John Duffus, 18041870 (aged 65 years)

Name
John /Duffus/
Given names
John
Surname
Duffus
Birth June 9, 1804
Source: unknown
Immigration October 17, 1838 (aged 34 years)
Citation details:

Sydney Gazette Thu 18 Oct 1838 p. 2

Text:

Shipping Intelligence. Arrivals.... From London via the Cape of Good Hope, yesterday, having left the former post the 21st May, and the latter 29th August, the ship Eden, 419 tons, Captain George Noble, with merchandise. passengers, cabin...Rev. John Duffus, Episcopalian Minister, Mrs Duffus and 5 children...

Not marriedCharlotte Ann ForbesView this family
between June 1845 and June 1847 (aged 42 years)

Citation details:

Sydney Morning Herald Tue 9 Nov 1847 p. 2

Text:

DIOCESAN COURT. THE Lord Bishop of AUSTRALIA held a Court yesterday, in the Vestry of St. James's Church, for the purpose of hearing the Rev. J. Duffus in reply to certain charges which had been preferred against him. The Court was composed of the Bishop, with the Revds. Dr. Cowper, J.C. Grylls, M.A., W.H. Walsh, M.A., and R.K. Sconce, M.A., Mr. Norton the Registrar, and Mr. H. K. James, his Deputy, were also present. Shortly after ten o'clock, the REGISTRAR read a citation, calling Mr. Duffus, on his canonical obedience, to appear before the Bishop and undergo his personal visitation with respect to certain articles of accusation. The articles of accusation charged Mr. Duffus with various act of incontinence and adultery, with one Charlotte Ann Forbes, with having regularly and clandestinely baptized the illegitimate child of the said C.A. Forbes, and with having written a letter to the said C.A. Forbes, advising her to marry one W.K. Bull, for the purpose of concealing his said incontinence and adultery. Captain MOORE (one of the Churchwardens of Liverpool) and Mr. E. McGinnis, proved the service of the citation on Mrs. Duffus, at the parsonage house. A certificate from Fr. Eckford was then handed in, dated November 7, stating that Mr. Duffus was subject to fits of an epileptic kind, and that he would be totally unable to appear before the Bishop. The BISHOP said he was sorry for the cause of Duffus's absence; but as he had already appeared in person before the Commissioners, and could now, if he had so determined, appear by counsel, for the purpose of doing away with the effect of the evidence which had been taken, he did not know that his presence was strictly necessary. He hoped to be able to do that justice in the case which, from the beginning of the proceedings, it had been his object to effect. His LORDSHIP then delivered the following address: - The present case is the first in which after nearly twelve years' presidency over this diocese, I have found it necessary to have recourse to the coercive powers with which every bishop is invested, and to sit formally in judgment upon the conduct of a Presbyter of the Church. This is a suit promoted against the Rev. John Duffus, M.A., the licensed minister of the parish church of St. Luke, in the town of Liverpool, at the instance of Samuel Moore, Esquire, J.P., Thomas Holt, junior, Esquire, J.P., and Richard Sadlier, Esquire, against the reverend defendant. ... The charges are these:- I. That the Rev. John Duffus was guilty of acts of incontinence and adultery with Charlotte Ann Forbes, now Charlotte Ann Bull, in the parsonage at Liverpool, at Botany, and in Pitt-street, Sydney, at various times between the months of June 1845, and June 1847. II. That he irregularly and clandestinely baptized a child, of which the said Charlotte Ann Forbes was delivered on the 2nd of June 1846. III. That he wrote and forwarded to the said Charlotte Ann Forbes a letter dated Bontary 1st July 1846, wherein he recommended and persuaded the said Charlotte Ann Forbes to marry one W.K. Bull, with the intention of concealing the acts of incontinence and adultery of which he had been guilty with the said Charlotte Ann Forbes. ..The Court was then adjourned.

Citation details:

Sydney Morning Herald Wed 10 Nov 1847 p. 2

Text:

DIOCESAN COURT. SECOND DAY. - TUESDAY. At the opening of the Court yesterday morning the Bishop enquired whether any one appeared on behalf of the Rev. John Duffus, to which there was no answer. The Registrar then read the finding of the Commissioners which was, that they were of opinion that there was sufficient grounds for believing that the Rev. John Duffus had been guilty of various acts of incontinence and adultery with one Charlotte Ann Forbes; that he had irregularly and clandestinely baptised the child of the said Charlotte Ann Forbes; and that he did write and forward a letter to the said Charlotte Ann Forbes to induce her to marry, with the intention of concealing his incontinence and adultery. ...This (said His Lordship) would have been the time for Mr. Duffus, or his counsel, as he was unable to attend himself, to show that the evidence which had been taken would not bear out the finding of the Commissioners, and that it did not contain that which would justify his conviction of the charges which had been preferred against him; but as no one had appeared, he must take it for granted that Mr. Duffus had no further reply to make than was contained in the evidence and documents before the Court, and it was his duty therefore to proceed to pass judgment. He felt most painfully the position in which, from the nature of the case, he (the Bishop) was placed, for it was impossible not to see that the principal witness, having to give evidence which tended to her own degradation, was justly liable to suspicion, and from the outset, therefore, he had been on his guard against receiving her testimony, unless where it was corroborated from other quarters. It had been stated by Mr. Duffus, in a letter dated so lately as the 5th instant, that he had been condemned on the evidence of an abandoned woman; he was sorry that such an impression should be on Mr. Duffus's mind, for he had not yet been condemned. It had only been reported that there was a case for inquiry, and that report was not made on the unsupported evidence of the young person referred to, as great care had been taken not to receive her evidence except as supported by others. His Lordship then went at great length into the evidence on the first charge. It appeared from the statement of the Principal witness, Charlotte Ann Forbes, that in 1843 she went into the service of Mr. Duffus as nursery governess; that after being there for a few months, Mr. Duffus took improper liberties with her, when her mother took her away from the house; that in July 1844, she, at the request of Mrs. Duffus, went back to the employ, and from that time the criminal intercourse was frequent. It appeared from the evidence of Mrs. Duffus, that in March 1845, Miss Forbes complained to her that on the previous night Mr. Duffus had come to her bed, and that there had been criminal intercourse, and notwithstanding this she remained in the house until the 8th May, and was there constantly afterwards. It appeared also that in the early part of 1846, Mr. Duffus was residing at Botany Bay for the benefit of his health, when he was several times visited by Miss Forbes, and according to her evidence was intimate with her; and although he must have known that she was pregnant, he allowed her to visit his family, and drove her about to various places with his daughters. With respect to the baptism the Bishop said they all admitted that it was irregular, but it was said there was no proof of its being clandestine; but it was performed in another parish, it was never registered, and had never been mentioned to the clergyman of that parish; taking this into consideration with the other parts of the case, he could have no hesitation in saying that it was done clandestinely, for the purpose of concealment. The explanation which Mr. Duffus gave of sending the letter was, that he wrote it at the request of Miss Forbes's mother, and enclosed it to her saying, that if she thought it would do her good, she was to give it to her daughter, if not, to destroy it. Now the letter itself showed that this could not have been the case. How it reached Miss Forbes there was no evidence to show, but on the outside of it was written in Mr Duffus's handwriting. "I put the wafer outside that you may not tear the writing, the sheet being full," and the wafer was outside. This quite did away with the statement that it had been enclosed to another person for perusal. Then the letter dated two o'clock, commences by stating that it was written at an hour snatched when all round were asleep, and he had risen from a sleepless bed. Now why (the Bishop) would ask, should a man get up at 2 o'clock on a winter's morning, when his family were asleep, to write a letter of advice, which was to be sent to a young person, and submitted to the inspection of her mother? The letter itself was of an immoral tendency; it recommended an act of imposture, an act of the greatest deceit of which a woman could be guilty, that of representing herself to a man she was about to marry as a virtuous woman, when she was not so This was clearly most immoral, especially as coming from a clergyman. When Mr. Duffus wrote this letter, what did he think he could say to the husband if he ever found out the imposture, as he did shortly after his marriage, and openly and directly charged Mr. Duffus with having seduced, and had a child by his wife? Mr. Duffus had complained that he was unable to subpoena witnesses to come and give evidence before the Bishop; but if he had commenced proceedings against the husband for making a false charge against him, the whole case would have been in issue in the Supreme Court, and Mr. Duffus could have subpoenaed any witnesses he pleased. It was in 1845 that he (the Bishop) received an intimation from a respectable party that the conduct of Mr. Duffus towards Miss Forbes was calculated to create unfavourable impressions, and he communicated with Mr. Duffus kindly but firmly, and desired that he would put her away from his house, which he stated he had done; and he produced a letter from Mrs. Duffus, and one from Miss Forbes, which induced the Bishop to hope that however open his conduct as a clergyman might have been to censure, nothing criminal had taken place. From a journal kept by one of Mr. Duffus's daughters, it appears, however, that although Miss Forbes did not reside in the house, she was constantly visiting there, and according to Miss Forbes's statement the criminal intercourse was continued. He would again repeat, that the testimony of a female giving evidence of her own degradation must be received with extreme caution; but for a man who had defiled a woman to say that therefore her evidence is not to be believed, is to say that by the commission of the crime he prevents any evidence of it from being given. He had very carefully considered the evidence; he had made an abstract of it, and compared one part of it with another, and, upon the whole of the facts of the case, there was no doubt in his mind that the Commissioners had arrived at a just conclusion, that the Rev. J. Duffus was guilty of acts of incontinence and adultery, at the Parsonage, Liverpool, at Botany Bay, and in Pitt-street, Sydney. As to the second charge, that he irregularly baptized the child, no one doubted; that he did it clandestinely, was, in his mind, equally clear, from the fact of his not registering the baptism, nor mentioning the circumstances to the minister of the parish in which the ceremony was performed. As to the point raised by two of the Commissioners, that it was not proved whether the intention of Mr. Duffus was to hide his own guilt or that of another party, he did not think it was of much consequence, and would leave the case merely that the letter was sent. And now he came to the most painful part of the case; in what manner was the guilt which he thought he had shown had been proved, to be visited? For it was a case of that kind, that it was impossible to pass over. He was not clear whether the total deprivation of the clerical character would be too great a punishment, not had he any doubt of the power of the Bishop to pass that sentence; but in practice, a Bishop does not proceed to that extreme step, without consulting one of his brethren; and as he had not had an opportunity of advising with another Bishop, he would not take a step which it was possible that consultation might convince him was wrong. He therefore decreed that the license of the Rev. John Duffus to the parish of St Luke, Liverpool bearing the date 1838, should be revoked. Mr. Duffus, his Lordship said, was entitled to an appeal to the Archbishop of the province provided his notice of appeal was lodged with the bishop within fifteen days. The Court was adjourned.

Emigration December 21, 1847 (aged 43 years)
Citation details:

The Australian Fri 24 Dec 1847 p. 2

Text:

SAILED... Dec 21, - The brig Daniel Watson, 163 tons, Watson, master, for Auckland. Passengers - Rev. John Duffus, Mrs Duffus and six children, Miss Duffus and...

Death 1870 (aged 65 years)
Text:

1870/9243 Duffus John 66Y

Family with Charlotte Ann Forbes
himself
18041870
Birth: June 9, 1804Kingston, Jamaica
Death: 1870New Zealand
partner
1823
Birth: 1823 28 25Sydney City, Greater Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Death:
Not married
Not married: between June 1845 and June 1847
12 months
child
William King Bull + Charlotte Ann Forbes
partner’s partner
18131899
Birth: about 1813
Death: July 24, 1899British Columbia, Canada
partner
1823
Birth: 1823 28 25Sydney City, Greater Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Death:
Marriage
Marriage: 1846Sydney City, Greater Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Birthunknown
ImmigrationNational Library of Australia. Trove: one search...a wealth of information. [database on-line].
Citation details:

Sydney Gazette Thu 18 Oct 1838 p. 2

Text:

Shipping Intelligence. Arrivals.... From London via the Cape of Good Hope, yesterday, having left the former post the 21st May, and the latter 29th August, the ship Eden, 419 tons, Captain George Noble, with merchandise. passengers, cabin...Rev. John Duffus, Episcopalian Minister, Mrs Duffus and 5 children...

Not marriedNational Library of Australia. Trove: one search...a wealth of information. [database on-line].
Citation details:

Sydney Morning Herald Tue 9 Nov 1847 p. 2

Text:

DIOCESAN COURT. THE Lord Bishop of AUSTRALIA held a Court yesterday, in the Vestry of St. James's Church, for the purpose of hearing the Rev. J. Duffus in reply to certain charges which had been preferred against him. The Court was composed of the Bishop, with the Revds. Dr. Cowper, J.C. Grylls, M.A., W.H. Walsh, M.A., and R.K. Sconce, M.A., Mr. Norton the Registrar, and Mr. H. K. James, his Deputy, were also present. Shortly after ten o'clock, the REGISTRAR read a citation, calling Mr. Duffus, on his canonical obedience, to appear before the Bishop and undergo his personal visitation with respect to certain articles of accusation. The articles of accusation charged Mr. Duffus with various act of incontinence and adultery, with one Charlotte Ann Forbes, with having regularly and clandestinely baptized the illegitimate child of the said C.A. Forbes, and with having written a letter to the said C.A. Forbes, advising her to marry one W.K. Bull, for the purpose of concealing his said incontinence and adultery. Captain MOORE (one of the Churchwardens of Liverpool) and Mr. E. McGinnis, proved the service of the citation on Mrs. Duffus, at the parsonage house. A certificate from Fr. Eckford was then handed in, dated November 7, stating that Mr. Duffus was subject to fits of an epileptic kind, and that he would be totally unable to appear before the Bishop. The BISHOP said he was sorry for the cause of Duffus's absence; but as he had already appeared in person before the Commissioners, and could now, if he had so determined, appear by counsel, for the purpose of doing away with the effect of the evidence which had been taken, he did not know that his presence was strictly necessary. He hoped to be able to do that justice in the case which, from the beginning of the proceedings, it had been his object to effect. His LORDSHIP then delivered the following address: - The present case is the first in which after nearly twelve years' presidency over this diocese, I have found it necessary to have recourse to the coercive powers with which every bishop is invested, and to sit formally in judgment upon the conduct of a Presbyter of the Church. This is a suit promoted against the Rev. John Duffus, M.A., the licensed minister of the parish church of St. Luke, in the town of Liverpool, at the instance of Samuel Moore, Esquire, J.P., Thomas Holt, junior, Esquire, J.P., and Richard Sadlier, Esquire, against the reverend defendant. ... The charges are these:- I. That the Rev. John Duffus was guilty of acts of incontinence and adultery with Charlotte Ann Forbes, now Charlotte Ann Bull, in the parsonage at Liverpool, at Botany, and in Pitt-street, Sydney, at various times between the months of June 1845, and June 1847. II. That he irregularly and clandestinely baptized a child, of which the said Charlotte Ann Forbes was delivered on the 2nd of June 1846. III. That he wrote and forwarded to the said Charlotte Ann Forbes a letter dated Bontary 1st July 1846, wherein he recommended and persuaded the said Charlotte Ann Forbes to marry one W.K. Bull, with the intention of concealing the acts of incontinence and adultery of which he had been guilty with the said Charlotte Ann Forbes. ..The Court was then adjourned.

Not marriedNational Library of Australia. Trove: one search...a wealth of information. [database on-line].
Citation details:

Sydney Morning Herald Wed 10 Nov 1847 p. 2

Text:

DIOCESAN COURT. SECOND DAY. - TUESDAY. At the opening of the Court yesterday morning the Bishop enquired whether any one appeared on behalf of the Rev. John Duffus, to which there was no answer. The Registrar then read the finding of the Commissioners which was, that they were of opinion that there was sufficient grounds for believing that the Rev. John Duffus had been guilty of various acts of incontinence and adultery with one Charlotte Ann Forbes; that he had irregularly and clandestinely baptised the child of the said Charlotte Ann Forbes; and that he did write and forward a letter to the said Charlotte Ann Forbes to induce her to marry, with the intention of concealing his incontinence and adultery. ...This (said His Lordship) would have been the time for Mr. Duffus, or his counsel, as he was unable to attend himself, to show that the evidence which had been taken would not bear out the finding of the Commissioners, and that it did not contain that which would justify his conviction of the charges which had been preferred against him; but as no one had appeared, he must take it for granted that Mr. Duffus had no further reply to make than was contained in the evidence and documents before the Court, and it was his duty therefore to proceed to pass judgment. He felt most painfully the position in which, from the nature of the case, he (the Bishop) was placed, for it was impossible not to see that the principal witness, having to give evidence which tended to her own degradation, was justly liable to suspicion, and from the outset, therefore, he had been on his guard against receiving her testimony, unless where it was corroborated from other quarters. It had been stated by Mr. Duffus, in a letter dated so lately as the 5th instant, that he had been condemned on the evidence of an abandoned woman; he was sorry that such an impression should be on Mr. Duffus's mind, for he had not yet been condemned. It had only been reported that there was a case for inquiry, and that report was not made on the unsupported evidence of the young person referred to, as great care had been taken not to receive her evidence except as supported by others. His Lordship then went at great length into the evidence on the first charge. It appeared from the statement of the Principal witness, Charlotte Ann Forbes, that in 1843 she went into the service of Mr. Duffus as nursery governess; that after being there for a few months, Mr. Duffus took improper liberties with her, when her mother took her away from the house; that in July 1844, she, at the request of Mrs. Duffus, went back to the employ, and from that time the criminal intercourse was frequent. It appeared from the evidence of Mrs. Duffus, that in March 1845, Miss Forbes complained to her that on the previous night Mr. Duffus had come to her bed, and that there had been criminal intercourse, and notwithstanding this she remained in the house until the 8th May, and was there constantly afterwards. It appeared also that in the early part of 1846, Mr. Duffus was residing at Botany Bay for the benefit of his health, when he was several times visited by Miss Forbes, and according to her evidence was intimate with her; and although he must have known that she was pregnant, he allowed her to visit his family, and drove her about to various places with his daughters. With respect to the baptism the Bishop said they all admitted that it was irregular, but it was said there was no proof of its being clandestine; but it was performed in another parish, it was never registered, and had never been mentioned to the clergyman of that parish; taking this into consideration with the other parts of the case, he could have no hesitation in saying that it was done clandestinely, for the purpose of concealment. The explanation which Mr. Duffus gave of sending the letter was, that he wrote it at the request of Miss Forbes's mother, and enclosed it to her saying, that if she thought it would do her good, she was to give it to her daughter, if not, to destroy it. Now the letter itself showed that this could not have been the case. How it reached Miss Forbes there was no evidence to show, but on the outside of it was written in Mr Duffus's handwriting. "I put the wafer outside that you may not tear the writing, the sheet being full," and the wafer was outside. This quite did away with the statement that it had been enclosed to another person for perusal. Then the letter dated two o'clock, commences by stating that it was written at an hour snatched when all round were asleep, and he had risen from a sleepless bed. Now why (the Bishop) would ask, should a man get up at 2 o'clock on a winter's morning, when his family were asleep, to write a letter of advice, which was to be sent to a young person, and submitted to the inspection of her mother? The letter itself was of an immoral tendency; it recommended an act of imposture, an act of the greatest deceit of which a woman could be guilty, that of representing herself to a man she was about to marry as a virtuous woman, when she was not so This was clearly most immoral, especially as coming from a clergyman. When Mr. Duffus wrote this letter, what did he think he could say to the husband if he ever found out the imposture, as he did shortly after his marriage, and openly and directly charged Mr. Duffus with having seduced, and had a child by his wife? Mr. Duffus had complained that he was unable to subpoena witnesses to come and give evidence before the Bishop; but if he had commenced proceedings against the husband for making a false charge against him, the whole case would have been in issue in the Supreme Court, and Mr. Duffus could have subpoenaed any witnesses he pleased. It was in 1845 that he (the Bishop) received an intimation from a respectable party that the conduct of Mr. Duffus towards Miss Forbes was calculated to create unfavourable impressions, and he communicated with Mr. Duffus kindly but firmly, and desired that he would put her away from his house, which he stated he had done; and he produced a letter from Mrs. Duffus, and one from Miss Forbes, which induced the Bishop to hope that however open his conduct as a clergyman might have been to censure, nothing criminal had taken place. From a journal kept by one of Mr. Duffus's daughters, it appears, however, that although Miss Forbes did not reside in the house, she was constantly visiting there, and according to Miss Forbes's statement the criminal intercourse was continued. He would again repeat, that the testimony of a female giving evidence of her own degradation must be received with extreme caution; but for a man who had defiled a woman to say that therefore her evidence is not to be believed, is to say that by the commission of the crime he prevents any evidence of it from being given. He had very carefully considered the evidence; he had made an abstract of it, and compared one part of it with another, and, upon the whole of the facts of the case, there was no doubt in his mind that the Commissioners had arrived at a just conclusion, that the Rev. J. Duffus was guilty of acts of incontinence and adultery, at the Parsonage, Liverpool, at Botany Bay, and in Pitt-street, Sydney. As to the second charge, that he irregularly baptized the child, no one doubted; that he did it clandestinely, was, in his mind, equally clear, from the fact of his not registering the baptism, nor mentioning the circumstances to the minister of the parish in which the ceremony was performed. As to the point raised by two of the Commissioners, that it was not proved whether the intention of Mr. Duffus was to hide his own guilt or that of another party, he did not think it was of much consequence, and would leave the case merely that the letter was sent. And now he came to the most painful part of the case; in what manner was the guilt which he thought he had shown had been proved, to be visited? For it was a case of that kind, that it was impossible to pass over. He was not clear whether the total deprivation of the clerical character would be too great a punishment, not had he any doubt of the power of the Bishop to pass that sentence; but in practice, a Bishop does not proceed to that extreme step, without consulting one of his brethren; and as he had not had an opportunity of advising with another Bishop, he would not take a step which it was possible that consultation might convince him was wrong. He therefore decreed that the license of the Rev. John Duffus to the parish of St Luke, Liverpool bearing the date 1838, should be revoked. Mr. Duffus, his Lordship said, was entitled to an appeal to the Archbishop of the province provided his notice of appeal was lodged with the bishop within fifteen days. The Court was adjourned.

EmigrationNational Library of Australia. Trove: one search...a wealth of information. [database on-line].
Citation details:

The Australian Fri 24 Dec 1847 p. 2

Text:

SAILED... Dec 21, - The brig Daniel Watson, 163 tons, Watson, master, for Auckland. Passengers - Rev. John Duffus, Mrs Duffus and six children, Miss Duffus and...

DeathNew Zealand. Department of Internal Affairs. Births, Deaths and Marriages Online [database on-line]. Wellington, N.Z., the Department.
Text:

1870/9243 Duffus John 66Y