The harbourside suburb of Clontarf was at the centre of a scandal in the late 19th century when allegations of debauchery at its pleasure grounds led to one of the most sensational defamation cases in colonial Australia. The legal battle, fuelled by accusations of immorality, tested the limits of press freedom and exposed the social tensions of the time.
The Rise of Clontarf Pleasure Grounds
By the 1870s, Clontarf Pleasure Grounds had become one of Sydney’s most popular harbour picnic destinations. Situated on the northern foreshore, it was accessible primarily by ferry, attracting thousands of visitors—sometimes up to 5000 on a public holiday. The grounds offered games like quoits and skittles, but the main draw was the dancing, drinking, and live music performed in licensed halls, where rum and brandy were the beverages of choice.
However, as crowds of young people flocked to Clontarf, concerns grew over the behaviour fuelled by alcohol and excitement. By 1881, the venue’s reputation took a serious hit when The Bulletin published a damning report. The report sparked an intense defamation lawsuit.
Photo Credit: Northern Beaches History Hub
The Defamation Case That Gripped Sydney
In December 1881, The Bulletin printed an article by journalist William Traill, who described the previous Boxing Day celebrations at Clontarf as nothing short of an orgy. He wrote of intoxicated men and women, their “blood warmed by alcohol and their passions inflamed,” engaging in “romping abandon” and indecent dancing, likening the scene to that of “satyrs and bacchantes,” describing them as being “in soiled suits and squalid finery.”
Enraged by these descriptions, Clontarf’s proprietors, William and Thomas Moore, sued The Bulletin for libel, demanding £1000 in damages.
The trial was a spectacle, drawing widespread public attention across Australia. Witnesses for the Moores—employees, friends, and junior policemen—acknowledged drunkenness and fights but insisted that it was not an orgy. However, The Bulletin’s defence presented lurid accounts of public brawls, swearing, underage drinking, and inappropriate conduct, including a man wearing a woman’s drawers and groups of naked bathers being watched by onlookers.
Senior policemen also weighed in, claiming that two-thirds of the prostitutes they knew had been led to ruin by pleasure grounds like Clontarf.
After heated legal arguments, the jury ruled in favour of the Moores, but in a symbolic move, they awarded only one farthing in damages, a moral victory for The Bulletin.
Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons
The Fallout and Press Freedom Debate
Despite the symbolic damages, The Bulletin’s proprietors, John Haynes and Jules Archibald, were ordered to cover the Moores’ legal costs of more than £1500. Unable to pay, they were jailed in Darlinghurst for a year, igniting a public backlash. A fundraising campaign quickly gained momentum, securing their release within weeks.
The case sparked a national debate on press freedom, particularly the right of journalists to expose social controversies and the broader implications for defamation law reforms in Australia.
While The Bulletin continued its fearless journalism, Clontarf’s reputation suffered. By the turn of the century, the pleasure grounds faded into obscurity, never fully recovering from the scandal that had once made them infamous.
Published 8-Mar-2025
