was possible
that he was among the “large crowd of visitors” who had gone to watch the
proceedings and it was also possible that he had contacted the Dispatch newspaper in London to express
his disgust at the whole business.
A large number of UK newspaper reporters had been invited to Jersey in 1924
to hear the Channel Islands’ arguments against making a financial contribution
to British defence expenditure and debts following the First World War. This
had become known throughout the Empire as the “Imperial Contribution” question
and raised important constitutional issues but had a special interest in the
Channel Islands where many wealthy British had settled or contrived, to avoid
paying UK taxes. Winston Churchill, appointed as Chancellor of the Exchequer in
1924, promised to curtail such tax dodging.
The case of Lady Lucy Houston and her late shipping magnate husband’s
fortune of £7 million was one that came before the Bailiff and the Jersey
courts over several years. It was widely reported outside the Island too not
only because the UK tax authorities wanted a share but the Jersey court had its
eyes on a £150,000 package of jewels which had arrived concealed in a fruit
basket from Southampton and was held in care by a St. Helier Jeweller.
No Income tax was collected in Jersey until the law was introduced in
The Bailiff of Jersey was of course prominent in defending the Jersey point
of view and he served as Chief Judge and the “principal citizen” for 32 years
The Islanders he said “were proud of their autonomy” and “England had
always helped the independence of the Island…and Jersey was always loyal to the
We are he said a “loyal and prosperous community “ but “we say no to a
contribution in our spirit of independence” and “ there can be no taxation without
Or, it might have been that the Dispatch
reporter was still in Jersey when Daisy went to trial.
letter to “The Editor of the Evening Post” revealed some specific observations
about Daisy’s treatment besides knowledge of Royal Court procedures that
suggest he had been observing these for some time and had reformist thoughts in
He wrote that Daisy
“had sobbed bitterly when removed to the cage in the Court” and he
congratulated the Editor for “having called the public attention to the continuance
of this barbarous treatment and venture to suggest the petitioning of our
authorities to discontinue this exposure.”
“Let a room be
arranged for the placing of prisoners before or after their trial and not an
iron cage. How many instances are there where prisoners have been so exposed
before trial, proven not guilty and yet they experienced this cruel exposure.
An equal sympathy should certainly be also shown the guilty. Sad enough it is
for prisoners to remain in the centre of the Court during trial without
undergoing treatment as you describe on Saturday last.”
That this was
evidently already a matter of public concern followed :
“Months ago this
very question was raised at a meeting of the Rotarians who unanimously agreed
to write our authorities asking were it not possible tomake other arrangements for prisoners by
giving them accommodation whereby they would not be put in a cage.”
there are two prisoners waiting trial the same day : the one is removed to the
centre of the Court for trial : the other remains in the iron grill, possibly
for hours, and the whole while gazed at by the folks attending Court.”
“I do sincerely
hope that steps will be taken to discontinue this barbarous treatment.”
At the end of the
Court’s proceedings on 18 August, Daisy was duly escorted - probably in a van
-the half mile or so to the Newgate Street
prison which retained a treadmill (for grinding peppercorns), picking oakum (from
old ropes and fabrics) and stone breaking as the usual employment for the
The prison usually
accommodated about 100 convicts or debtors and included a female wing for about
a dozen more.
Here she was
measured and weighed and her details entered into the admissions ledger as
She was 32 years old,
the widow of George W. Warren, a brush maker with no particular marks but her
hair was dark brown and her religion was “Church of England.”
her education as “imperfect” and she had no previous convictions.
If her baby and
three other children had not been taken-in by members of the Warren family or
other friends they would have been removed to various homes around Jersey.
William the 7 year
old boy was probably sent to the “Home for Boys” facility at St. Martin’s
whilst his sisters were probably admitted to the Grouville “Girls Home.” There
would have been little opportunity to visit or communicate with each other.
Daisy as a nursing
mother, separated from her baby and other children and confined to the grim
prison would have had to adapt to a strict regime. Yet her weight had increased
by 4 pounds (to 108 pounds) when she was released on 16 September.
Why she made the
false registration declaration is not clear. It is probable that this was from
ignorance as her defence lawyer claimed in court and she was simply following
the previous procedure without thinking too much that her husband was three
education was most likely relevant too but there might have been some financial
inducement such as Parish Poor Law relief or an Army pension increase payable
to an extra legitimate child.
Reports of the case
and the scandalous use of the “medieval” and “barbaric” cage soon appeared in
newspapers around the British Isles and overseas too.
Daisy Southard was briefly
The cage was a
“strange Jersey Custom” in the Gloucestershire
It was “old
fashioned justice” in the Dunbar Courier.
A “practice that
smacks of the Middle Ages” in the Larne
barbarism” according to the Hull Daily
“Back to barbarity”
in the Lincolnshire Echo whilst the Nottingham Evening Post noted the “vigorous
protests from Jersey it is hoped will end the medieval practice.”
It was not the sort
of publicity that Jersey welcomed.
Daisy was soon
returned to her home, family and presumably, her brush making work.
Her moment of
celebrity had passed but not her ability to produce babies.
Whether the same married
lover was attending at “Kendum” 4 Dorset Street is not known but baby Joseph
Alexander Southard joined his “sister” there in June 1926 and baby Irene Maud
Southard was also squeezed into the little cottage in October 1928.
These babies were both
registered by Daisy alone with no father being identified so she might have
been looking after a family of six children when Christmas descended on St
Helier in 1928.
In November of that
same year Daisy’s little sister from Exeter - Mabel Amelia Southard – married
Philip Misson Egan in St. Helier.
He was a 23 years
old bachelor and labourer. Spinster Mabel
was just 15.
Daisy was a witness
at the wedding which was unusual insofar as the newlyweds had brought their own
new born son Philip Henry along too “in order to give him the sight of
The fact that he
was “presented at this marriage” was duly entered into the Register.
Whether it had been
intended that young sister Mabel moved to Jersey in order to help out with
Daisy’s many chores is not known but Mabel’s own little family did not survive.
At least, by the
time that the German Occupation of the Channel Islands commenced in 1940 Philip
Henry Egan had been placed in the Jersey Home for Boys at St Martin’s.
When his Identity
Card was produced by the German forces in 1942 he was a schoolboy living –
inevitably – at 4 Dorset Street.
Evelyn Muriel, Joseph Alexander and Irene Maud were all living there too. Daisy
also had an address at “Meadow View”, Longueville, but what had happened to
Philip Henry’s parents is not clear.
They possibly had
sailed to England on one of the evacuation boats just before the German forces
Of the three
legitimate children of Daisy’s marriage to George William only their son William
George Warren has been identified with certainty among the Occupation Identity
His was issued in
1941 when he lived at “Evadale” Undercliffe Road, St Helier.
Most likely his two
sisters had married and so changed their surnames.
eventually to Daisy Southard is not known.
The “cage” was
removed from the Royal Court but it is not known when or why.
There remains only
a small room off the back of the Royal Court which is claimed by senior court
staff to have been its former location.
This is a Draft copy of this article.
Southard-Warren’s German ID card includes her photo. Subject to agreement with
the Jersey Archives this may be copied here in due course.
This article has
been researched with the help of staff and volunteers at the Jersey Archives,
Jersey Library and Registrar of Births, Marriages and Deaths.
Sandra's Skydive started on 22 April 2018 with training and preparation at the Jersey Aero Club HQ but the jump was called off due to low cloud/mist...
The training and preparation continued on 7 May in very fine weather and the take-off was at about 4.30pm...(above)
It takes about 30 minutes for the aircraft to reach 10,000 ft....
This video goes silent for about 50 seconds at 1min 50 seconds....
The "official" on-board and off-board video recorded by Liam Hardman follows and commences with some more basic training reminders....
HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT and TARGETS - the Jersey dimension.
Environment” and “Targets” are words that have brought down the UK Home
Secretary Amber Rudd. She has resigned.
suddenly woken up to the reality of the obscene policies that lie behind such
words and has conveniently labelled this as the “Windrush” problem after the
ship that brought in about 600 Jamaican ( and some Polish) immigrants to London
penny has not yet dropped in Jersey (or Guernsey) where the policy of creating
a “Hostile Environment” for “immigrants” has been accepted for decades and is
being enforced now with greater enthusiasm than ever.
During the current
Jersey General Election there is hardly a candidate who does not propose the
application of even harsher “immigration controls”.
Coupled to this is
the demand for “targets” of the number allowed in each year and for a maximum
population “target” to be achieved.
unbearable so that “immigrants” leave the territory should be so obviously unacceptable
to any decent person but where election votes are concerned such values can be
trampled on with impunity.
Of course in the UK
the pretence that it is “illegal immigrants” that are the “target” has now been
exposed as wholly false because the use and mis-use of deportation powers and other
punishments have been widely inflicted on almost anybody whose face did not fit
the “British” profile.
In part of course,
this prejudiced application of arbitrary controls has been fuelled by the
campaigning of such groups as UKIP and the BREXIT referendum and its continuing
In the UK,
landlords, employers, the NHS, Charities, banks and many more have been sucked
into the “policing” role of demanding ID cards and police checks to help create
an underclass of “foreign”, mainly ethnic origin workers and their families,
vulnerable to exploitation with limited access to the social and welfare safety
Those persons in
abusive relationships with partners, employers or landlords are often so
intimidated that they do not seek help from the Police or other agencies.
UK Immigration laws
do apply in the Channel Islands but how they are actually administered is
the Islands are usually made known only when a person enters the territory
illegally and is arrested at the Ports – usually from St Malo.
However, the next
stage of UK controls that demand English language tests, for example, will be
in force here and will be added to the disgracefully discriminatory housing and
work restrictions that are already in force in the Islands. Those “immigrant”
persons who fail the language test – we are told - may be deported from the UK
and presumably the Channel Islands too.
Senator Routier’s extraordinary Jersey “population control” measures based upon
10 months or 4 years work permits will be added to the controlling mix. These
will apply to ALL so called immigrants into Jersey whether they are British
from the UK or “foreign” from EU or any other “non EU” but “foreign” place
around the globe.
The status of
persons from the BOTs (British Overseas Territories) arriving in the CIs for
work or play is not clear.
How the UK
government will be induced to approve of such legislation which adds to the
existing 5 years (work) and 10 years (housing) qualifications is anybody’s guess.
government already has had to relax recently introduced and restrictive
regulations based upon short-term “work permits” because they caused so many
workers to leave the Island. Some of these workers – rather like “Windrush”
immigrants - were long term residents of Guernsey.
It was the loss of
workers and complaints from business that stimulated the panic changes.
Not any sudden
discovery of a lost morality.
But evidently, The
Channel Islands have been operating policies specifically designed to create a
“hostile environment” for decades and the deliberate intention has been to make
life so difficult that many (so called) immigrants leave after a few years.
In other words they
do not become established in order to claim the benefits of the Social Security
and Income Tax or other impositions that they have paid and gain no status in
the job market or to obtain proper housing accommodation.
They are second
class residents by design.
The Jersey system
already requires that all new arrival must obtain a “registration card” for a
fee from the Social Security Department and this must be shown before taking employment.
Jobs for new
arrivals (except special “key workers”) are generally restricted to those
officially described as “low skilled” and not in demand by “locals” – such as
catering, cleaning, tourism or agriculture.
After 5 years in
such employment a person can enter the general employment market and claim
Social Security benefits but there is no unemployment benefit payable in Jersey.
New arrivals are
also restricted to lodgings type accommodation for 10 years continuous
residence. All resident are supposed to notify changes of employer or home address
to the Social Security Department and registration cards must be shown to
employers and landlords.
Under the new
Routier plan, “immigrant” workers will be required either to leave after about
10 months (seasonal workers) whilst longer term employed must leave after 4
category will progress to the 5 year (work and benefits) or 10 years (housing)
The poor standards
of housing accommodation currently available to the 13,000 resident “non quals”
workers and their children have not gone entirely unnoticed.
The recent death of
a farm worker in his accommodation has highlighted the dilemma and the Independent
Jersey Care Inquiry Report (into child abuse since 1945) drew particular
attention to the social problems created by such discriminatory policies.
It has featured in
several past election campaigns and politicians have promised to deal with the
problem and the allied lack of security, low pay and substandard working
So far there is
little actual improvement to be seen although some legislation is now in place
regarding the standards of properties to let.
Yet, the “hostile environment”is not
a critical feature of the current Jersey election but rather - as already
referred to - there is almost a competition among many candidates to put forward the most repressive
policies that purport to limit population growth andpreserve jobs and housing accommodation for
What might happen
as a result of BREXIT is also uncertain.
Whether there will
be “free movement” across European borders is still being discussed in London but
where those borders might be, whether visas will be required and if the “Common
Travel Area” might survive are all uncertain.
What future relationships
might exist for the Crown Dependencies with the UK, the EU and the rest of the
world is not determined.
The status quo will
So far it has been
suggested that all those “EU” nationals resident in the UK and the Islands must
apply for “settled status” and will thus have a “right to remain” but how this
will relate to their dependents in other places, future children, marriages
across nationalities or gender or changed circumstances and many other factors,
is not at all clear.
Because of the
difficulties already found in recruiting workers, the Islands are suggesting
that (having virtually exhausted the supply from the UK and the EU) recruits
might be found from such as Kenya or the Ukraine who are willing to accept the
low pay and poor working conditions instead.
This seems very
unlikely – even if the new post BREXIT arrangements with the UK and the EU
There are about 2
million Filipinos in the Middle East. Many are exploited and abused.
government has responded to the death of 7 workers in Kuwait by banning
nationals from taking up “low skilled” jobs in that country. The ban may be
extended to other countries even though there is a great shortage of employment
in the Philippines.
creation of a “hostile environment” for so called immigrants in Jersey is
totally unacceptable and any population control policies based upon “targets”
needs to be examined very carefully with Human Rights standards, rather than
profit from growth, being uppermost in the minds of those who promote them.
The "Empire Windrush" made just one voyage in 1948 carrying Jamaicans and some Polish refugees to London.
She caught fire and sank in 1954. Four crew members died.
We should burn the "Hostile Environment" policy for Jersey in her memory.