Review of all 27 entries in the supplied Draft 2 image-source catalogue. Seven concern printed material: the reward notice, creek poem, Professor Pepper illustration, French illustration, Andrew Lang book, film advertisement and first festival programme. The catalogue supplies leads, not scans or permission letters.
No clipping images have been reproduced here. Trove and the NLA viewer returned browser-verification screens. Links and publication details below distinguish inspected pages from citations and unresolved leads; none is a claim that an inaccessible original scan was examined.
Start with the reward notice. The additional reports below were found through the references in Rachel Franks’s 2018 Dictionary of Sydney article, which was inspected. They are contemporary reporting, not substitutes for the original court files.
Open the original newspaper record. The notice is dated 22 September, published on 23 September. Franks identifies this issue and later repetitions; Council’s Carol Liston history describes the £20 reward for recovery of Fisher’s body or proof that he had left the colony.
Best catalogue clipping lead for the disappearance chapter. Issue identified through a scholarly citation; original scan, exact wording, resolution and scan-specific terms not inspected.
Open the newspaper record. A lead for contemporary reporting of the search, Aboriginal tracking expertise and discovery. Read the original before quoting it; do not turn the ghost story into evidence from the inquest.
Additional documentary lead, outside the supplied image list. Citation inspected; scan access blocked.
Open the newspaper record. Another contemporary report cited for the discovery. It includes distressing descriptions; a future clipping should be selected for documentary value, not graphic detail.
Citation inspected; original scan and reuse terms not inspected.
Open the newspaper record. Franks cites the same article as both “Supreme Criminal Court”, page 5, and “Supreme Court (Yesterday)”, page 3. The heading and page need checking against the scan. Do not silently choose one.
Also cited: The Sydney Gazette, 3 February 1827, article 2187586, described by Franks as “Supreme Criminal Court, Tuesday”, page 3.
Useful trial-report leads, not inspected trial papers. Exact headings and pagination remain unverified.
Open the newspaper record. Contemporary reporting cited for Worrall’s final account. A reported confession should remain attributed reporting, not an invented verbatim scene.
Citation inspected; scan access blocked. Suitable for checking the ending of the legal narrative.
These items show how the story circulated after the case. Keep them with the print, folklore and festival chapters—not as proof of what happened in 1826.
Open the reprint record. Franks’s article reproduces a transcription with the heading “The Sprite of the Creek” and cites this issue. It describes an earlier anonymous version in Hill’s Life in New South Wales in 1832, but does not link an exact 1832 issue.
Do not label this scan 1832. The 1846 reprint is an identified lead; the 1832 original remains unlocated in this research. Transcription inspected on the secondary page, not compared with the newspaper scan.
Open the illustrated newspaper record. Franks’s page links a Fisher’s Ghost illustration to this record; the supplied catalogue separately labels its tourism-page derivative “Professor Pepper’s Fisher’s Ghost”.
Promising illustration lead. The exact match between the two derivatives, creator, complete caption and scan terms must be checked on the original. No exact-match claim is made here.
Open the magazine scan lead. The Wikipedia file-description page identifies this issue and source link and lists a 764 × 944-pixel advert derivative.
File-description metadata inspected; NLA original blocked. The file is marked public domain in the US, with an explicit warning that source-country status is not established. Not cleared for reproduction here. Viewer position n14 is not confirmed printed pagination.
Open the article and clipping viewer. The archive page was accessible: its bibliographic details, OCR text and four clipping-image links were inspected. It discusses Longford’s film and its New Zealand distribution.
Strong accessible clipping candidate for the film/folklore chapter. This is a later account associated with the film, not contemporary legal evidence. Its sensational ghost and reprieve claims must not be imported into the case narrative. OCR has not been visually checked against the scan; consult the archive’s copyright guide before reproduction.
Open the article lead. Search results supplied the title, date, page and opening text. It is an additional later-retelling lead, not one of the catalogue’s original entries.
Search-index lead only; original page not inspected. Do not treat its title as a guarantee of historical accuracy.
The Dictionary of Sydney provides this citation for the anniversary ghost watch. No exact digital article or original scan was located. Search the issue through a library newspaper archive using the title and date.
Bibliographic lead only. Keep with 1950s folklore, and do not assign this date to the separate mannequin photograph, which is dated only c.1950–1959.
