IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I Hi 12.5 H J50 — U lili L£ 12.0 IS u i llllm \\25 III 1.4 1.6 V] <^ y /^ Photographic Sdences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 873-4503 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques i \ 'S h. Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. n n n □ D n Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommag^e Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur6e et/ou peiiicui^e I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque I I Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured Ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou Illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relii avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure serrde peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge int^rieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ 11 se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout6es lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmdes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppldmentaires: L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6tA possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibiSographique. qui peuvent modifier une image reprodulte. ou qui peuvent exiger une modL nation dans la methods normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ v/ This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqui ci-dessous. Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes n Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurdes et/ou peilicui^es Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages ddcolordes, tachet^es ou piqudes □ Pages detached/ Pages ddtachies The toth Showthrough/ Transparence I I Quality of print varies/ Quality in^gaie de {'impression includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel suppiimentaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 filmdes d nouveau de fagon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. The poss of th filmi Origi begii the li sion, othe first sion, or ill The I shall TINU whic ly/lapt diffei entiri begir right requi meth 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X j The copy filmed here has been reproduced thank* to the generosity of: Bibliothique nationaia du Quebec L'exemplaire fiimi fut reproduit grAce A ia gAn*rosit6 da: Bibllothdque nationaia du Quebec The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in Iteeping with the filming contract specifications. Les images suivantes ont At6 reprodultes avec la plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at de la nettetA de rexemplaire film6, et en contormitA avec les conditions du contrat de fiimage. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the bacit cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est ImprimAe sont filmAs en commenpant par la premier plat et en terminant soit par la derniAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont fiimis en commenpant par ia premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la derniire page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol —^>( meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol y (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaltra sur la dernlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le ens: le symbols — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film6s d des taux de reduction diff^rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour 6tre reproduit en un seul clich6, 11 est film6 A partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant ie nombre d'images n6cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la m^thode. 1 2 3 32X 1 2 3 4 5 6 m; DEL. Mr. B] tleman w intosh) w to depre tile talent an illuatr conslderal I shall fe( House, to was indeei to be folio US tolerabJ we are no' there is nc apparent f ■W7th whic peroration^ dealing wi commencec us an olla ancient far facts, whic] ed so as tc thie very se fore us. ] tailent in se mired his s contracts ; the acquisil I am to^a} taiiuneiita j MINISTERS ON TRIAL. Was 'the Execution of Elel Necessary or Proper ? MR. BLAKE'S GREAT JUDGMENTS, DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA, ON THB 19tli March, 1886. Mr. BLAKE. I trust the lion, gen- tleman who has just sat down (Mr. Mac- intosh) will not impute to me any desire to depreciate the varied and versa- tile talents of which he has jusb given us an illustration, if I do not devoce any considerable portion of the time for which I shall feel called on to trespass on the House, to a discussion of his speech. It was indeed a production which, if it were to be followed and discussed, would lead us tolerably far afield from the question we are now called upon In debate ; aud there is nothing I more admired than the apparent fervour and freshness and zeal 'W7th which the hon. gentleman in his peroration^ denounced the propriety of dealing with dead issues, after he had commenced his speech, by laying before iiB an olla podrida not very savoury of aiicient fancies and fictions, rather than facts, which he proposed should be discuss- ed so as to prevent us from dealing with the very serious issue which is really be- fore us. I have admired his skill 'aid talent in several capacities. I, ,bav>a ^aU- mired his skill in the making of printing contracts ; I httve admired hib .pcv»e|ij i^ the acquisition of railway sut)&idies';'&nd I am to^iay called on to admire his at- tainments in the profession of law, and in the profession ol medicine, as well as in that process of the collection of odds and ends of dead issues, which he began by telling us about, though he ended by denouncLug their being raised. Now, Sir, the question before us belongs to that part of the administration of justice for which the Executive is responsible to Parliament. It is, in its nature, out of the ordinary scope of our enquii'iea But I am glad to know that the Government has frankly recognized the proposition which I ventured a few weeks ago to suggest in public — that this particulai; case Oomes fittingly within the scope of our enquiry; that it is a proper thing, under the circumstances which have occurred, and in the "condition of »the question that it should be brought into parliament, and should be here debated and decided. There is, therefore, on this occasion, no '. R6ee,ssity t6 jBn^ge«i4:i the consideration ' of .what Jire the \imi;tation8 under which we may pix)pe'rry 'intervene in Parliament ' vitk .'this ■ ^^orjbioA 6f tife administration of justice; hejcaxaeb^t^ aidei of the House appectr to afftee that this particular case does not fall within any rule which shnitjd 58389 ' ' ■ '^ '% \ r "3581 prevent our interference, hut rather tJuU it^ nature is siwh as imperatively demands elieve that there are mater- ials very important to a satisfactory dis- cussion of this question, which materials the Govornment have not thought lit to bring bef^^re us. I do not intend to en- large upon that topic, having bad an op- portunity of referring to it a day or two ago. I say wo ought to have had an op- portunity of seeing some of the papers which have been brought down and which we have not yet seen, because we know that unprinted papers are accessible to but few. For my part, I have not yet had the opportunity of seeing a single paper brought down by the Government so far, with the exception of the instruc- tions to the Crown counsel of which I obtained a copy. There are important papers, so fur a.s I am able to gather from statenaents made by the Minisf-^r when presenting from time to time those which he did bring down, which are not yet brought down, »nd some, as I shall show before I resume d^ mt, very important. I think the Conduct of the Administration on the question of the proauction of papers is blameable in the extreme. They use these papers as a fund upon which they can draw, so far as they think them ad- vantageous to themselves in the conduct of the discussion ; but such papers as they think do not tell in their favor, they hold back. Take the Minister of Militia. The other evening he thought it would help his argument with reference to the patviofcibui and disinterestedness of B,iel, with reference to the degree of sympathy or the reverse which we ought '"to extend to him, to read a letter of 'Bishop Grandin. The Minister takes tjje letter out of his pocket, and he reads iti. He thought it would help . him to "^anticipate the encounter which I am Sure we are looking forward to with great interest, of the two military mea, the hon. Minister of Militia and the hon. member for Bellochasse (Mr. Amyot) ; he thought it would do him a little good to bring down some correspondence in ad- vance, and he I'ead extracts of a lot of let- ters, and a couple of telegrams, which he says, were sent to him by tho hon. member for Bellechasse, and he read tliem at a time when the hon. member for Belle- chasse (Mr. Amyot), having already spoken, had no opportunity, according to the rules of the debate, of replying to him, and when they were but very little relevant to the question. Such was the course that the hon. Minister of Militia thought consistent with his duty to the House, with the dignity of his position that he thought consistent with the gen- erosity which ought to prevail between political opponents. The Government select such papers as they think they can make a point on in the debate. These they bring down at the moment they want to \iso them, but the tnass of papers, on (he perusal of which, if they had been placed in an accessible form before us, a proper general judgment could be reached, these they refuse to briny down. They say they have no time to bring them down, that they have no time to do any- thing else but to debate this question fi'om day to day, and have time only to bring down those papers which serve their own arguments. I said the other day, and I repeat, that in my opinion the whole question of theconduct of the Government, before the rebellion, and up to the out- break, and the whole attitude and relation of the half-breeds and white settlers to tho Government with reference to the variousquestionswhich have been agitated, are extremely material to the " formation of a judgment upon this question. I do not say what the hon. the Minister of the Interior the other day misunderstood me as saying, that I thought we ought to debate them in the same debate on which we debate this question. I did not think so far a reason which is very obvious, for the reason that, even the debating of them, by themselves taking them alto- gether, involve a question so large in point? ()f time, in point of subject, in point of re- ference to dooumentfl, as to transcend the UmitH, the ordinary and reasonable limits of debate, while the question wo have be- fore us is one of quite sufficient magni- tude and complication at any rato to in- volve a debate by itself. 80 far I quite agree, but what I sHid Hio other day, and what I reiterate, is that, notwithstanding that proposition as to the complexity and magnitude of the quostions rendering it inconvenient that they should be debated together, it is none the loss important to a sound decision upon this question that theotherquestioDS should be debated, and ■we are doing a wrong thixg : we are Putting the cart beforo the horse, "whfn we discuss first of all the final act in the great drama, instead of dealing in the first instance with those precedent facts and circumstances, threshing theri out, sifting them, and endeavoring to reach a conclusion as to the relative re- sponsibilities and attitudes ot the Gov- ernment of the country and of the people who rose. I say that we oughc lo know that in order that we may pro[.erly measure what the moral guilt wasof those who rose, we ought to know it in order that wo may properly measure what was the right of this Government to act as judge in this cause. And, therefore, Sir, I am of opinion that the course which the Government has decided and insisted upon being pursued in this matter is an inconvenient, an illogical, an unsatisfac- tory course. I think also that it must be thoroughly understoo sh«ll be put, when we cannot call, if it were convenient to call, for a decision upon it, when we have not those niaterials to which I referred the ether day, the obligation to submit which to us has bei-n admitted by the Government but remains unperformed ; that we are not now debating, still less deciding, that great question, a question which is the question, Sir \ for what we are debating to-day, however important it may be vith reference to the considerations of senti- ment and of feeling which have been raised about it, that qiifstion is but an incident, of the real question which ia to he tried between the two sides r>f thi* House. And again. Sir, I am unablo to com- pliment the Government upon the course which they have pursued in determining that, this question being brought forward now, the discussion, in its practical form and sense, should be limited, by their motion of the previous question. I am not hinting that we may not debate the main motion just as freely after the pre- vious question is put as before — of course we may ; but all the subjects which are involved in the ma'u motion are questions which are properly to be debated, and some of them should have been brought forward in a manner in which the opinion of the House could be taken upon them in this connection ; and the capacity to take the opinion of the House upon them in this connection being taken away from us by the proposal of the previous ques- tion, the Government has, as I conceive,ex- ercised a very unwise discretion, and pur- sued a very needless course as well, in so dealing with the matter. I say a needless course, because I think it is pretty palp- able to all of us that no possible amend- ment that could have been moved would ha'^e prevented us in the end from com-* ing back upon the motion of the hon. member for Montmagny (Mr. Landry). I should myself deplore any attempt to evade a decision upon that precise ques- tion, but quite consistently with a deci- sion upon that precise question being desirable, is this proposition also good that it is desirable that there should be decisions upon other questions as well. Therefore, Sir, upon these grounds, and notably on the ground to which t have referred a moment ago with reference to the papers, when we happily reach that stage in this debate at which our opin- ions are to be converted into votes, I shall myself vote against the proposition 6 that this (j[ue8tion bo now put, believing it U not fit that, at thia time and under thest; circuuiHtanceH that the question Hhould be now put. I shall represent, I feel Hure, though I do not know, I am quite satisfied I shall repre- sent in that declaration the opinions of a nunority — how rfinall or how large a minority Is of little consequence — the opinions of a nunority, and therefore iamiecUatoIy afterwards we will come to the question itself, and coming to the question itself and recognising therefore the fact that with that question wo shall have to deal, I propose to discuss now the method in which we should deal with it, aa of courao after that first vote there will bo no opportunity for further dis- cuSHion. Now, I could well understand and I believe that I could well justify this proposition — that under the circum- F*"ances to which I have briefly alluded, it would be iit further to emphasis© one's view of the inexpediency, The Impropriety, the Unfairness of the course which the Government is purauing by abstaining from voting either way upon the main motion. I can thoroughly understand the opinion of many people as being in favour of such a view, tlms leaving the question to be debated at its proper time and under its proper circumstances ; and I can understand also — as you will readily perceive — the opinion as existing in some minds that in the sum of this whole matter, though they may not be able wholly to agree with the view of the Government, they should yet think that it was not a case in which there were grounds for lecording a censure upon the Government in regard to their action. I have already declared, on the occasion to which I have referred, that such conditions have existed in my know- ledge, paying as I naturally do, some attention to the operation of criminal justice in the country, and I say that I can very well understj&nd that some per- sons should reach that conclusion. It is not the view or course which I propose to adopt. I have reached, for my own part, conclusions which seem to uio to be so clear, which seem to me to be so well founded, which seem to me to be so im- portant in the general interest of the administration of criuiinal justice, that I fee! it my duty notwithstanding the dis- advantages in which we are placed in coming to a conclusion, not to permit those disadvantages to deprive me of an opportunity which, perhaps, might not recur, of recording my vote or expressing my opinion. Now then, as I have said, it will be necessary that wo should, be- fore we can finally dispose of this ques- tion, though we are called upon to dis- pose of it now, it will yet be necessary that we should, before we can really and properly dispose of it, to thresh out the subject of the North -West affairs. I do not propose to enter into that discus- sion now, for the reasons which I have given. It is, perhaps, needless for me to do so, because I have already, at some considerable length, variously stated at from six to seven hours — I hope it was not quite seven, Mr. Speaker; I dare say you know better than any one of us — but I have stated in a speech which was but, after all, a chronological recital of the actions on the one side and of the other, my view upon the evidence which was then presented, of the relations of the Government to the North-West, to the white settlers, and to the half- breeds in the neighborhood of Prince Albert and elsewhere ; and I have de- clared, and fl think I have proved, that there were in those matters Gross, Palpable, Incredible Delay, Neglect and Mismanagement. I was struck the other night when my hon. friend from Eaat Quebec (Mr. Laurier) in the coarse of another branch of his argument altogether, re- ferred to the execution of Admiral Byng. * I thought I recollected something of a historical parallel in another regard be- tween those times and persons and these times and persons ; and turning next morning to the book I had in my mem- ory, Walpole's book on George II, I luy owQ tiu) to he HO well )0 HO iin< of the se, that I the difl- laeod in > peiiuit uo of an ght not prcHsing avo saidy Quid, be- lls quee- to dis- ecesaarj lally and out the urn. I t discua- I have for me at some bated at it waa I dare ine of US ih which 1 recital iof the !e which tions of h-West, he half- Prince ave de- ed, that Delay, aent. tien my c (Mr. another her, re- IByng.- g of a ard he- ld these g next r mem- . II, I found what happened at that time. At that time, too, Sir, there waa a North American quoHtion with England ; at that time there was a French ({uestif . in North America ; and just at that time the annalist of the reign of George II, records, with reference to the Hecretary of the Southern Department, the MiniH ter of the Interior of that day, the Duko of Newcastle, that Duko who, when he was told, us I said a while ago in this House, that Annapolis nuiHt be defended, said, ** Oh, yes, of course ; Annapolis must be defended ; certainly. Where — where is Annapolis?" Of that same Minis- ter, the annalist records, that what facilitat- ed the enterprises of the French was the extreme ignorance in which the English court had kept themselves of the affairs of America. " It would not be credited" aays the annalist, " what reams of paper , representations, memoriaU and petitions from, that part of the world la// monlder- ing and unopened in his ojice." And turning a few pages on to the other event which had called my attention to the subject, I iind the account of this same Minister with reference to Byng, that when a deputation waited on him shortly before the trial to make repre- sentation against the Admiral,he answer- ed : "Oh, indeed, he shall be tried immed- iately , he shall be lianged directly" So you see, Sir, there are very curious par- aillels bft ween* past and present times. Now, Sir, I have held, and I hold this Government responsible for every dollar of the public and private treasure which has been expended, for every pang that has been inflicted, for every life that has been lost, whether on the field or on the scaffold in the North-West, and I believe that for this, their responsibility, they will be called to a strict and stem account, hero first, and afterwards at the great tribunal, so soon as they, who so boldly challenge us to come on, choose to bring forward those papers which they hlod — I do not know whether thev be moulderius; or unopened — but which, in some way or other, they hold within their vaults. The Guilt of the Insurgents. Now, with refereno»< to the insiiigents, of coarse there was legal guilt —of course, rebellion, the old saying is, is always treason until it becomes revolution. Th* degree of miornl ymlt is not a aint«Ki mifc Ihftre ynvL-e HOiue (Iii)ioultieB in I'elation to tiny jud^e who might bd appointml uriilor thr exiHting circumstancoH ; that in the firat phico thcHn Mti|>nn()iary nnigiHtratrs, in the North We«it, woie, in truth, iiiler- ior nia^MHtrat(>H. They an^ not nin^iH- trat«'a--[ ihiHiro togpuak of th(Mii with all duo rtwpect — but confeH.s(;clly th«y arc not uiagiNtraUm in any HtniKO of thai wci^^ht, dignity, authority and Htanding wliiuh belong to those nuigistrateH, who, uiidnr tlu' lawH of the older Provinces ot" the Dominion, anient rusted witli the trial of capital oHenceH. I have pointed out, beHidci}, that these JudgOH are political otticere, tin nienibers of the North-Wewt Council, of tiuit very North-West Council which, Hhortly after theao trials, thought it within the sphere of its duty to pro- nounce an opinion — first of all, upon the conduct of the Government with refer- ence to the transaction of its business, that ])ortion of its busine3s the neglect of which led to the inauirection orgave the opportunity for the insurrection ; and secondly, to i>a8s an opinion upon tho course which ought to have been, or tho course w hich was pursued bv the Govern- ment with reference to the execution of ibis very sentence. I have pointed out also that the standing of those officers in another important respect is inferior to that which ought to be the standing of men entrusted with such issues, in this : T/iat they are not officers holding their office during (jood behaviour ; they are officers holding office practically during •pleasure. The security which grows from the entire independence of the judges of the Executive Government, does not subsist in this case, and the fact that it does not subsist has been empliasized by this Government, whicli in a well known case has removed one of those stipendiary magistrates from office. So that, not merely in theory, but in practice has the lesson been taught that these judges are tmder the control of this Government. Those difficulties in my opinion should have been removed by legislation. I do not think that Parliament as a whole, whatever the Administration may have done, really contemplated that trials fot high treason or treason felony should lake place before thoso magistrates. I do nbr NuppoSe that in what we thought was hap[)y, pfNiceful and contented Canada' there was anyoiu* who thought of the po«'«* sibility of a trial for high treason or ticason felony. .Sp«?aking for njyself I sav it neveroocurred to me that we should have such a trial last year or any year in our country ; and 1 therefore say that I fancy it must have been upon that view very largely that tho legislation which was passed by tho late (Jovernment and which was amended bj the present Gov- eniment in a dinicbion which diminished to eomci extent the securities for the pri- soner was passed. You may say these are but theonitical didiculties alter all. I say, no. I say they are seriotis practi- cal difViculties. They are intensely practical. I have already said olse- whei'e th.vt the question is not simply of the actual faivn(iss of the trial. It is of the lant conHcqiiencb that the public sliould retain all the securities which constitu- tional government and parliamentary gov- ernment have wrested from the prerogative and that there should be in the minds of the public a certain conviction tluit those securities exist and are available. This is not a new question ^ith us. Its spirit is exhibited in our Statute Book, in the Act which constitutes the Supreme Court, by which it is expressly provided that the judges of that court shall not be competent to accept any commission or employment, of emolu- ment under the Government of th^ day. In the Consolidated Statutes of Lower Canada, an express prohibition of a similar character exists, and was brought into play, we recollect, not so many years ago, by our lamented friend, Mr. Holton, and that in coilhection with a North-West matter too, when a learned judge of the Superior Court of th6 Pro- vince of Quebec had been appointed ad- ministrator of the Govemmerit of th© Province of Manitoba. This statute pre- cluded the taking effect of that appoint- Viten Hov on t b«'ei to of The has of n mont. And how did tluH tako placn 7 How wa8 it that thn \nw wan engruftnd on tho Stiittitn Hook 1 IlecAUSo it hud b«i«ii found of pmotical coiifwquence to the |)(H)pl(5 of tlio Province of Quoltpc t!iat it Hhould ))0 no. Thoi-o uIho, as wo know, thoif haa hocn an aj^itntion a^ainnt p{riovant;«vs of many ynai'H'8tandii\j(,whi(;h (Milininatcd in tho iob<'llion of 1837 ; and fvjia ^Toat many years this (lucstion was one of tho (luoHtionH aj^itatinc; tho poojdo of tliat Province. You will find that as oarly as 182r), tho rPHolutionH of the rj«*gi.shitivo Assoinoly of Lower Canada, d<:ulared as follows : — "Thfit for tho moro upri^j'lit and im|)ar- tial adtuinistration uf jiMticu it im uxixniicnt lo render tho judj;;c3 of His Mnhwty'a Court of Kin^''H I5eiic.li and Provincial Courts moro .independent UiaJi hithortofore by iuca|>aci- tating tho Hftid judges from seats in the Executive and Legislative Councils, and dis- qualifying such an have now seats therein from sitting or voting in such Coiincds. "That it ia expedient to secure by law to the said judges their renpective ofHces during good behaviour in the same manner as 4ho«e onicers are secured in England. ^, " That it will be expedient tor tho afore- fl^id to secure adec^uate permanent salaries to the said judges on their being preventetl from "holding any other office of profit or emolument under tho Crown." It is not, Sir, in the heyday of liberty that we are to forget the securities for freedom. The price — according to a hackneyed but ever-to-beremenibered maxim — the price of liberty is eternal vigilance ; and in this fegard, as I have said, an error has been committed. Now, what is the measure and extent to which this Administration is chargeable in this respect 1 Certainly not in the exiHting state of the law with reference to a trial before one of the stipendiary magistrates. All that can be complained of fairly against them is, that their attention being called to the special circumstances of the case, to the unpro- cedent and unanticipated circumstances, dui'ing the late Session of Parliament, by the hon. member for Beauharnois (Mr. Bergeron), and the suggestion being made that legislation should take place, they declined to accede to the suggestion, and instNted that the trialHhould goon under the exittting lawn. Sir, I have said that triaU of this dpMoHpiion ditfur altogether from all other olas-iOH of trial in ri*Hpoct to the importance of tho independence of the judiciary. Relation of the Govermnent to trials for treason. They (lillor wholly, l)f(;auHe in trials of this description there is hardly a conceiv- al>l(t <>aM(> in niodorri times, at any rate, in which the (JovcrnnKUit docH not occupy a wholly dilYcrcnt relation to the prosecu- tion fron- i/liat which it occupies in all ordinary cases in the administration of criminal justice. There can b(^ no (|UPa. tiou, for example, of the Government being otherwise than an itiipartial and erpud administrator of the law if John Jones or 'I'om Smith is taken up and ac- cused of having picked somebody's pocket, or robbed somebody's barn, or maimed somebody, or killed somebody. But cases of this description wholly differ. In this case the (Jovernmont may be, generally is, in tliii particular case un- questionably was— a prosecutor in alto- gether a different sense and with alto< gether diflerent relations to the prisoners than in those other cases. I point out — for I desire through this discussion to sustain myself by authority — what au- thority sjiys upon this topic. I refer to the well-known book of Lieber on Civil Liberty, when he uses these words : **/?i the trial of treason the Oooeniment is no longer theoretically tlie prosecutiyuj fariy, aa it viay be aakl it is in (Ao case of thefi or assault, lut the Government is the really dffendedy irritated party, endovxd at the aaw* tune vnth alt me prce of the Government to ann'y, prosecute ana ofteti to crush. Governments have therefore been most tenacious in retaining whatev r power they could in the trial for treason ; and on the other hand, it is most important for the free citizen that in the trial 'for treason he should not only enjoy the common protec- tion of a sound venal trial : but far greater protection. * ■* * * Tlie trial for treason is a gmge of liberty. Tell its how they try peo])k for treason and we Wvil tell you whether they an free. "It redounds to the glory of England 10 that attention was iireeted to thu subject from early times, and that guarantees were granted to the prisoners indicted for treason centuries before they wene allowed to the person suspected of a common offence. * * * Experience viovea tluxt not only art aU the gwirantees of a fair penal trial pecuUari/y necessary for a fair trial in treason, but that it requires addUional safeguards ; and of one or the other the following seem to me tJie most important. " T/w judges must not depend on the Executive. # # * " TJie judges must not be political hodies. * # # Many safeguards are specified, of which I select the two that are opposite to the present case : " The judges must not depend on the Executive ; the judges must not be |:olitical bodies." Now, Sir being iu the difliculty that in these par ticular trials the Government, under the atandmg laws which they did not choose to propose to alter, had to select a judge who was dependent on the Executive — a judge who was one of a political body, it was Eminently incumbent on them to have made the best selection. the one which was least objectionable, the one in respect of which it might be said, though there is a difficulty as to all to which I have adverted, this one is cer- tainly the least, or at any rat« not the most obnoxious. But what I have ob- jected to on a former occasion, an objec- tion which I renew to-night, is the choice of the particular judge, because this particular judge, as you will see if you ref'^r to the Public Accounts, was the rrciT)ient of special favors, the occu- pant (J' v.[;< jinl relations to the Executive ef the tU > ii ^he first place, he is the legal t.;dT *>i< V .0 trie Executive of theNorth-West; !te ' SS' uT';<, '^ted during the pleasure of the ^^jit.Acr) laoiit ; he is so paid a salary dur- ing the pleasure of the Government. He ansvers to the Attorney-General, the legal adviser of the Government in the North- West Territories ; and it needs not to enlarge upon the relations and respcn- sibilities of a Lientenant-Govemor of the North-West Territories to a rebellion in the Noitl^West, and upon the relations and responsibilities of the First Minister of Canada, who declared that he was the medium of communication between the two Governments and of the Minister of the Interior towards the Lieutenant- Governor of the North- West Territories to shotsr that it was an unhappy choice to select out of the tliree or four judges, the very person who filled the position of the political adviser, the political law officer, to the Government in the Terri- tories to be the judge in this particular trial. He is also the recipient of special favors. I find, in the Auditor-General's Report, just brought down, a statement of his accounts. I find th»t, irrespective ol uic salary of .1^3,000 a year, there has been paid to him, during the year to which these accounts refer, a special rental allowance of $500, an additional salary as legal adviser to the Lieutenant- Governor of $200,three votes of $200 each, as a nominative member of the North- West Council, his travelling allowance of $1,000, and something between $400 and $500 for expenses and allowances for at- tendance at Ottawa in connection, it is said, with the Torrens' Act ; making a total of over $2,700 paid during the last year to this judge, in addition to hin salary of $3,000. Now, US to tra veiling allow- ances, and allowances as nominative members of the North- West Council, the other judges were in the same position ; but the allowances for house rent and as legal adviser and in connection with the Torrens' Act are peculiar to the particu- lar officer whom the Government, I think, extremely unfortunately, decided they would entrust with the duty of conduct- ing these trials. Well, the judge cl oosea The Jmy Panel, and we have heard from the hon. member for Bellechasse (Mr. Amyot) a statement, which I think is of considerable import- ance. and with reference to which I should have desired to hear something from the Government before now — a statement to the effect that there were persons of the faith and nationality of the prisoner eligible as jurymen, but that none or only one such was chosen of the panel. I heard the hon. member for' <"'^'> «,*■** ri Montreal Centre (Mr. Ourran) say that no objection of that description ooukl apply, in consequence of the relations of the prisoner at the time of his trial to the church of his fathers and the church to which he himself belongs, bat I do not think that argument Ixolds ; and, for my part I must ex- press my regret that, if the circum- stances be as up to this moment they appear to be from the uncontradicted statement of the hon. member for Belle- chasse (Mr. Amyot), a wider selection should not have been made of the panel ; and I' share the regret expressed by several hon. members that the single person who happened to be on the jury, of that faith, should have been perempt- orily challenged. For that challenge there may have been, for all I know, a good reason ; but we are not told, and we must not presume it was a challenge for cause. We all know the shock to the administration of justice vehicd ensued when those of his faith were challenged •on the occasion of the O'Connell trial. That ought to have been a lesson on this occasion, and the same difficulty ought not to have recurred in our day. Again, with reference to The character of the prosecution. The wiittea instructions which were given to the Crown lawyers were to try all the leaders, with the exception of certain Indians and others who might be • chargeable with murder — to try all the leaders for treason. No distinction what- ever was made in those instractions be- tween Louis Riel and the other leaders. Now, how did it happen under these cir- cumstances, that all the prisoners, except Louis Kiel, were indicted — for the same offence, is true, but under the more modem statute and procedure, for trea- son-felony, while Kiel alone was tried for high treason under the ancient law. Were there special instructions given "which have not been brought down to us, or special verbal instructions or com- munications differing from the general instructions whch have been brought down to us, as the only instructions given to the officers ? If there were none such, I consider it to have been a viola- tion of those instructions to try for trea- son-felony the mass of the leaders, and for high treason, one. They were all ordered to be tried for treason, and they all otight to have been tried under the same statute, unless special instructions were given to the contrary. It was, of course, w^th the cognisance of the Gov- ernment that this difference was made, because it was everybody's news — it was reported in the papers ; and, therefore, I assume that the Government either in- structed, in the first instance, or else acquiesced in the course pursued ; and I am entitled to assume that because I observe still further that the Deputy Minister of Justice was one of the officers associated with the others in the conduct of the trial. As to the tune, I agree with the observations that have been made, that it seems to have been short ; but I am not prepared, in the present state of the evidence, to maintain that it was too short, simply because I have been unable to observe any protest on the part of the prisoner's counsel that it was too short, excepting in so far as such protest may be implied from their having asked for a longer time than the Crown counsel granted. Upon that subject, I think we might have some further information. I was glad to be able to make an observatien, which has been referred to before in this debate, aa to the assist- ance given by the Crown in procuring The Prisoner's Witnesses. That observation can no longer be re- peated in its full force, because I have learned, since this debate commenced, the course which was pursued with reference to the request for witnesses. In my view, it was of the highest consequence, and in saying that I do not overlook the letter which the hon. member for Montreal Centre (Mr. Curran) read, that Dr. Howard should have been called. } do not, after the statement of that hon. rl ;.v^*-A 12 11 «taiember, charge his not beiog procured upon the cpunisel for the Crown, because the hon. gentleman read a letter address- ed to Dr. Howard from the Department of Justice here, from which it appeared that negotiations had been going on be- tween the Department of Justice and Dr. Howard as to the terms upon which that gentleman would visit Kegina ; that he had named, under the special circumstances which the hon. gentleman mentioned, the sum of $500 ; and that it was upon the question of that charge that the Department of Justice declined to arrange for Di'. Howard going up to Regina. Now, Sir, I regret that decision. I think it extremely unfortu- nate that Dr. Howard — who, besides be- ing a well-known alienist, also had charge of Kiel for, as well as I could gather, a period of nine months in the asylum over which he presided — was not a witness at the trial, and that we have not now the benefit of his evidence. I do not think any such question as the diflference be- tween what might have been supposed to be his reasonable charge and the sum of $600 ought to have weighed tor an in- stant in considering the question whether he should have been available or not. Then, Sir, I think it is unfortunate that we do not know more with reference to the Complicity and responsibility of the Whites • in the rebellion. We remember the speech of the First Minister, last Session, in which he declared that it was not to the Indians or to the half-breedsj but to the whites of Prince Albei-t, that we owed the shame, the disgrace and the discredit of the rebellion. We find the law ofiicer of the Government pointing out the same proposition, not as positively, but still with a tolerable degree of certainty, to the oounsel he was sending there, and instructing them that no point was more important than that they should secure evi- dence and convict those who were guilty in this regard. We hear frcm t^p Min- ister of Justice that reports hftye been receired from the law officers of the> Grown on all these points ; we know the beggarly kind of attempt made to mete out justice to these guiltier whites. Vfe know that two only were committed for trial, for the Minister of Justice has told us so ; we know that one was Jackson,, of whom the Secretary of State, with that liveliness of imagination which characterizes his oratorv, told his con- stituents at Terrebonne that he was a Frenchman in all but the name, that he was Franeise, that he was just as much a Frenchman as Regnier, and there was no question of nationality about it. Mr. CHAPLEAU. I did not. . Mr. BLAKE. Oh ! well, we will verify as we go. Here is a report in La Minerve of the hon. gentleman's speech : Uue VOIX. Vous avez bien graci^ 1' Anglais Jackbon, pourquoi ne pas avoir graci eon 6tait I'un des secretaires de Riel ; il a eii le sort de Bc^gnier, son compagnon, un Canadien de nom et d'origine. And then the hon. gentlemen proceeds to say ; "lis ont ete gracilis tous deux comme com- plices au second degt^, de sorte que la ques- tion de race n'a eu rien k faire dansleur cas."^ That was the hon. gentleman's statement by the revised report of the hon. gentle- man's speech in the Minerve. Mr. CHAPLEAU. It was not my statement. The hon. gentleman who corrects the Hansard here should allow other people to correct reports in other papers. Mr. BLAKE. I do allow it to be corrected. So this is the account o'L the trial of Jackson, who, I admit, was an Englishman, contrary to the incorrect report of the gentleman's speech, which some wicted adversary, with intent to get him into a comer aad injure hJuti S n< II hoi set H( the. the of enow tap to me^ litted for has told Jackson, te, with which his con- was a that he much a a was no b. we will rt in La peech : graci(J 1' w avoir qu'on a Jackson, le groaee »aB pliis avait d*^ Frangais i-meme. de nos icossaise, . Jack^ J il a eu 100, uu seeds to ae com-»^ a ques- ur cae.'^ tement gentle- ot' my I wl^o allow other to be oi: the as an sorrect which nt to > hrai. 13 politically, has foisted into that well known hostile paper to him, the Minerve. I leave the I'esponsibility to him and the hon. mem'ber for Ottawa (Mr. Tassd) of settling with the reporter, and I hope the hon« gentleman will not blame me if I liave chosen the report from that paper which has given ostensibly, in the first person, a verbatim report of his speech. Mr. CHAPLEAU. I blame the hon. gentleman for not accepting the state- ment of one of his colleagues in the House. Mr. BLAKE. I said !• hoped he , would not blame me for having taken the report. With reference to Jackson, we know well the circumstances in his case. We know that he had joined Riel at an early period, and that he is said to have become a lunatic and was acquitted on the ground of insanity. The other person was one Scott, of whom we have not equal particulars, but of whom the Minister of Justice reports to us the result of the trial, saying he was found " not guilty" ; and I think having read that in the instru easy to jump over a preapice, out if one wants to get to the top from the bottom he must be content to clamber up tho hill. It need ncarcely be added that as recovery of health is jtradual so must the recovery of responsibility, or dril ability be also a nisttpv of time. But as the law cannot recognise the minute dis- tinctions which exist between to-day and to- morrow, it cannot recognise graduated re- BponHibiiily, and it is only necessary to re- membttr that this recovery of mental strength Is gradual, that due allowance mav be moile for those persons who have recently suffered from an attack of mental disease, and that tt u tafe to regard rntch persona as still irrespon- ■tibU /or criminal acts and incapabk of civil priuiUges, even altlwugh the recovery nuty seem complete, unless tlie contrary can be proved. Let the presumption be in favor of their uant ofw^- octty and. tli,eir irreeponsibU'Uyf and no injxutxce u mel/y to arise. At the same this presump* tion is liable to be rebutted by proof of its opposite." In the commiuHion to which I huVe al- ready referred. Dr. Tuke, being examined, zoade these answers : " The fact is certain that insanity oon- fltantly exists with long lucid intervals, and that it is more or leas patent 'at different 'tfanes. " (^. And that the patient fluctuates in a condition between wnat may be termed sanity and insanity, the line between which is not easily definaole ?— A. Yes ; that is a constant form of what we call insanity with lucid intervals, or insanity with remissions, or recurrent insanity." A C£bse closely resembling Riel's. Then Clouston gives one example, that of patient ** C. Y." of whom he says : " His mental condition was at that time exactly that intense exaltation, that morbid mental 'expansion,' that 'ambitious delirium,' or ' mania of grandeur ' which we find so •ommonly In general paralvsis, and which some physicians suppose to be characteristic of that oisease. . . In three months he bad become quiet in manner, self composed and rational, but had just a suggestion of Ids former state of mind in being too pleased with things and too grateful for little kind- nesses. Uis friends thought him well and Im was removed home. . • • Jn'seventeendays he was back again. He I would come up and be most pleased to see you, and in a moment, someumes with soma uttle provocation, such as your not agreeins at once with him that he was an earl ana sometimes without he would strike you sud- denly, verv often goin^ down on his knees immediately after and m a theatrical mannar bagging your pardon and hejiping he had not onended you. # # # h^ labored under chronic maniacil exaltation." Then comns the instance of "CJ.," who was admitted, OctoJier, 18 aucfl[>t- fid, witli tliirt ()bn?rvatioii — that if it Wfii; loHHil)I(' for any oiui to HujtpOHn tliiit i tiy ourHC! of ('oiil to Father Andri' .. >r«Mnrtdr and thlH concluMiou woH tvachrd long before the outbreak, jumI b«'fore, hh Im Hiiys, Kiel had uitually risen against th» pri(!stH. These crroncoUH i leas, and thesi; inntiih'Htationii of irregularity of nund, were during the latter part of IHHI and the early part of 1H85, before the r»»bellion. Father Fourmond's Testimony. Father Fourmonil Hays that ho wa.s proseiit at this nicrtiiigof tho prii'sts, that it was he who mifed the (mention ; and he states the facts on which bin view rested. He says : Before tho rebellion it seiiined as if thoie were two men in tht priKoiier ; in j)rivute conversation he was allable, polite, pleasant and charitable ; if contradicted on religion and politics he became a diH'erent in ai and would be car- ried away with his feelings; he would use violent expieKsions. Ah so(> k (11(^1 liy i\ui prioHtH." All of a Huddiui, wIh^ii th«^ wit nenH cainr to tlu^ l>0At, Kirl axnw up with grnat poltt(MioHH and Haid : ^' [jook out, Father ; I will h Ip yi)U to j^ttt on tli" boat." la an instant ho pasHt^d Jroni rage to jL^reat politoncwH. Onoo Hgatn at thr> ('Otinoil tho witnn-iN w»iH brou;,dit up for trial ; Hid v/as onragHd, atid calhnl hitn a littlu tigm- ; nut whtm tlm witnoHH was huving, Ikj paHHcd again t'roni rai(n to <'\traoi'.lin:ii'y politoujHS, ollorod a ctrriugt! and took, th.) ■witneHH* puoel and oanitul it for liini. Charles Nolia'a Testimony. TImui (Hiarles Nolin (whoso c!onook written witli bull'alo blood, the Itl*Q in which thit wan, after taking Hngland and Canada, he would divide a» trt- spired. Whonover tho word "police'' was pronounced, ho lacutne very oxoited. He proposed a plan to the witness, and said ho had decided to take up anus, and the lirst tiling was to ti;{ht for tho glory of (iod, for the honor of reli^^'iojj, and for the salvation of souls, liefuo the Duck li'i,k(> fi^ht, ho was goin;^ a'^out with a ciuoitix a foot and a-lialf lon;^, tak»n out of till) church. Now all thewi^ thinj^H save the last word before the rebtjUiou, and a groat portion of them in tho year before the rehollion, the year 1884. Garnot's Testimony. Then, P. Garnot proves that about the be;2;inMi:ig ot the outbreiik, lliel talked to him about changing the Pope; wanting to name Bishop Bourget Pope of the new world, hemiiil thit the Spirit of Eliasv3a» wdhhivi; he wanted the people to acknow- ledge hiui as a prophet, and said he had the spirit of l^lias in hiin and was prophesy- ing. A iwlhcr time he declared he was repre- aenting St. Pettr. Almost every momiiur he would come in front of the people and 3ay such and such a tiling would happen. When /le slept at ths wU-'ivai house hetmu praying loud all nigJU ; There w«*s no one else there. He would not stand aay oontradictiQn by anyone. He seveir^l timea said h^«r thia country was to be divided into MTfa Provinces, one for the French, GemuuM, Irish, and othera ; he mentioned Xtaliaaa; he expected the aaaistauce of an army of several nationalities; he mentioned U)» Jews, he expected their assistance and money, and he was gomg to give them a Province as a reward for their help. He ha4 no doubt of his success, or that aoj' obstacle could prevent him from succeed- ing ; he always mentioned that he was going to succeed, that he had a diving 24 i! I nuaeion, and was an instrument in the hands of God. The witness thought the man was crazy, becouse he acted very foolish, and communicated to others at the time this impression of him. Evidence of Qeorge Nesa. George Ness says that at the begin- ning of the outbreak he witnessed a difficulty between Eiel and Father Moulin, in which Riel accused Bishop Grandin and Bishop Tach6 of be- ing thieves and rogues ; Father Moulin wished to speak to the people, Riel re- fused and said : " No, wo won't let him speak ; take him away, take him away, wo will tie him." Riel said he would take possession of the church Father Moulin said he protested. "Look at him," said Riel, '• he is a Protestant." He said that the Spiiit of God was in him. Father Moulin said he was mak- ing a schism in the church. Riel said Borne had fallen. *' Borne est tombee" and that the Pope was no longer legally Pope ; that the Spirit of God was in him (Riel), and that he could tellfuture eventa Doctor Willoughby also. Dr. Willor.ghby says : At the commence- ment h- sa'^' RieJ, He said his pro- clamation wvi8 at Fembiiia, that it was going forth, and he would be joined by Indians and half-breeds, and that the Udited States was at his back. He in- tended to divide the country into seven portions he mentioned as parties, Bavari- ans, Poles, Italians, Germans and Irudi. There was to be a New Ireland in the North-West. These nationalities were going to assist him in the rebellion, before the war was over, and they would have their portion. He men- tioned the Irish of the Jnited St£.tes, the Germans, Italians, Bavarians and Poles. He put Germany and Ireland twice; first, the Irish and Germans of the United States, then Germany and Ireland them- selves. The proposition did not appear rational to the witness, who also proves the excitement of Riel. Similar Byidence from other Witneesee. Saunderson says : Riel told him that he was going to divide the country into sevenths, one-seventh for Canadians or white settlers, one for the Indians, one for the half-breeds, three-sevenths to remain to support the Government. He said he had cut himself loose from Rome altogether, and would have nothing more to do with the Pope. Walters says: Riel told him that the land was to be divided — o ae-se venth to the pioneer whites one-seventh to the French-half-breeds, one-seventh to the church and schools, and the balance was to be government lauds. He said that if the whites struck a b'ow, a thunderbolt from heaven would st>rike them,thatGod was with their people. Lash says : He mentioned that he was going to give one-seventh to the Indians and one-seventh to the half-breeds. He had been waiting fifteen years and at last his opportunity had come. Astley pro- posed an exchange of prisoners, but Riel came up and said he could not see it in that light, but that he wo«ld exchange them for Hon. L. Clarke, Registrar Sproat and McKay. We know what an exchange of prisoners is, but Riel propos- ed that the most important personages on the other side should be given up to him in lieu of inferior prisoners on the same side whom he had in his hands. Jackson says Riel told him his brother's mind wa» affected; that it was a judgment on him for opposing Riel. He talked of giving; one-seventh of the proceeds of the land to the Poles, one-seventh to the half- breeds and one-seventh to the Indians,, and some to the Hungarians, and so on. I was surprised to hear it stated that it was a mark of sanity in Riel that he- should have thought Jackson insane,, while we know that inmates of the insane asylums know that thair neighbors arei insane and discuss the question ef their insanity. Mackay's Evidence Maokay had a oonrersatioa with RieL He appesund very excited and said : *'It was hlood,and the first, blixodi the;: 36 wanted was mine. There were some little -«Uahee on the table, and he got hold of a apoon and said : z ou have no Uood-^you are a traitor to your people. Yonr blood is frozen, and aU tne litue blood yom have will be there in five sninutes, putting the spoon np to my face and pointing to it. I said : Ifyou think you are benefitting your cause by taking my blood you are quite welcome to it. He called his people and the com- mittee, and wanted to put me on trial for mv life, and Qamot got up and went to the table with a sheet of paper, and Gabriel Dumont took a chair on a syrup keg, and Kel called up the witnesses against me. He aaid I was a liar, and he told them that I had laid all the people in that section of the country had risen against them. He said it was not so, that it was onlv the people in this town. He said he could prove that I was a liar by Thomas Scott. Then goes on the account of the trial during which Rial was up stairs. " When he came down, he, Riel, apologised to me for what he had said, that he did not xxean it to me personally, that he had the jpreatest respect for me personally, but that It was my cause he was speaking against and he wished to show he entertained great re- spect for me, he also apologised in French to tee people there, and ne said as I was going out that he was very sorrv I was against him. That he would be glad to have me with them, 4uid it was not too late for me to join them yet." Young's Teetimony. Tomng says : Kiel explained that at Duok Lake he gave three commands to fire. 1. In the name of GK>d who made us reply to that. 2. Then they fired and Chrozier'i man re- j^ed : and Biel said : In the name of Gk>d the Son who saved us reply to that. 3. In the name of God the Holy Ghost who sanctifies us reply to that Biel gives a like account in less detail to half a dosen witnesses of his action at that time and Oenei-al MiddleUm says : "Of come I bad heard constantly before about reporti of his insanity. I heard for instance one or two of the people that es- Qi^pei from Um, scouts, half-breeds. One man, I remember told me ' Oh ! Biel is mad, ke is a looL' He told me what he was doing ^at Batoehe. So that I really had heard it, but I came to the conclusion he was very far from being mad or a fool." To that is to be added the prisoner's own oondaot at the trial, the statements he made, even in the course of hu intermp- 1 tions during the trial, with reference to | these points, and then in his addresses. | In them, you will find him declare that ^ he does not plead insanity, and yon find ; him saying he showed that calmness which '\ they said he could not show. He obvious- ly, in the address he made to the jury. I was doing his best to restrain himself in : respect to those matters which had been j presented as proofs of his insanity, with | the view and in the hope, so far as was | consistent with his assumed position, that i he might prevent the jnry from coming | to the conclusion that he was insane. | For instance, this extraordinary division | of the territory into sevenths among diff- ■ erent nationalities was pressed very much. I What does he say to that ? He says : ,? " A good deal has been said about the set- 1 tlement and division of lands, a good deal | had been said about that. I do not think | my dignity to-day here would allow me to | mention the foreign policv, but if I was to | explam to you or if I had been allowed toJ make the questions to witnesses, those ques-| tions would have appeared in an altogether! different light." ^ A little after, when the verdict had been given and he was showing his reasons against the sentence, you will find he de- veloped the policy which, at this time he| preferred not to do, when he restri " himseli^ as those people often do under] similar ciroumstanoes, in olier to ob ' that which he desired, a verdict whic would not find him insane. He speaks ini thesame way,thanking General Middletonf and Captain Young for proving him as h^ believes he is sane. | Riel on his own Inspiration. 1 Having touched the question of foreigil policy, as he calls it, in the lands, he feeb; called upon to deal with this question oij^ inspiration, and he attempts to explaiii| that miatter. ■ He says : "It is not to be supposed that the half J breeds acknowledge me as a prophet if the 26 liad not seen it that I could ape epaaethiug into the future. If I am okmA Tuithout meamre I can see something into the /«i(ure, we •U He into the fu^rc more or iesa. J^ wbat kind of a prophot wouJd I come 7 Would it be a prophet who could all the time have a stick in nis hand and threatening, a prophet of evil ? If the half-breeds have acknow- ledged me as a prophet, if on the other side priests come and say that I am polite, if were are general offio«r8, good men, come into this box and prove that I am polite, prove that I am decent in my mannero, in combining all together you have a decent prophet. An insane man cannot withhold nis insanity, if I am insane my heart will tell \f |i -#hat is in me. Last night while I was takiug tamcite the spirit who guides and assists me amd tonstksms, told me that to-morrow somebody ipM y that. While I was recuiiing to my God, io Our God, I said : But woe to me if you not help me, and those words came to me in the momiDg : ' In the morning some one will come Vaider, that is to-day.' I said that to my two guards and you can jzo for the two guards. I told them that if the spirit that directs me is the spirit of truth it is to- day that that I expect help. This morning the good doctor who has care of me came to me and said : ' You will speak to-day before the court,' I thought I would not be allowed to speak, those words were given to me to tell me that I would have the liberty to speak. There was one French word in it, it meant, I believe, that there was to be some French influence in i% but the most part Eng- lish. It is true tl at my good lawyers from the Province of Quebec have given me good ad- vice. Mr. Nolin came into the box and said ioid that Mr. Riel said that he heard a noise in his bowels and that 1 told him that it meant something. I wish that he had said what I sidd, whi^I wrote on the paper of whi«h he •peaks, perhaps he can yet be put in the box. I said to Nolin " Do ]^oa hear 1" Yes, I said there will be trouble in the North- West and was it so or not, has there been no trouble in the North- West ? Besides Nolin knows that among his nationality which is mine, he knows that the half-breeds as hunters can foretell manv things, perhaps some of you have a special knowledge of it. I have seen kalf-breeds who say : " My hand is shaking, this part of my hand is shaking, you will s^e Budi a thing to-day,' and it happens. Others will say; 'I feel the flesh of my lee move in such a way, it is a fcign of such a Uiing, and it happens.' There are men who know that I speiBik right. If the witness spoke of that IgmI with which he mentioned to show that I was insftne he dyl not remember that pefhiMker> on thi^t point he is insane himself. oe^M^ the htflf-breed bv the movement ctfois hoftd, sometimes of Ins shouldeis, sometiioies j|k» leg, cftn nave certain knowledge of whjit will happen. To bring Sir John to m^ hei, it was well reported it would appear far mOre reasonable than it has been ma^e to appear. Mr. Blake, the leader of the Ooposition is trying to bring Sir John to Ids feet in one wav. He never had as much at stake as I had, although the Province of Ontario k great it is not as great as the North- West. ** I am glad that the Crown have proved that I am the leader of the half-breeds in tie North-West, I will perhaps be one day acknowledged as more than a leader of the half-breeds, and if I am I will have an opportunity of being acknowle(^ed as a leader of good in this great country. "One of the witnesses eaid that I intended to give Upper Canada to the Irish, if he had no mystery he would have seen that Upper Canada could not be given to the Irilh with- out being given to England, he rested only upon his imagination. " There is another thing about the partitioa of the lands into seven. 1 do not know if I am prepared to speak of it here because it would become public, information, there is so much at stake that if I explained that theory Canada would not very long remMn quiet." Then, he says about the delegations : " The half-breeds also know that 1 told them I would be punif^hed, that I did not sa^ it of my own respcnsibility but that I said ik in the same way as I had told them other things. It was said to me that the nation would b« punished. Why ? Because she had consented to leave Rome too quick. What is the meaning of that ? There was a discussion about it, too quick. They Said that they should do it at once. Too quitk does not mean too soon. If we lay yes, it shows no consideration to tm man. If GK>d wants something and if we say yes, that is not the way to anvWer him ; He wants the consdence to say yes : Oh mj Qdd I do thy will ; and because the half- breeds quickly separated from fU>me in siith a quick manner it was disagreeable to God and they were punished, and I Ji|Old them it would happen — fifty of tho^e ^who are there can prove it. But you will sfty.: * You did not put yourself as a prophet' The ijiine- teenth century is to be treated in certain ways, , and it is probably for that rc^ijjn I have found the word 'Exovede.' Xpn^fer io be called one of the floek. I am no mbi» 27 *han you are, I am simply one of the flo'ik, equal to the rest. If it is any satisfaction to l4ie doctor to know what kind of insanity I kave, if they are going to call my prete.yisions in- sanity, I say humbly, throv/jh the grace of God I believe I am the pr' fhct of tlie new woi'ld. "I wish you to believe that 1 am not try- ing to play insanity ; there is in the manner, in the standing of a man, the proof that he is sincere, not playing. You will say ' What have you got to say ?' I have io attend to practical results. Is it practical that you be acknowledged as a prophet ? Is it practical to say it? I think if the half-breeds have acknowledged me, as a community, to be a prophet, I have reason to believe that it is beginning to become practical. I do not wish for my satisfaction the name of prophet. (Generally the title is accompanied with such a burden, that if there is satisfaction for your Tanity there is a check to it." Riel thankful to be found Guilty and Sane. Then, the moment the veidi't wa- given and the prisoner was called to speak in res[)ect of sentence, he congratulates him- self, and thanks the jury for having found him sarie, and says : " At least, if I were going to be executed, 1 would not fee executad as an insane man. ' Then he goes on to say : " Must not I take advantage of the situa- tion to show that they are right and that I am reasonable, and yesterday, when I said by repeating the evidciice which has been given against me, when I said in conclusion that you had a decent prophet, I have just to-day ^e great oppottuuity of proving it is so, besides clearing me of the stain of insanity, ilearing my career of the stain of insanity. I think the verdict that has been given against me is a proof that I am more than ordinary myself, but that the circumstances ami the help that is given is more than or- 4iinary, are more than ordinary, and although I consider myself only as others, yet by the ■will of God, by his Providence,- by the circum- stances which have surrounded me for fifteen years, I think that I have called to do some- thing which at least in the North- West Bobody has done yet, and in some way / thmk that to a ceiiairi nvmber of people the iixrdict against me to-day is a proof that may he I am a prophet, maty be Rid is a prophet, He suffers for it. No^, I have been hunted as an elk for fifteen years. David has been seventeen, I think. I would have to be about two years still ; if the misfortunes that I have had to go through were to be as long as tho.se of the old David, I would have two years still, but I hope it will come sooner." Then he proceeds to describe what he had kept concealed in the earlier speech — the question of ihe lands. He says : "The half-breeds had a million and the land grant of l,40O,(tOO acres out of about 9,500,000, if I mistake not, which is about one-Seventh of the landof Manitoba. You will see the origin of my insanity and of my foreign policy. One seventh of the land was granted to the peoj>le, to the half-breeds of Manitoba, English and French, Protestant and Catholic There was no distinction whatever, but. in the subdivision, in the allotment of those lands between the half-breeds of Manitoba, it came that they had 24(> acres of land. Now, the Canadian Government say, that we will givo to the half- breeds of the North- West, 240 acres. If I was insane I would say yes, but as I have had, thank God, all the time, the conscientiousness that I had a certain degree of reason, I have made up my mind to make use of xt, and to say that one-seventh of the lands in Manitoba, as the inauguration ol a principle in the North- West, had to bring to the half-breeds of the North- West, at least as soon as possible, the guarantee for the future that a seventh part of the lands will also be given to them. And seeing and yourself understanding how it is diflicmt for a small population as the half-breed popula- tion to have their voii but whether I am a deceiver or an imposter. I have i^aid to my lawyers : *I have written things which were said to me last night, and which have taken place to-day.' / said, that be/ore. the court arty was feigning insanity, and some of those about him, and in charge of him in gaol, from his clearness and coher- ence, were satisfied that he was (juite sane, and that wliat he exhibited was merely eccen- tricity, or simulated attenipta to act as a mad man. Insane he certainly was beyond all doubt ; but he fought the point of his sanity most bravely in court. He made very clear and quick remarks upon the evidence of the medical men, who had no doubt of his entire insanity ; and when one physician of gr^at experience with in- sane persons that he thought him quite in- capable of giving information to counsel and agents for conductiiig his defence, he said in- stantly;' * Then, why did you advise me to apply to see counsel and agents ?" Now, Sir, my clear conclusion from this evidence is that in the tfentimony at the trial there was overwhelming proof of great disorder of intellect, of insane de- lusions on religions and ]>olitical topics, those very topics u at of which the acts grew. Degree of Riere Insanity. Now it is unnecesaary Ui cnqiu e for the purpose of the isssue Ixfoiv. us whether that disorder was so g^oafc as, by our l^w, to justify a verdict of not guilty on the ground of insanity. On that point minds will diiTer as to whether it was great enough or not. Assume if you pleaf?e — and [ think there is great force in the preposition — that, dealing with the verdict of the jury and with thejudg- ment of the court in Manitoba, you may not unfaidy argue that it was indicated istrongly so far as the evidence at the trial Avent t: ;?.t he was not so irresponsible withir v<^Q iRCJUDg of fche law so an to have a verdict of not guilty returned — though that conclusion would not acLord with my -own individual opin- ion — l)ut assume that. Give the verdict all Its just weight, omit the very strong point to which my hon. friend from East Quebec alluded, tlio evidence in the case of Jackson which I have read in the im- pevf(K)t report we got in the newspapers, in which Dr. Jukes seems to have sworn that, with the exception oi sonu!Lhin<,' said about his not speaking rationally all the while, his delusions were much the same as Kiel's and on which evidence he waB found insane — I say that asHmuing, if you please, that the disorder was not soseriotia as to render the prisoner vholli/ irrespon- sible, so deciding you justify the verdict of guilty, and having justified the verdict of guilty, you by no means rid the Ejcecutive of very grave duties. Judicial Duties of the Govern- ment. Now upon this cjuesticn there are very serious errors largely prevailing in the public mind. It is common talk, and this House has not been wholly free from that common talk, that there should be no in- terference with the verdict or sentence in capital cases — talk, which if it were act- ed on, would render it impossible to maintain capital punishment on the Statutw Book for twelve months in any civilised country. Now, I shall prove tho errors of this view by statistids. Tke statistics of the administration of justice in England aud Wales, during ten years before 1863, show that the proportion of convictions to committals for all classes ©f crimes taken together, was 70 to 71 per cent ; and I may say that there is a curious run of similarity for many years in both England and Canada in that xegard. But for murder during those ten years the proportion of convic- tions to committals was only 23^ per cent, or a little over one-third of the proportion in the general run. While thus you find, in the Jvrst place, that a much smaller proportion of persons w proportion to those charged were convicteA of mwrd&r than in the general run^ ffou 81 find the proportion of exsctUiotis to the cohviatioru for murder was hut 60 per contf and that 40 per cent, were commuted. In the 20 years from 1861 to 1880 there 'were612 capital sentences for murder. Out of those there were only 279 e> cations, or 541 per cent., and 233 not executed, or 46^ per cent. In the 5 year.* from 1880 to 1884 there were 168 capital sen- tences. Out of these only 80 executions took place, or 48 per cent., 88 were not executed, or 52 per cent. Thus there are now fewer executions in proportion to sentences than there were. In the first period I gave you there were some- thing more than half, during the second period there were fewer but still a little more than half, but for the last available period less than half those tentenced were executed. Lot me give you the individu- al cases which came before Mr. Justice Stephen in three years. He sentenced ten persons to death ; four were executed, six commuted; four because the means by which they caused death wf re neither intended nor in themselves likely to cause death ; in these cases, und«r an improved definition, the prisoners would have been found guilty of manslaughter ; one, be- cause after the conviction it appeared probable that he bad received provoca- tion, which might reduce tJie offence to manslaughter; one Itecause the convict was aubjecttoepilepticfits, which rendered her frequently unconscious and had perman- ently impaired her powers, though she was probably not insane at the moment. Jndge Stephen had not the least doubt when he passed sentence as to the cases in which there would be commutation and execution. In Franco, by the evidence taken in 1864, the persons found guilty of murder in four years, from 1859 to 1862, were 1,368; of these 1,228, or nine-tenths, were found guilty with ex- tenuating circumstances, leaving only 1 40 or one-tenth guilty, and liable to death. These were the very worst cases, yet of these about one-half only were executed and the rest were commuted. The Eng- lish Commission on Capital Putiishment state the custom in France as foUows : — " Whether the convict has or has not sued for pArdon or commutation penalty, the case i« always examined by a coamiMton at the MiniBtiy of Juatice, aiui by tJie advice of this commiMion the execution either li^es place or the penalty is commuted, unless ihe Emperor should take the initiative ; his right of pardon has no limit." Now take Ontario and Quebec, in the four years, 1880 to 1888, according to the criminal statistics brought down by the hon. gchtlpman opposite, there were ninety-six persons charged with murder ; twenty-six only were convicted or twenty- seven per cent., thirteen only were left for execution ; evri'y second sentence was commuted. During the same four years seventy per cent, cf those charged with all crimes were comvicted ; and the commutations (including murder and 'second commutations of capital cases) were only one in 350, and of those many were due to ill-health. The result is that of 500 charged with all crimes 860 are convicted, and of these 349 or more suffer the sentence of the law, to that practi- cally the sentence is executed in all thrpe cases. But of 500 charged with murder only 135 are convicted instead of 850, the general average ; of the 1 85 only 67 or 68 suffer the sentence of the law, crone out of two, instead of 349 out of 350 the general average. Of the 500 charged with murder only sixty seven are convicted and suffer the lentence of the law, or less than twelve per cent, of the committals; while out of 500 charged with al! crimes 849 or more are convicted and snffer the sentence of the law, or seventy per cent of the committals — nearly six times as many as in capital cases. What is the general result 1 The general result of these stat- iiticB ''a that in England, in France, in Ontario and Quebec there is a more care- ful sifting in the preliminary f rocess be- fore verdict in the capital cases than there is in the general nvrrrge of crime. There is a greater reluctance to convict, there is a greater tendency to pcquit,ard eo there is a very much Fmaller proportion of persons charged wilh that paitictilar offence, the capital offence, who are con- victed than o^'those who are chargied "With other offences. What followb^ Is it that it is in the resic'uvm, the "vorst cases 32 I I the plaineBt cases, the most obvious oases alone that oonyiotion takes place, and after that preliminary sifting whioh re- oults in the most obvious and plainest oases only leading to conviction in cases of charges of murder, yet while only one in 350 of all classes of sentences is commuted, in capital oases 175 out of 850 are commuted. "Why is it that we do not inter- fere With other sentences, and yet we in- terfere to such an enormous extent with these particular Ljntences, capital sen- tences t Reaaon for large proportion of Oommutations to Death Sentence. The reason is perfectly obvious. It is because there are various classes and de- ii;rees of moral guilt in the same legal offence having the same legal definition, and because in all other cases than cases of capital sentence the judge has a discre- tion to apportion the punishment to the particular circumstances of the case. He does so. He tempers justice with meroy himself; he considers the palliating circumstances ; he considers among other things the state of mind and degree of responsibility ; he exercises a wide discretion, he may have a right to com- mit a man for life or for one hour, for a long term of years or for a month. The law gives it to him because the law feels that in all these classes of cases, of lar- ceny, of intent to commit murder, of assault, of what crime you will it is im- possible to predicate the same degree oC moral guilt, and therefore that i^ is essential to provide some machinery by ■which, to some extent, the pimishment awarded shaU be proportionate to the degree of guilt in the specific case. BtU in capital eases there are not less — there are even more — sheuies of guilt than there •re in other caaes. No one will dispute that; no one who has read the interest- fao^ but harrowing aooonnts q£ murder tnak but miiflt agree that there are all ■arts and shades of gvflt in the commis- ■ioD cf that which, asootding to the law of thalf^^ is yet nlways murder. And yet in thxU particular case^ the judge luu not any discretion at all. He must ^o- nounoe the only sentence, the ultimate sentence, the maximum 8entenoe,the sen- tence wliich is the worst and severest sen- tence no wapplied, not to all murderers, but to the worst murderers alone. But there is a discretion, notwithstanding. There is no reason why, in this particular case, there should not be somewhere that discretion which exists in other oases, not as a part of the prerogative of mercy, but as part of the administra- tion of criminal justice, which in other cases is vested in the judge. //' in impoa- sible to say that you should not f.'.*d some- wherein the case of murder the discretionto apportion thepuniskment to the moral guilt, tvhenyougive it by your Statute Books in all the odier cases in the land. For reasons which T need not discuss, this discretion is not in capital cases vested in the judge. The reasons may be satisfactoiy or unsat- isfactory ; it is no matter, but in fact the discretion rests in capital cases, 'not with the judge, but with the Executive, and IN THIS CASE THE MINISTERS OI8GHAROE UNDEB THE LAW OF THE LAND A DUTY WHICH IS PART OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, AND WHICH IN ALL OTHER CASES IS, UNDER THE LAW OF THE LAND, DISCHARGHD BY THE JUDGE WHO TRIES THE CASE AND AWARDS THE SENTENCE. They have combined and commingled also the prerogative of mercy strictly so called, as distinguished from this part of the administration of justice, the prerogative which they exercise with reference to all cases. If they think the judge's sentence too severe, they may — though I am glad to s% the power is rarely exercised — com- mute the severe sentence of the judge.. This is a distinct exercise of the preroga- tive of mercy, and in the capital cases they have, as a matter of course, to con- sider the two positions, and they are commonly considered together; the whole case and the circumstances are con- sidered t(^;ether. Now, I think I have shown you perfectly plwnly and ,,s^^ 33 idg« Jt4U iBt fro- iltimatn the 8en- 'est Ben- rttni, but ut there There lar case, 3re that r canes, rogative ninistra- n other In vmpot- ;*u 8o:m- cretionto 'al guilt, ■)ks in all reasons isoretion le judge, tr unsat- fact the lot with e, and 3CHAROE A DUTY TRATION IN ALL OF THE QE WHO THE mingled meroy iguished ition of 1 they Bes. If ace too glad to i — oom- B judge., preroga- \\ cases , to con- ihey are le whole re con- hink I ily and ^ perfectly clearly that there is the nost Marked distinotion that can be oonoeivei toiwaen the capital aentenoe aad its ex- ^ootion and all other lentenoeB and their flaeoation. I might pat it to yoo in an- •Iher point of view, in this way : the ry case in which sentence of death is inflicteil, proves nothing more than that murder, as well as other crimes^ has its decrees, and that the extreme punishment which the law awaril^ ought not to be carried out in all coses." He says further : "I am strongly of opinion that capital punishments should be retained and that they Bhould be extended to some cases in which offenders are at present liable to them ; but I am also of opinion that no deflnitiba which can ever be formed, will include all murders, for which the offender ought to be put to death and exclude all those iox wh|i(^ secondary punishment would be sufficient. " The most careful definition will cov«r crimes involving many different degreen, both of moral giult and of public danger ; moreover, those murders wbieh involve Am greatest public danger, may involve for kea moral guilt than those whieh involve lititk public danger." " The question of the necessary disproppt- tions between gradations of crime and grada> tions of punishment is brought to the most perplexing issue in the case of the punish- ment of death. This punishment has the foUowing characteristics as distinguished from, all others : It admitti in itself of no grada- tion ; it is irrevocable ; and it is more differ^ ent in kind from all other punishments than thev are from each other. ♦ ♦ ♦ Mutdtr is tht offence to which the punishment of death is nmv almost universally restricted." Thei. the Commission on Capital Punish- ment declared : "There is one point upon whieh |ha witnesses whom we have examined are almoit- 9$ aoanitnouH, vi/.., that tliu pow^r of ilircctiiiK ^nlntuIlcu of (iuath to hv ix-citiiU'd t\ ami Ih'a (InUom tlora rwt form a priciiliiit for ttuhseijiniU cnxeii. Wo do not Huu liow a butter muaiiM could bo prnvid- ed for in((uiry into tho circiinistanci's ef the exci'plional coHoa in <|UL'Htion. The powers of tho Sociotary of State, how- ever, as to disposing of tho canes which c 'Uio l)eforo hitii aio nol as Hati factory as his pr)Wor of ini|uirii.fj into ihoir circum- stanct'H. lie can advise llor Alajosty to remit or coninuitc a sentence ; but, to Kay nothing of iho inconhisloncy of pardoning a man may be unwatiNfactory. The result of tho iuiiuit- ies of tho Secretary of State may be to show, not that the cwnvict in clearly innocent, but that llio projniety of the conviction is doubk* ful ; that nialterM wore left out of account^ which ought to have been considered ; or that too liitlo importance was attached to a view of tho case, tho Ivearing of which was not Hulliciontly apprehonde«l at the trial." Bather extensive powers. Sir. Tlum, 1 refer to a series of authorities of the highest character, being mainly the explanations which have l)een given by successive Home Secretaries in the British Parlii^- meut, with reference to the discharge ef their functions. Opinions of British Home Secretaries. In 1835, with regard to the Dorchester laborers, Lord Russell, then Home See- cretary, said : " What I have to say is, that in this case, as in any other that may be brought before me, whether in the House or out of it, I do not hold myself precluded from^ entering upon the consideration of any facts or cii- cumstances that may come to my knowle^e, or from forming a judgment upon them without reserve. " Lord Loughborough, who was at one time Chief Justice, said in the House of Lords : " That he had tried prisoners who had been capitally convicted, and he had carefully examined and revised all the circumstances ' I §1 of their cahuii witliout heittg able to And a •in^flfl reaMun which would juntify hiM reconi- in«!nding mercy to be ext«nd«d to them, and be had reported to the Governmunt that ho did not think himnt'lf warranted in saying that they were entitled to favorable ooniider- tion, aiid yd mercy luid been extended to ihem mor$ ttuin once, nnn, he verily belurmd, on fair and jutt yrincipUs. " Sir Geo. Orey, Home Secr«tury, 8aid : "I cannot accept the doctrine of the hon. member/that the Secretary of State inbound to conHider the verdict of a jury in a capital case an alwolutely tinal, and to refuse to in- TeNticate any alU-^'ed facta which may be atated to him tending to alter the view of the case Hubniitted to the Judge and jury. The duty of a Secretary of State would be easy if in all cOHtH he refused to receive any appeal for mercv founded upon factii not Htated at the trial. But he cannot shrink from the performonce of the duty which is now impos- ed upon him howt-ver painful it may be ; if he did hlH conduct would meet with universal condemnation." Mr. Honio Hecietniy Walpole snid that a murder referred to waw one of aggravated enormity and barbarity ; yet the uentenoe WEH commuted. Again Mr. Gathorne Hardy, Home SecrotHry, said : " After the trial and condemnation tacts might como out which it would be desirable to sift ; and however long it might be after a man's conviction, if circumstances transpired showing that the conviction was unjust, or throwing such a d< ibt on it as to make it dear that there ought to be some interference, there must necesHarily be some authority to exercise the preroj^ative of mercy." Mr. Home Secretary Walpole said : " Do not it be supposed that I think that the Home Secretary has not a very large power vested in him of advising the Crown to exercise its prerogative of mercy. I think there is such a power vested in him. not for the purpose of re-hearing a case which can only be properly reheard before a judge and jury, but for the purpose o£ taking into con- sideration, not only tne facts proved at the trial, but any other facts and circumstances that mav be brought to light subaequently, of weighing them, and of determininjg whether, under all the cireumstanoea^ it u his duty to recommend the Grown ta exer- dat its prerogative of mercy, and to mitigate the severity of punishment In no case, however, should he interfere against the de- cision both of judge and jury, unless the case U >o plain as to leave no reasonable doubt on the mind of any intelligent man that a great injustice had been done." Mr. Gathorne Hurdy, Ffonm Seoivtary, Htiid : a "Certainly, in thin instance, the jury did not uefflcct their duty, but found a vonlict of * wilful murder ' in a cane which was undoub- tedly one of wilful murder acconling to the law of thin country. Ah far as I am concern- ed in this transaction, I have no hesitation in explaining all that has taken place in regard to it. * * The memorial was sent down to the judge, and by return of pout I receive Secretary to remit the extreme sentience . ill cases of infanticide. Another custom which had grown to be invariable — at least he had not been able to find a single exception—was that no sentence of death was ever inflicted in a case where, in the opinion of the judge, it ought not to be inflicted. Evervbody ac- quainted with the subject, must be aware that ofter every assize there were judges who hastened to inform the Home Secretary, that although, according to the definition of law,, the jury had been right in finding the pris- oner guilty of murder, and although the judge was himself bound to pass sentence of death, yet, in his opinion^ that sentence ought not to be carried mto execution. Then no inconsiderable number of cases arose where the judge passed sentence of death, himself disagreemg with the jnij. In the two latter clMses of cases, the Homa Secretary, whether he agreed with the opinion of the judge or not, was bonnd, ac- cording to the practice, to abandon his own •T ! doubt OD At a gTMt Hecit'tiiiy, e jur^ did vordict of in undoub- iiig tu the iiconcerB* HiiAtiun in ill re^ard it down to cctiivtiil an uiided that aniuted to he Bill to lich came !e, Hftid : lat the law lot oxiflt at ^cretionaiy Secretary^ lot only of Mt painful justify the ider which but became *ry of State miy passed a jury. In a his office, ecretary to ill cases of vrhich had le had not ption — was ei- inflicted the judge, srybody ae- be awar& judges who :etary, that ion of law, ig the pris- hough the lentence of t sentence execution, r of cases sntence of the jtuf. the HonM with the bound, M^ m his own opinion and act upon that of the judge — morally l)ouud, he niuant, of uoume, for lUiere wtM no legal obligation resting upon ifdm beyond the nrecudentH invariably recog- ^«d by hJM pruaeoeMHon, " Mr. Itruce agniu HHid: " A third class of caHen, cxtreinuly difficult to deal with, and expoHing tht> hoKUtr of the office to comuiuntM, harch aiiiay that, in IiIh upinion, thin wan the weakent part of our prenent sy«teiu, and one deHerving the nioiit serious consider- ation of the LeciHJAture. The coue was that of a very poor cia.ss of persona, who either where unable .to obtain legal assiHtance. or from their position or perhaps from tlioir previouH character, excited but little sym- pathy in the neighborhood, and factu which might have told in their favor were not brought out till the conscienccri of those acquainted with those factH were aroused by the impending death of the convicts. Cases such 0.^ thene were by no means infreciuent. In hii) short experience he bad already had two or three signal inntanceH in whicli evi- dence of the moht unbounded importance bad been kept back, either from want of means on the part of the prisoner to have his case propenv investigated, or from want of interest en tne part of those by whom the evidence could bo given." Then ou the remission of capital ])uiii8h- ment Mr, Bruce said : " It is well that the House and country should understaifd how in the cases, whicn so often offend the honest opinion of the public, there is apparent discrepancy between the opinion of judge and jury on the one hand and that of the Home Secretary on the other. It arises from this — that the jury is oblii^jed to find, from the direction of the judge, a verdict of wilful murder, and that the judge Is constantly required to pass a sentence of death, when it is quite cer- tain it will not, cannot, ought not, to be ex- ecuted. ♦ * # Such is the state of the law, and so long as it is the state of the law it is absolutely impossible but that the decision of the Sacretary of State must oocaaionaily be in disaccord with the finding of the jury and the sentence of the judge." On another occasion, he said : ''I may here mention another case which was brought under my notice more recently. Atiisonerwas entirdy undefended, not a pafliative circumstance was adduced on his trial for murdf^r, and he was consequently coBvicttid and nced to death : but other evid«*nce was afterwards brou^nt forward which, in the opinion of the judge, would, if laid l)eL)re tile jury, have turuod the acala in favor oT the priMooer and shown that he wa» guilty of maiiHlaughtf r instead of murd«r«'' Ml . Bruce sayH aguin : "While tlie law respecting murder remain* as it i(«, and while the sptrtat^ie is so oftan seen of iudges and juries diHNunting — the one from the verdict and the other from the i^entenci* which, in accordance with law, they are obliged to past* — there must \h! lodged somewhere the power of administering the prerogative of mercy." Lord Penzance says : *' Kow, independently of the cases in which the punishment of death has been commuted, it has, I believe, been the prac- tice for many years of the Home Office to mitigate to severe sentences." Mr. Trevelyaii, Irish Secretary, said : " I am cla explain- ed by the Home Secretary last night. It knows of the reference to the responsible Minister, who, surrounded by the very best advisers, and acting under the deepest sense of req>on8ibility, is entitled to exercise the prerogative of mercy. That mode of opera- tion you begin b^ excluding, because what you are asking for is not a furaier inrestiga- tion of the question by theresponiible oficer of the Queen, but it is a fall and pubtte enquixy, a description to whidi his operation could not correspond." I ; I) I ' A' 38 hi ! Ill What should be the Effect of a Becdlnmendation to Mercy? I think I have sufficiently established the accuracy of my statement, and ^larged oven my own statement by these proofs of the extensive powers and consc ({uential duties of the Executive in exeicitiing this branch of the administration of criiuinal justice, particularly in cajtital cases ; but before I j)aRs to the qu(!stion of what should be done in casco of insanity and the speciaitirs of those cases, I wish to make an allusion, at this })oiut, to the effect of the recommendation to mercy. The hon. member from Ottawa, quoted a portion ot a passage, which I deem it my duty to rtad, from Sir James Stephen's Ibook : "There is one other point on which the Enghsh and French systems are strongly «ontra8t'':^ This is the French system of tittrcotistc ■:<■ ^ attmuantes and the English sys- tem of T .commendations to mercy. The finding; u "irrimstancesotienuanteshy a French JTiry ties i :e hands of the court and compels tlien' to pass n lighter sentence than tiiey •therwide wo aid be entitled to pass. It gives A permanen^j legal effect to the first impress- ions of seven out of twelve altogether irre- gponcible parsons upon the most delicate of «U questioiks connected with the administra- tion of justice — the amount of punishment which, having regard to its moral enormity Jkid also CO its political and social- danger, «ugl)t to be awarded to a given offence. Si'hese 'ire I think matters which require mftturti an<^ deliberate considerations by the Jierp,ons best quahfied by their position and beir previous ; i-aining to decide upon them. In *]1 cases not capital the discretion is by ciur law vested in the judges. In capital oases it is practically vested in the Secretary for the Home Department advised by the Jndge, and inasmuch as such questions always Mtract great public inter''?*: and attectiou ■and are often widely di^cu^o^d by the press, there is little fear that full ju although by no means the whole of it. "After we had retired to consider the res- diet, onr foreman Mked eai^ and every om* 40 of xu the following questioiu :— 'Is the pri- joner guilty or not guilty t $3nAj is he sane «x insane.' We eaw answered in our turn, Onilty and perfectly sane.*' ('In recconmending him to the mercy of the court, we did so Mcause we considered that while tibe prisoner was ^[uUty and we emiM not by any meamjudify hmnin hiioeU of HbeUimt at the aams tme wefett (heU had the 'Qovemment done their duty and redressed ' the erievanoes of the half-breeds of the Sas* katcnewan, as tiliey had been requested time and again to do, there never would have been a second Bid rebellion, and conseqently no prisoner to try and condemn. We could not but condemn in the strongest tenua possible the extraordinary dilatoiiness of Sir John liacdonald. Sir David McPherson «nd laeutenant-Ctovemor Dewdney, and I firmly believe tbat had thsse thbkb bkbn at! TRIAL AB AC0B8S0BIE8, VXRT LITTLE miROT, IT ANT, WOULD HAVK BBSN SHOWN VHKM BY THB JURY. # * # ^^"Although I say we, in nearly every case In the above, it may possiUiy be that not everyone held the same views as myself^ but I certainly thought at the time that they did «o, and am still of the same opinion. " You are at perfect liberty to make use of this letter in any way you see fit, pro- vided anything therein relating to myself is Aot made pubuc" I have given everything which does not relate to himself, and which bears upon this case at all. I thought it my duty to read that letter particularly, because, iMving in my hand the statement from one of the jury that the jury thought the prisoner sane, I did not think it would be consistent with the frankness I owe to the House to withhold that, inasmuch 4U3 they will see it is not a view which I Biyaelf share. I repeat that I do not at ■all contend that a recommendation to mercy is necessarily to be yielded to. 1 .• ; I Juive never said so or thou^t so. I think |[| iJuit would be a still more unsatisfactory mode of dealing with the case than the Vrench system. But I do argue that thb statement given in the author whom I Itave quoted is a fair statement of the gen- eral rondts and of the degree of attention which in proper to 1 e given to a recom- mendation to mercy ; aad if the hon. mem- l ber for Ottawa {Ui. Kaokintosh), «who aeems to have had Bpeoial opportuni- ties of investigating the cases of the exercise of the prerogative of mercy for several years past, opportunities not vouchsafed to otiier hon. gentlemen, had extended his inquiries and had gone into those cases in which the recommendc:.tion to mercy was effectual, instead of confin- ing himself to those in which it was in- effectual, I think he would have given us an array of facts more important and more satisfactory than the repi'esentation of 00 ly one side which he has given us. The question is in what cases, and in what classes of cases the recommendation has been made, and what degree of weight has been given to it. Proper Exercise of Prerogative in Oases of Insanity. I turn to the question, so far as it may be illustrated by authority, of the exercise of mercy in those cases in which the defence of insanity arises, aud upon that subject, no less a learned judge than Lord Chran- worth was examined by the Capital Pun- ishment Commission, in 1865, and the Attorney-General for Ireland put to him this statement : "I happen tJl!f know a recent case where a man was tried, and the defence was insanity — incapacity to judge of his actions. The t'ury convicted this man; not believing that le was insane. The Executive subsequently received information from various doctors who had not been produced, showing that the man really was msane, and in that «ie the prerogative of mercy was exercised, the man being retained in prison." And the answer was : " That would be the reasonable mode of dealing with him." So you see that where the question of insanity was raised at the trial, and where the jury decided against it, and where the Executive, upon the evidence given at the trial and before them, did not think they were wrong — and where of course the judge was not dissatisfied with the verdict either — ^yet where subsequent medical testimony was brought forward it was acted upon by the Executive and they commuted upon the score of the ■abaequMit medical testimony, and there- to (( 9 of the xiercy for ities not men, had gone into aendc:.tum of oonfin- t was in- i given ns rtont and )8entation given ns. i, and in nendation of weight rogative ty. 1 it may be exercise of )he defence at subject, ord Qran- .pital Pnn- , and the 3ut to him se where a ras insanity ;tionB. The ieving that ibsequentiy ovu aoctoTs lowing that in that cue erdsed, the le mode of [ueation of , and where and where ace given at [ not think I of course I with the subsequent ;ht forward scutive and ooce of the r, and there- 41 fore they received it. Now then, on the Bill to abolish capital punishment in 1869, ttie Hume Secretary, Brace, said : " One of the first cases he had to acyudicate upon was that of the convict Bisgrove, the circumstances of the murder being such as in themselves to excite suspicion of insanity. No evidence was adduced before the court as to the previous life of this unl'..ppy man ; but after sentence had been passed the con- science of the neighborhood was aroused, and information was given which led to the dis- covery of what the facts really were viz., that for three years he had been subject to fits of epUepey, and while quite peaceable at other times, under the influence of these he was dangerous, so much so that he had been dismissea from one employment. With a knowledge of these facts, it < Then Sir James Stephen in his book, speaking as to the doubts thrown on the justice of a verdict, or the accuracy ot the evidence, and the course o: the Home Secretaiy in Sraethurst's case says : "Sir George Lewis, Home Secretary, states : • I have come to the conclusion that there is sufficient doubt of the prisoner's guilt to render it my duty to aclvise the grant of a free pardon. .... The necessity which I have felt for advising Her Majesty to grant a free pardon in this case has not, as it appears to me, arisen from any defect in the constitution or proceedings of our criminal tribunals ; it has arisen from the imperfections of medical science, and from fallibility of the judgment in an obscure malady, even of skilful and exper- ienced practitioners." I am unable to deal with some of the cases in our own country as fully as the hon. member for Ottawa (Mr. Mackin- t«Bh) but I observe a report in the Mail newspaper of A trial that took place in Octo- ber, 1882, at Napanee. One Lee was tried for murder and the elefence was insanity. The medical evi- aUi. That sentence was commuted. It was commuted by hon. gentlemen opposite. I am not able to speak with authority as to the circumstances of the commutation ; and I state simply that I received a letter on the case this morning, and therefore too late to enable me to apply to the hon. gentleman, as I otherwise would have done, to bring down the papers, but I now m»ke the application. The letter is written by a rtspectable person who ought to know and who professes to know as to the circumstances which preceded that commutation. But before I refer further to that letter, I should like to give the reporter's account of the prisoner as published in the Mail : "The prisoner whoso appearance is i|^et such as to give the unprofessional eye mU(Ni» if any, indication of insanity has wstcll^ apparently with much interest throughoM. He seemed to understand about what eijp- dence each witness called would give, and it could be noticed as some of the more impor- tant ones came to the stand that he pla«ML himself in an attitude of close attention as if to catch every word said. He did not at any time display indifference, and towaM the close though showing signs of wearintM seemed to take, if possible, more intertst than at first and to be in a measure impresseiL with a sense of his peril. In this respect there was a visible change in his countenanBe after he heard the address of the OroWn counsel and the judge's chaise, and a Ttitj marked one when the venlct was rendered. *^ The information communicated to me by letter this morning is as follows : "When the trial of Michael Lee for murder took place at Napanee some time ago. Dr. Metcalf, of Rockwood, Dr. Clark, of Toronto, Dr. Lavell, of Kingston, exam- ined him. Drs. Metcalf and Clark pro- nounced him insane ; Dr. Lavell pro- nounced him perfectly sane. His sentence was commuted and he was sent to the penitentiary, were he was transferred il» the crintinal insane ward as . insanity became marked. Whether he still n- mains there or not I do not know. I 44 know, haying liad some reason to learn, that a Tory great number of those whose minds are disordered are kept, and perhaps not unwisely so, out of the insane ward and mix with the other prisoners. That is the statement giren to me; and I think, considering the circumstances and the names I have given, it would have been fortunate if the hon. gestleman for Ottawa had 80 for perfected his investigation as to be able to state all the facts respecting the case of Lee. Summary of what has now been provided. I think it is established beyond all contradiction that the practice accords with reason, that a disordered condition of the intellect, which in the view rightly or wrongly of the law is not sufficiently disordered to entitle the prisoner to im- munity from crime, is yet regarded in dealing with the qjuantity of punishment awarded; that in all other cases than the capital cases that regard is paid by the judge, and in the capital cases it is to be paid by the Executive, whose duty is, not as a matter of clemency or mercy simply, but as part of the administration of criminal justice, as part of that justice 'which we declare in our Statute Books we seek to accomplish by the apportionment of the punishment to the moral guilt, to liave regard to what surely must be an element of the moral guilt, the degree of the disordered intellect, the degree of the insane impulses, of the insane delusions of the unbalanced mind. Even although this degree may be not enough to en> title him to acquittal, though the verdict may be right and the judge's sentence under the law may be right, there is not a mere discretion but a sacred, solemn and imperative duty to have re- gard to the circumstances disclosed on the trial, and all other circumstances which may be made known, and if upon the whole of the circumstances, you find, .as was said by Mr. Justice Stephen, that the man was not mad enough to be ac- quitted but too mad to be hanged, you ^cannot shelter yourself under the propo- sition that it was your duty to carry out the sentence of the law, and that the verdict of the jury had settled all that matter. The verdict of the jury settled no more tJian thia ; tlie prisoner loaa not 9§ completely insavie as to be entitled to he absoltUely acquitted on the grotmd of in- samty. Consistently with that findingf his intellect might be seriously disordered. He might be seriously disordered mentftl- ly though not sufficiently disordered to give him immunity. Is not that question to be decided ? Was that question settled bjr the verdict? No, it was left un- settled. It was to be settled by the Executive. Has it been settled 1 If not, they did not discharge their duty. If they settled it, and decided that it did not apply in this case, then I humbly say that I wholly disagree from them in opinion. The Question of Political Offences. Now, Sir, to come to the other branch of this case, the question of political offences, that has also to be considered on the question of the award of punishment, and in this matter I am obliged to differ very much from the spirit of a good deal that has been said by hon. gentlemen opposite. The prerogative of pardon is dealt with by Mr. Amos, as applied to these oases, thus : " There are other cases in which the faculty of granting a remission or diminution of the penalt}[ may also properly belong to the Executive. Thus in cases of what are some- times called ' political crimes * in which the perpetrators of them are as often as not per- sons of virtuous habits and tendencies, and even in some cases of a herioc spirit of self- samfices, it must depend entirely upon the danger to the community to be apprehended ham a repetition of such particular offences whether any and what penalty should be ex- acted. It may not be wise to leave to the judge the soprome decision of a question more of poutical circumspection than of simple moral insight. Tl^e usual if not neces- sary role is to leave % considerable amount of choice of penalties to the judge, j^ut to resev f e to He Executive the opportunity of ent':.^el^ rebutonf^ Or as political sagaaty r.ompte from time to. time the penalty e-^acted dj jtidgl The[ insti POA to Cli of tend of: 46 rry out lat the ,11 thai ItUd no I to he I of in- Indinffy ordered. mentlil- ered to uestion . settled eft un- by the If not, ity. If b it did ibly say hem in ical ranch of ofiences, on the Ishment, to differ ;ood deal sntlemea mrdon is )plied to le faculty Lon of the ig to the are some- iirhich the 8 not per- icies, and it of aelf- upon the }rehended ,r offences aid be ex- VQ to the questioB than of notneoes- amount of itoresevfe jf ent'.rtty r rvompts exacted >y the Btrict letter of the law. TheM remarks vMk judifymg the hutfUution of the prerogative efpardon^ none tiie Uu point to the eteential im- portance ofhedaixxg round the eameiee of thiavre- •rogatim wUh aU tne safeguards which a viguant U^islattCre and cm aetfwe publie opinion ccm ams€." "With reference to the exercise of the pre- rogative in case of political offences, an instructive statement was made on the ^plication in The casb ui certain Fenain Oonvicts. of 1869, when Sir Frederick Heygate said : " He would beg to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland, whether, in the selection of those Penian convicts now proposed to the released, the course bad been adopted usual in the re- mission of sentences of obtaining the approval of the judges who tried each case. " Mr. Ohichester Fortescue, in repl^, said, that in ordinary cases when a memorial was presented from a prisoner for a mitigation of punishment or a free pardon, that memorial was referred to the judge who tried the case. But in the present instance no such memorial had been received by the Qovernment and the c[uestion was not considered as one re- specting a mitigation of an ordinary sentence. On the contrary, it was regarded by the Qov- ernment as a question to be decided by them* selves and by the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. What they did was to institute a most rigid examination into the case of each prisoner, aad in conducting that examination they had the assistance of the law officers of the Grown, and more especially of the Attomey-QeneraL The examiaation was conducted in every case in reference to the character of the per- sons and the circumstances of the case, and to all that came out of the trial. Having done that,Her Majesty's Qovernment and the Lord lieutenant were of opinion that it was their duty to decide the question solely on their own responsibility, and without inviting the Judges to share that responsibility." Then, Sir there is a most interesting and instructive discussion on Mr. O'Cjnnor Power's motion, in 1877, with reference to certain Fenian convicts, notably. The Manchester Murderers, of whom three suffered the extreme sen- tcHa.ce of the law, and the others sentences of imprisonment for considerable terms ; and after a period, an agitation took place for a remission of these sentences. Mr. Gathome Hardy said : " He would admit that this question cam* verv near the hearts of a great many of the Irisli people ; but they were not the Irish nation and the Irish nation was not the whole peo- ple of the empire. This was an empire and not an aggregate of separate kingdoms, and the Qovernment had to consider the interests of the whole of this great empire. It was also a free empire. Every man who was wronged had the opportunity of bringing his wrong to Ught, and there was no man who suffered an injury who had not an o]»portunity of obtaining redress in a con- stitutional manner. Therefore, the man who took up arms had to vindicate himself from a charge of the deepest dye. Where there was no necessity — not even an excuse — for shedding blood, the man v' raised his arm to shed blood, committed .. v^xime ; and for that crime the country had a right to demand, he would not say vengeance, but utmost punishment the law allowed. Mu(^ more when men who had taken upon them- selves the character of defenders of the country, violated the oaths they had taken and conspired to destroy the country, no punishment could be inflicted upon them which they did not deserve." Then the Attorney-General of England, in the same debate, describing the offen- ces, u?ed these words : " When the van emerged from under a rail- way arch, about half- a- mile from Bellevue^a large number of persons were seen upon some vacant ground, slightly elevated above the road. They were armed with revolvers, and had evidently been waiting for the ap- proach of the van, determined to all hazards to rescue the prisoners. It was proved after- wards that messages had been sent in order that they might be prepared. They discharg- ed their revolvers at the policemen, stopped and surrounded the van, and some of them got on the roof and attempted to break it in by means of hammers, while others handed up large stones to aid them. Others, again, tned to break open the door. It was the duty of Sergeant Brett to guard the door. He was a brave oificer, and he did his duty. He positively refused to admit the assailants. When he was in the act of closing a ventila- tor — which was something in the shape of a small Venetian blind — for the purpose proh- aUy of preventing them from getting a hold there, one of the conspirators pointed a re- volver at the aperture, and, deliberately dis- 46 charcint; it, shot the officer. Sergeant Brett felTiii the van, the door was then broken open, and the prisoners were released. Hon. members might, if tbey liked, call that awi- dantal ahootin^j, but he (Attorney -General) called it deliberate homicide. * • * Thoy might call it a technical crime ; but ho called it vulgar mur- der. They might call it a political offence ; he called it dmiberate and atrocious asaassi- natlon. It was a deliberate planned attack, carried out by the prisoners wlio were after- wards convicted, regardless whether they committed murder or not, but determined to do murder rather than fail in their object." Mr. Pease, the member I think for South Durham said : " Well they had had a real rebellion some years ago in Ireland, headed by a gentleman who sat for many years in that House, and •was highly respected by all who knew him — he alluded to Mr. Smith O'Brien. He was taken while in arms, holding a cottage some hours against the Queen's soldiers ; and, in that extreme case, when the offender was actually convicted of treason, and formally sentenced to be hanged, drawn and quartered, the dread sentence was afterwards commuted to 14 years* banishment, and was afterwards again commuted, and Mr. Smith O'Brien was brought home to his country. Had any of the men whose fate was now before the House of Commons been guilty of such a great crime as Mr. rfmith O'Brien 1 He had signed the roll of Parliment, had taken the oath of allegiance, was in the Queen's com- aaiBsion of the peace, and yet it was felt consis- tent with public safety to commute his punish- ment, twice after he had been sentenced to death, and had been transported to mark the turpitude of his crime." Hr. Gladstone said : "The question which we have to deter- mine is, what constitutes a political offence. It is quite clear that an act does not become a political offence because there was a politi- cal motive in the mind of the offender. The man who shot Mr. Percival, and the man ■who intended to shoot Sir Robert Peel did not become political offenders merely on this ground. By a political offence, I, at .least, understand an offence committed under cir- cumstances approaching to the character of cifil war. Whenever there is a great pojju- lar movement, the offences committed in giving effect to the intentions of the people partak e o f the character of civil war . Kef er- ence hab been made to tue action of the President of the French Republic in pardon- ing offences committed by communists ; hot it must not be forgotten that the offences — though darker than the crin.es for which th* Irish prisoners are under punishment — were committed in the progress i»f a civil war. But the riot committed at Manchester, by a crowd locally gathered together, was a proceeding totally of a different character, and must be considered as in the main belonging to the category of ordinary crime, though it is not on tiia ground that the offence is a poiitioal offence, that I think the prisoners in question can be recommended for consideration. But if these offences be not political offences in a strict sense, yet they were undertaken for a political motive, and in so far partake of that character as to effect^ in a material degree, tke moral guilt of the persons concerned." That was the observation made by the most eminent of Englishmen as to tke ingredients of a political offence, even in a case so obviously gross and, as many of us would regard it so totally alien from the ordinary category of political offences as the case of the Manchester murder. Oanadian Oases. Well, Sir, let us come to o»p own country. History repeats itsell in a wonderful way. I remember wheu we brought this case first on the tapis 'last Session amongst other things, w« enquired ot the Government what they had done with certain persons who were very active, apparently in stirring up dis- contentjin the latter half of the year 1884, Schmidt, Dumas and others ; and after a while we found out that the Government had been giving them little offices, con- tracts, and one thing or another, and that they had been thus either marking their sense of their worthiness or attempting, to isolate them from the popular move- ment. And that is an old plan. I was looking a while ago into the earlier his- tory of Lower Canada,, and I found an account of -what used to go on in the long agitation which cul- minated in the rebellion of 1837. As long before that time as I think, a quarter of a century. Governor Craig sent home Mr. Ryland as his secretary, to communicate with the Home Govefn- meut with reference to the affairs of thA janlon- t9 ; but 'eiicefl — lich the t — were ir. But a cro\f4 )ceedinv must bb to the it is nut poiitioal iiuestiuu )n. But nces in a en for a e of that ■gree, the l.» by tke B to tke ce, evea as many Leu from oQenoeii urder. to o»n ts itsetf er wheu the tapis lings, w«i lat th^y nrho weTe ^ up dis- ear 1884, id after* ^emment ices, con- and that ing their empting, ar move- I was rlier his- I found go oil oh cul- ►f 1837. think, a )raig sent etary, te Govetn- irs of tld 47 ddH, R. Desrivieres and L. H. Masson., to Bermuda, also provided : *• If any of them, or if L. J. Papineau, C. H. O. C6te, J. Gagnon, R. Nelson, E. B. O'Gallaghim, E. E. Rodier, T. S. Brown, L. Duvemay, E. Gartier, G. E. Gartier, J, Ryan, sen., J. Ryan, J,jin., L. Perrault, P. P. Dema- 11 48 ray. Jou. F. Daviguuu and LouU Qautier, •fiaiut whom warrant* for hkh breaaon have MM iMued,«hall hereafter without penulMrion ooMe into the Province thej Hhali oe deemed guilty of high treaMon and HufTer death. ** Nothing in anv })rocIamation ghali ex- tend to the caMeo of cttrtniii named penonii, or if aav other jierson charged with tne murder of Lieut. Weir, or with the murder of the late J. Ohartrand, and they nhall derive no advantage from such proclamations.^' The case of these perHons wau raiuod in the fiuglisii House, and Lurd John IIuh- sel Hays : "The Government has not neglected to let Sir J. Colbome know its opinion of the inex- pediency of inflicting capital punishment on occasions of this nature.'' Sir Robert Pool argued that an exception should be made in the case of the mur- derers of Lieut. W'eir, As soon after as 1841, the following resolution was passed in the House of Assembly by a vote of 39 to 9 : **Re8ohed, That it is the opinion of this committee, that an humble Address be pre- sented to His Excellency the Governor- General, as representing the Crown in this Province, praying for the exercise of the royal prerogative for granting a free pardon, indemnity and oblivion, of all crimes, offences and mipdemeanors, connected with the late unhappy troubles in the late Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, to such of Her Miyeftty's misguided subjects, in so far as may be compatible with the safety of the Crown and the security of the Province, and o* all attainders and outlawries during the period of four years. " In 1842, Mr. Lafontaine proposed to Sir Charles Bagot an amnesty, to which he agreed for all except Papineau. Mr. Lafontaine declined, and threatened to resign. The Government yielded, and a nolle prosequi was ordered as to Papineau whereon he was able to return, as he did in 1845. It is unnecessary. Sir, for me to refer to the Upper Canadian rebellion, in respect of which, one might almost go through a bimilar history. I have gone so far, in order to show the language which is used in events of this description, while they are going on, as contrasted with the language used a few yesurs after- wards, aM illustrating the vriew taken when passions have subsided and the mists 01 prejudice have disappeared. It is to that view that the Executive should look ia their det.rmination of oases of this description ; it is not the view of the moment j it is the view of the future they should look to. Ocuses in the Fenian Invasion of Canada. Then I turn to another case of a more recent date — the case of the Fenian in- vasions of Canada. These Fenian inva«h ions harassed us for a number of years. On the «th of March, 1866, Ix)rd Monck reports to the Secretary of the Colonies : " These reports, taken in connection with the open avowals at their public meetings, held in the United States, of the leaders of a portion of the Fenian Society, that it was their intention to attack this Province, had induced a feeling of great uneasiness and in- security amongst the people. • • • It will be' satisfactory to you to learn that the order calling out the force was issued by tel- egraph from headquarters and the different stations, late in the afternoon of Wednesday, the 7th instant, and that by noon on Thurs- day, the 8th, answers had been received show- ing that at that time about 8,000 men were mustered and prepared to move on any points where they might be required." Well, the advance did not come at that time. On the 4th June, 1886, Lord Monck says : "The body of Fenian conspirators who crossed the frontier from Buffalo to Fort Erie, on tiie morning of Friday, Iflt June. proved to be between 800 and 900 men, and seemed to have been well armed. ' * Immediately on the receipt of the intelligence of the invasion, Major General Napier push- ed on by rail to Chippewa, a force consisting of artillery and regular troops, under Cot Peacocke, 16th Reciment. • ' • '^ They came upon the Feniaos encamped in a bush, and immediately attacked them, but were outnumbered and compelled to retire to Port Colbome. T'lis occurred some time on Saturdav, 2nd June. . . . We have 65 prisoners in our possession, who have been, by my direction, committed to the common gaol, at Toronto, to await triaL "^ On the 8 th June, 1866, Lord Monck writes thus : Thei ganc exprj atora in thl couni gratij ■ofth*^ :eil the It luld of the I of more \ in- uva«H ^earS' [onck >nie8 : a with etiogB, rs of a it was ce, had and in* . It hat the by tel- jfferent [nesday, Thuw- [d show- )n were Ion any • at that ^, Lord lore who Ito Fort it June. len, ana ■ . • lelligence ler puah- onBiBting ider Cot iped in a Ihem, hut lelled ta I occurred • • , who I to the It trial. "^ Monck 49 <'Iinmeeforo aoine with thi« mad and wicked «)nter))riie. You iitand there furrounded by the fnendii and relation* of the men you m1(!w on that occaition. You cannot be HurpriHiui that the law •heuld be enforced, and that you nhould ioffer its drtMut ponalty, m I am kvcry much aAraid you will ; fur huw cuuld wu purmit the Iounff unreflecting men who wore brought ere by you and others like you, who placed tonftdence in you, who put faith in what you ■aid ; how I say could wu in justice punish them if we allowed you, the greater criminal, to escape." And after that Bentenco and undor thoMO circumHtancoH, that Hontonco waH not ux- ecatod. The priHoner's Hnntcnco wuh oommutod, not ov«'n for llf(5, but for twenty years' itnpriBonment and aH far as my knowledge goos he was pardoned not rery long after the uentenoe was given. That was the case of a ponton who never had any pretension of l)eing a Canadian citizen, wlio never had any pretense of having a grievance against Canada, and who cost us so much in time, money, anxiety and life. 2%at indioatea that the modern doctrine, as applied by oicraelvesin this case^ Is a doctrine which practically excludes from almost any conceivable case of a political cff'ence a capital atntence. The Half-breed Rebellion Now I tirn to this case in hand, and I say that some language htus been used be- fore and in the course of this debate, which I, for my part, cannot approve of, langu- age which seems to ignore as non-existent the right of resistance. I think here, and I have never disguised my opinion, that the half-breeds should not have risen, and that in that sense the rebellion was not justifiable, but the position which was taken by the Minister of Militia at "Win- nipeg, and the position he took the other evening, and the position which other hon. gentlemen have taken in this debate, upon the general question, seems to me to be at variance with our understood constitutional rights in the larger sense. Always there is legal, but only generally is there moral guilt in a rising ; always legally, generally morally, is there guilt, but not always morally. I cannot apprare of the spirit of those obiiervationa. OoD rORBIU THAT WB OANADIANH QIIOnr.D rol- ORT yUR A MOUKNT THAT THK COKNKK 8T0NI or OUR LIBERTY 18 THR SACKRO RIUHT OW RRSIHTANOB. Somo, through their blind zeal, do forget this. They forget that th« sacred right of rediatanoe was exemplified in the events whioh preceded the great charter, and is enshrined in that instra- ment itself ; they forget that the pious and immortal memory of William is the memory of an intmder who rose to the throne through the people's resist- ance to their king ; they forget that the battle of the Boynt voa* the triumph •/ the insurgents over the monarchy ; they forget tliat the ylorious revolution was the cor^ecration of the right to resist, and that the preHt;nt settlement of tiie British Crown is the visible embodiment of that light. Let me road you just two pass- ages on that point to show that I am not extreme in these views. Amos says : " But, an now, reHiflting tests wore incon- sistent with thu revolution which was founded upon resistance^ those of the acts of uni- formity and mUitia were abolished at that epoch ; and the non-resisting test in the Cor- poration Act was expunged from our statute Dook at the accession of the House of Bruno- wick. " Thus there is no longer any obligation of conscience binding one soul in secular chains to regard the royal dignity merely as a de- scendible property, instead of viewing it as a trust for millions, subject to a right of resistance when rendered indispensably necei> sary by the aaltis popuU." And take Brougham's Political Phil- osophy : — , " The national resistance was not only in point of historical fact the cause of the re- volutionary settlement ; it was the main foundation of that settlement. The struc- ture of the Qovemment was made to rest upon the people's right of resistance as upon its corner stone, and it is of incalculable im- portance that this never should be lost sight of ; but it is of equal importance that we- should bear in mind how essential to the preservation of the constitution, thus estab- ushed and secured, this principle of resiatanc* is ; how necessary both tor theGk)Teinor8 and the governed it ever must be to regard thi» ►prove OOD [> ro»- ftTONl ■ liHT or blind lat th« iplLfied 9 gre*t Instru- j plouB is the rose H roslBtr that th9 imph •/ y; «W was th« and that Brititih t of that two pw- 1 am not Bayt) : ere incon- as founded b8 of uni- ed at that in the Cor- our atatuto B of Bruno- oligation of jular chains y as a de- viowing it a right of isably necei- Lical PhU- notonly m of the re- , the main The struc- nadeto rest ance as upon Jculable un- ■^be lost flight nee that w©' lential to the thuB eatab- -oofreaifltance oveinon anA regard thii- 61 •eourM to that extremity m alwayi poMiible —an extremity no doubt, and to be oantioaaly •Bbracad aa inoh, bnt still an extremity within the people's reach, a protaction to which they oan and will reeort as often as their rulen make luok a recoune necoMiary for self-defence," I aay I oan not, an a LiiMral, permit aen- iimenta which appear to me to bu Henti- mentN of retrogrossion to the ap;o8 of abso- lute governinont, Hentim«mtH which from time to time in the beat onui of English liberty, have been repudiated, to pass without saying what I foel of the sacred right of resistance ; and 1 think it came with a very ill grace from the hon. the Minintcr of Militia te throv taunts at thisHideofthellouHo upon that Hubject and to accuse us in effect of having stimulated by our views feelings of this description when he ought to have remembered that the Minister of the Interior under whose reign this rol)ellion broke out was the Tery gentleman who in 1849, signed the annexation manifesto declaring that it was the object and intent of the signat- ories to agitato, peacefully of course, for — and they set that up as their object — reparation from England and annexation to the States. According to the high flown Tiews of loyalty which hon. gentle- men opposite utter that would have been « treasonable act. I do not say it was a treasonable act. I shall not inquire into its motives and shall not ask how it was that the high-flying Tories suddenly turn ^ round and advocated annexation. I believe there was a great deal to be said against the action of dismissing those who signed that statement from the militia; but fora gentleman who had for his colleague a Minister of the Interic who signed that •declaration, and set that great example to the half-breeds, to give us the high-toned notions which he expressed, was, I thought, a little out of place. Now, hav- ing said this as to the abstract right of resistance, I think it is important that we should remember also that the more representative and popular is our form of Government, the rarer are thu occasions vpon which resistance is necessary or Justifiable for the redress of grievances ; and, if, aa stated in our Oanadian charter, in that Colonial Secretary's d( valve, of course at once increased the responsibility of an autocratic and paternal Gcyernmeat subh ai^ ours was ir reference to the Kbrth-West ; a' paternal Governuierit which refused this aissistance ; and it also operated, more or less, in as much as they had not provided for them the re- presentative machinery to ditainish the m6l^\ guilt of the people. But, with renihlTO the other aspectif and conditions to #hich I have referred, I have ali^^y 8^d tiuibt, while I condemn as in the highest dei^i^ censurable t)ie conduct of the G6v^ernment| I myself have not been able to agree that this rising was justified, that the condiiioiis remove, although tbey may, and in my opinion do, lighten the stain of moral guilt ; and therefore the csuse had to be dealt with on the question of punishment, and by the "Sxecative under their responsibility to us. Unhap- pily IT WAS impossible; in this case for THE GOVERNMENT TO JUDGE THIS QUESTION FAiiiLY. They had. precluded themselves from that position. They had made this their own issue. They had de9lari»d tliyat.to a^mit the uxistence of grievances as a justification or a patliation for the inBvVgents^ would be their own obadepi- li^, wp^:,} t|i^ ..ajji^priate p^nisWoetitj that dediih on iAuiacalflbld? mmaeedfililv in oitkH^ to ftv«0fc/tliieir own death hei«^''and^ thus they had become diA^tialifled ^or sound judgment. An hon. MEMBER. That is your opinion? Mh BLA.KE. That is my opinion. In this connection I desire to say a word, and a wor5 only, with reference to a charge highly calculated, if true, to in- crease the guilt, so far ad' he "was morally responsible, of Eiel. I refer to The charge of venality. I have already read that portion of the evidence of Nolin which shows the pur- pose to which this man stated he would^ apply the money which he was about to get from the Government — that he woulu apply it in starting a newspaper and in raising other lu^tionalities in the States,, and in effecting the prosecution of his. designs. I say that however plainly that may appear to be a violent, a wick«^, or a mad sentiment, it is utterly inconsiateut witli the charge of venality ; it shows that this was the moijle which^. , in his disordered mind, he thought would bo most, efficacious in order to accomplish the design for his people, and for himself,,; as parti Vf his people, which he entertain-- ed. Bv^^ the very circumstance that he, made that statement to !Nolin te my n^ind ., proves that it is impossible that he could, have made the proposal for a venal pur- pose. I know perfectly the prejudices which exist. I know how many m^i^y^ ■would like to et se their consciences by saying : Oh, this was a base, and venal man. But it would be an ac!/ of humilia- ting cowardice on the part of one who has formed another conclusion on this subject,, to bend to such prejudices, and to allow a name which must ever be deeply clouded and stained, to receive another cloud or stftjn which he, at any rate, in my jndg- meiii^ does not deserve. But I will add to' diis, that I had expected to, hear ^ere now from an hon, gentleman who was i OJ ti n^! "ti iii Sjbej (**^: is your lion. In. a word, ice to ft le, to in- } morally Ity. on of tte B the pur- he would' 3 about to t he woulu 3er and in the States,, ion o£ his ainly that ricked, or a iconsiatent it shovs It., iP- *^/ his W011114 y>^, aooomntU^ lor himself^; 3 entwtain- , ace that he; t»myn»inA,, latheooula venal pur- prejudices many in§i^ Lsolences by and venal of humilia- one who has this subject,, id to allow a eply clouded er cloud or , in my judft- ut I will add to hear ere aan who wa» T«|^ intim^tel j;|^889ci^ted with Louis Riel, i^p worked t<»eih^rwjli|1^iiiB BleHnthe !^^m "West, fi^'apprieioianon of that por- tion of the oae^ I bfive been told a s|»ry -—I was told it by one who knew — on this sijliject, When the firs^ intelli|;^nce came, that he had asked the Govemmlent fOir money, that he was going to sell the cause :" Well," I said, "this is a most oxtraordina* y thing ; it entirely alters the whole complexion of the case." " Oh> do not believe it," said the gentleman wiho knew. " Weil," I said, " I have eyery reason to believe tb%t he askdi for the money." " Yes, that is quite poraible, h(9 is quite convinced he has a claim, but depend upon it, I know th*t it is impos- sible that he can have asked for money to d^eive or to betray his people, or that he would betray their cause. I know all the events which occurred when he was in the Provincial Qovem- mept. I do know thit at the time w;hen he was in power there in 1869-70, wi^en he H^/the resources of the Hudson Bay Company at his command, his own family was in a state of destitution, living down at their place, and he would not allow any portion of what he called public property to be sent to them at all, even to keep them in life, and that same provi- s^^n^.1 council was obliged secretly to send dqiwM a bag of flour or soEfiethin^^^i t^^t^ kind to his mother, who had the. cKai^, of the family, in order to ke^them^juiV^^ An ho^. liEMBlJR. Tqo thinu',: , Mr. BT AKE, SomeWy pava tiat is, top, thin. I refer this hon gOj^tl^man [ to tl|€| hon. meml;>er for Prove^cher (iitr. itoyal) on that subject. Incitement to Indians. Now, Sir, wim reference to the question of the Indian warfare. I think that if there was one thing above another tht^t n^^ved us the very instant w^ h^rd of thJB rising, to preiss on the Adm^nistaratiori ill every way we could, to t^ko i»lj th^ s|bej>s which they with th^r' gjreater, k)iiOwledge of the, conditions up tliere. Height themselves 'deem necessary, and' not to make a single suggestioiitKat, they were doing too much^t wim tli^'pofj^i- bility of Kn Ii^diaa rising ; the thouffhis wHibh Immediately eii|(a^ ttit all y^^ that there couM ncit' be a I'ising dttin&M by Riel' add the hUliibreeds wiloui 1^- mj|neiit danger o£ ah Indian ri8ing,aiidtlnit' in the (Condition of the cduntry We owed ii-\ to ourselves and to our humanity, to tK& ', Isolated settlers all through that country to take very large steps, to make very r great preparations that if possible, wO' might anticipate, at any rate minimise,^ the teriible results that might flow from that rising. No man felt, no man feels, more strongly than myself, the dangers,, the difficulties, and the probabilities of an Indiaii warfare, and therefore I am quite prepared to agree that if you are dealing with a man of perfectly sound intellect, this would be very important as importing a very much deeper dye td^ the crime he was committing. But, Sir, I may siy that 1 do not think that hon. gentlemen arO entitled' to rest the whole burden of thfs case upon that factl Iik the first pl^Oe we are to remember that the maii himself was a half- breed, that he was partly of Indian blood, that those who were with him were half-breeds, that it was natural, in fact, in view of so large a part of" their, through not of his, training, that that warfare Hhould be adopted. In the second i^lace| we can hardly hold our head's, high With reference to this questioli 0^" Ind^n warfare. Why, you remem- ber the great fight between Wolfe and MiSntiisklm at Quebec, and you remember thi) monument which celebratos ttiat evisnt, and in which their names are joined. Bat Montcalm had amongst his- forces a thousand Indian warriors, and an Ihdian warfare was going on in conrec- tion with these eveAis. In the other part of the Province at the very same time the English were using the Indians^ in warfare ; the Americans had used them in warfare. Why Sir^ it is but'a few years ago that at tJlie instance of my hon. friend from Brant, we voted $6,000 towards a monument to Joseph Brant £ suppose we all know something of the his^ toi^ of Joseph Brant, and what a remark* ablei man h^ was. But to the end of his Mtei ii Joseph Brant defended, with all his en- lightened Christian views, the Indian sys-, tMn of warfare as, for their circumstances and under their circumstances, proper i^A necessary, barring the question of torture, as to which, I am glad to say, he took an entirely different view, as many remarkable persons among the Indians have done, from the ordinary line. So with reference to Tecumseh, a name, perhaps, hardly inferior to that of Joseph Brant. So, that while we honor and refer to those persons, we cannot altogether forget this past in the present. Nor need we go so very far back. Why in the Lower Canadian rebellion there is a most interesting account of the feats of the Indians of Caughnawaga, who cap- tured some 60 or 70 insurgents, but they were on the loyal side, and therefore it was a proper act. In the course of 1869- 70, when Lieut.-Col. Dennis, as conser- vator of the peace, went into Manitoba and proposed to raise forces, he raised an Indianforce. There 50 Indiansunder Chief Prince were enrolled as part of his forces, and they were doing garrison duty, which was all, fortunately, they were called upon to do at the time. The Govern- ment very properly disapproved of it, and they stopped it. They were thor- oughly alive to the dangers and the im- proprieties of it. But it was not a crime of so deep a dye to engage the Indians and thus to create a great probability of an Indian warfare, as to prevent the late Lieut-Ocl. Dennis from being raised im- mediately afterwards in the public ser- vice by those gentlemen, and being pro- moted in that sei'vice, and remaining in it until he was superannuated. Now, Sir, referring to another point, to the Question of the Old Offence. liis said by the hon. gentlemen opposite, and has been said very loudly, that my altitude on that subject entirely precludes me from condemning this execution. Well with reference to the old offence. We must remember that there waa a general amnesty announced by the Qovemment by proclamation, on their re(roon8ibility covering not that particular offence, but covering all the politicsaloffenceis and dis- turbances. That amnesty Was received,,, with universal approbation. I do not', remember a single voice or newspaper' ever being raised against it. It was uni- versally thought that the Government had done propar in issuing, and issuing early, that particular amnesty. It did not, however, cover this particular offence; but the rising, the political part of the whole affair, the raising of men in rebel- lion, the creation of a Gx>vernment, the organization of forces, all that was with the u9inimous consent of the people of Canada amnestied. Thore remained, as I have said, the question of this particular offence. As to that, what was my atti- tude in 18711 'It is the same as my attitude to- day. I thougat then, as I said then, that in my opinion the death of Scott was a cruel murder. There is just one point in respect of which the discus- sions which have gone on within the last few months have tended to modify my view, and that is the very point** to which I have been drawing the attention of the House this evening. It is questionable, in my opinion, and those who read with the light which recent events and evidence have thrown upon these matters, will agree with it, will see in much that has occurred the reason of that question, it is qutgtionable how far the mind of RUl maif «V(sn at that early day have been thoroughly balanced, I do not intend to disduss it; I allude to it as the only thing in regard' to which there is an observation to be made which differs my attitude to- day from my attitude of 1870 with respect to that event. That being my attitude then and my attitude ever since, an attitude in which I was confirmed by Sir George E. Cartier, who called it a cruel murder, by Sir John A. Macdonald, who also stigmatised it as such and in- voked his l^ker to testify to his anxiety to catch the criminal — that being my attitude, I was exposed at that time to a storm of indignation, because I expressed the view that those who had been, as I oonoeived, guilty of cruel murder should be broiu^t to justice. Mr. HESSON. It was because you 65 t [ dis- lived i not )aper 3 uni- iinent isuiag [tdid tence; ){ Uie rebel- t, the ) with iple of d, as I ticular ly atti- as my ,8 1 said " sath of is just discus- tbe last lify my J which 1 of the ionable, ad with jvidence >rs, will that has ion, it i« Rwimajr oroitgh^ Lscuss it; ihing itt aervation litude to- ^70 with )eing my ver since, irraed by Jled it a iacdonald, h andin- is anxiety being my time to a expressed been, as I ler should wanted to make political capital out of it ? Mr. BLAKE. The hon. gentleman, who is f^lways cbAritable, says it was be- cause I thought CO make political capital. The hon. gentloman has been some time in Parliamenl, and he ought to know it is not parliamentary to impute motives. I wonder what the hon. gentleman thought of it himself 1 I wonder whether he thought it was a cruel murder, and whether he thought the murderer should be brought to justice or not 1 Mr. HESSON. I have not changed my mind. Mr. BLAKE. The. hon gentleman thought it then and thiAks it now. Mr. HESSON. You have, I have not. Mr. BLAKE. We shall see. I have just said I have not changed my mind. I did my best to enforce that view. I am told that I did it without papers and I want papers now. I had papers; the Government had brought down the papers to the House ; they had brought down the full account of the murder. I have Mr. Donald Smith's account and the account of other dignitaries — all the ev-i dence on which a man could reasonably come to a conclusion in'advance of a triul. What did I want ? I wanted a trial ; I wanted that the man should be brought to trial, and I thought then and I think now that I had quite ample evidence to justify me in stigmatising that event as a murder, and in calling that the perpetrator should be brought to trial. Full Amnesty was granted. That being so, yet in the year 1875, 1 think I was amongst those who though, not of the GovexT^nent, yet in our party councils, and subsequently in my place in parliament, most strongly supported by voice and vote the proposition that there should be an amnesty in respect of that offence. I believed that the facts which were revealed before the special committee on the North-West troubles proved that we were in duty bound to grant that amnesty, that we were in honor bound to grant that amnesty ; and so believing I acted upon that bdief and sustained, as I have said, by every forot In my power* the proposition that an ai n§sty uiould be granted. That amnesty was a v«rr effectual and complete transaction, it was not granted simply upon the respon- sibility of the Crown without the approval of the people's representatives. The^ people's representatives were asked to- take the initiative, at the instance, of course, of the responsible Ministers of the Crown, and they did so by an overwhelm- ing majority, in which you are to count, not merely that very large ma- jority, that voted for the granting of that amnesty, but also all those who voted for the granting of an unconditional amnesty and may have recorded .their votes against this one because itwas conditional. There was not absolute unanimity. The Minister of GustciHS was, I have no doubt, a Protestant, as Kiel says, upon that subject, as some others were, and the First Minister declined to vote upon that occasion at all, so his opinions were left to be gathered from rather indefinite observations. But take it all round both as to political parties and as to the abso- lute majority, there was a very close ap- proach to unanimity. The hon. meml^rfor Ottawa has made a discovery on the head of this and has found that because Hiel was amnestied on the condition that he should absent himself from Canada for five years, and because for some sixteen months of those five years he was confined as a liuji- atic in a lunatic asylum by the authority of and at the instance of the Local Grovernment of the Province of Quebec,^ Canada, he thus broke the condition and made himself liable, but for the leniency, kindness and consideration of this Govern- ment, to be executed forthwith upon his being found in the country and caught by the constables. Such is the view of the hon. member for Ottawa upon the criminal law. He has supported it by some ex- tract from a book upon contracts, dealing with civil rights, and wikh the somewhat complicated question of the voidable char- acter of agreements when made by a per- son of insane mind. But I will tell tho hon. member, without endeavoring to enlighten him upon these subjects, that jcause you ft6 ^jr bpinion is that the ^tence in ^ihin cotihtinr of Kiel in an insane i^tite, should tot be talten, Us a a breach 6f ifhat oondiHon ini point of law, and that I liet?e regard it, for I believe it "WC'^ld be considietred even if it .were a ) nominal, a technical breach, as nothing- less in the literal sense of the term thiem a judicial murder if advantage had been token of the presence of this lunatic io award execution against him. I therefore pass from this essay of the hon. member for Ottawa, into the regions of (nominal law. I am a little surprised that it should bs said that I am not free '•'to exercise my judgment now, and to de- cide as to the extent of Kiel's responsi- bility, because, in common, I believe, with a very large majority of my fellow- ««3untrymen, I came to a particular con- '•'^usion Which I still retain, with refer- "ence to the events of 1869 and 1870, *^vhi h had been amnestied in 1875. How himj critics 1 Was the Minister of Cus- )iJtQB free to come to such a conclusion ? 'Was he hatnpered by the views he held ■^ that tdi)ic in the ^ailier d^ys t Was InfB h^pered by his declinature to vdte %^r^ ^h^n for the kmtlesty ? tf as' W fie %meiiiiy f^ to d^kl with' t^is'ciii^tionjn flis tii^feiltive cft^^ty, entirely irr^spect- %er&8'!»e Vas bdi^d to 'do, br'the tl^W WkUhe held tbat th^^de^th^of Scott Svas ^!n;fti6t a cruel Aitii^^rl HbW of t^e Wc^tkry bf State) As I haire'inid, I !^#48:'fii^bd^ to a.^trtrm 6f 'oblpquy In '4^tk^i*^rtions of tlte Doidain{6n because .iTHiwi amrmfed the Itiroposltion^l have Hil^ntlbi^ed^with refBinehce to the 'death of ' Siiitt. Dmerent views uji^n tkat . suib- 4^ %ere stat^ . by niAi^y hbn. gentle- men, tthd'i^tnon^t them was the Secretary of State, who was of an entirely different opinion with reference to the question commis June foi, i» Boci6t6 mt l^jgai opulaire. :ution de un aujet L afin de itionalet}. ie difesire le Qoulet ie lesang, satisfaire que je ne ationaliea 3 barbare by the )mamiiig that he who hifai- >ine upon Hy prod- bis cooa- effect cf igst th^Qi UtljUfit deal with entleraan o des^idb- putatiocis )e due to ts At that AtemeiktH lis redeteit loment^ to thehon. am afraid same-uil- am about fortunate corretetly jentleman 5se words • aching ar- "RiiBl was irifbmied of it, aiid feeling that hia reign was about to clOib, did^ot heiitate ^b%?f.»coriMe^^^^^^ hiiwejf and the CM^hation wfiidh wis imvins m^ the holj |m||^dhary. Sc'p^t , wi^ imin^|Med a^d ' his l^^o. thrown as d^fttince ftt aif^ilroi'tB' of re- ''jndlation * * Last winter was not Riel's de]^ui inithis, course of hiji;h treason. His revolt in 186d will pe remembered — the use- less murder of Scott, whom he caused to be executed when that poor unfortunate was in a position whete it was impossible for bun to injure his captor." I am going to try another plan of being correot this time, and I shall take the Mii^Mreal Gamtttea report of the Secre- tdi*y'8 speech at Terrebonne; in which he said, with reference to his action in 1874, in the case of Lepine : " I defended my client, and duiing that defence I had proof, and the best ])roof too, that the killing of the unfortunate Scott was one of the most atrocious murders ever com- iiutted. That atrocious murder was without the connivance and without the appi^pval of Lepine, but it was the result of the selfish vengeance of the then dictator of the North- "West — Louis Kiel. Now, Sir, perhaps the hoil. member for North Perth (Mr. Hesson), with that ac- curate appreciation of motives and that Christian charity which animaces him in the exercise of that appreciation, will discern on what principle it was that the Secret Ary of State in 1875 described, as I have read to you the event to which I have referred, with ihe knowledge that he had of that event, as proved by the description of it which we got from thb Secretary in the year 1886 ; and hfe will tell us how he came to treat it in one way in 1875, and in another way altogbther in 1886. I do not occupy that position. I regard it now as I regarded it in 1871 and in 18^5. I am fortunate enough not to have required a reversal of my opinion in the interval, though the Secretary of State seems to have required fifteen years to ascertain the facts and arrive at his last ccrtlclueion. Now, Sir, whatever was the guilt of 1870, whether the hon. 'Secretary of State of 1875, or the lion. Sidcretary of Stai(;e of 1886, be right upon tbkt subject, here was, as I have said, a solemn aumestjr — an act of oblivioxlu What )8 the meaning of "Anmesty"? It is a blotting, , out of remembr^oe. What is the mwning of <* ohlivioa "? It is the same. That ia' the technical meaning expressing the reality of these transact- ions ; and it is in my opinion, contrary to the spirit of our law that wo should, at this time and under these circumstances, bring up the event which was so solemnly amnestied, as a reason why the extreme penalty of the law should be inflicted if but for that even^ it should not be in- flicted. Will you allow me to read a word or two that Sir Bobert Peel used in the House of Commons when, at as early a period as 1825, he proposed a Bill for restoring the credit of criminals : — ♦ ♦ * " By the spirit of the English Constitution, every man who had satisfied t)^ justice of the country, by a pardon ought to be restored to the same situation as he was in before he committed any offence. * * • Thfe Bill would also go to place persons whose' sentence had been commuted m the full en* joyment of all their rights as free citizens. So when a capital convict has fulfilled his com- muted sentence of seven years' transportation, he was to be restored to all his 'credits and^ capacities.* • * * In God's name, wheii parties had expiated their offence by fulfilin^ the sentehce of the law, why should any vx>- dusion remain against them ? It was there*» • fore provided by the Bill, that whatever a party h(^d undergone thjB punishment awarf^- ed by the court for any offence, he was theaa restored to all his rights, credits and capadtie^ in as fidl a manner as if no offence had heen committed." Much more solemnly can we apply such language to the case of a parliamentary amnesty such as was granted here. NbW was he hanged for the old offence 1 tt yes — if his sentence would have been commuted but for that, then he was in effect hanged for it ; and this would be in effect to adopt the views of those who called for his blood, on the grounil of the death of Scott. But, Sir, if his intellect were disordered, how could the old offence be taken into consideration iii administezing the extreme punishment £or thenW. Incarceration for life wad re- quired ; pardon would not have been right* «8 l! That in one of the obaervations hon, gen- tlemen opposite make: "You say he ought to have been pardoned." I have not said so. I §ay pardon VHmld not have been right. The n^ety of the State and hie pimiehment, taking the etrongeet view againet him of hie mental condition, dtnumded inoarceration ; but the amnes- tied offence ehotUd not have hanged him. Was Riel Executed as a De^rrent. It is said tUe execution was needed as adeterrent. Sir Alexander Campbell, in his report, has declared that there never was a rebeliion of which it might be so truthfully said, that it was entirely the act of one man — that if he had not come there, or had been removed one day before it took place, the outbreak w6uld not have taken place. Yet, he said that as a deterrent to others against rebelling, it was necessary that he should be executed. I do not think so, I have not so ill an opinion of the people oE the North-West. Incarceration would have been quite enough to deter, with all the other results which have followed from their imjustifiable rising. Justice and mercy, redress of grievances, and a pro- per attention to the rights and interests of the people, are the best deterrents. We asked, to day, Sir, in our prayers, that peace and happiness, truth and justice, religion and piety, might be es- tablished amongst us through all genera- tions, but I do not believe that it is by this man's blood that a step has been taken to accomplish that result. / do not see how, on the score of necessity to deter, you can justify hanging a man of a disordered intellect. That is a deter- rent, it is true, but it is a deterrent to the continued existence of the principle of capital punishment. Now, Sir, one word with reference to the Reprieves and the Delays. We have not yet heard a satisfactory explanation of the last reprieve. I do not clesire to detain you on that subject ; but I wish to advert to an authority upon it. In 1869 the Home Secrotaiy, Mr. Bruce, Mid this : " In Windaor'ii caie, again, although the enormity of the offenee was undoubted, still the sentence havina been postponed for riz months, in order that important questions of law might be determined, the right hon. gentleman had thought that it woukl not be ri|[ht, after that lapse of time, to permit the prisoner to be executed." I will advert to one other case of which I happened to become personally cognisant when Minister of Justice. In the dis- charge of my duties I visited the King> ston penitentiary and conversed with the Warden in reference to a number of pris- oners. Amongst them was one whose sentence had been commuted a great many years ago. I enquired into his case. He was a navvy, I think, living a little way out of Hamilton, on the Toronto and Hamilton Railway, perhaps during the time of its construction. He had been convicted of a cruel and brutal murder of his wife with a crowbar. She was found in a terribly mutilated state; he was tried, convicted and sentenced. At the last mo- ment the technical legal point was raised that the law required an associate on the sbench when the sentence was pronounced, or at some st^ge of the trial. The asso- ciate had as little to do with the case as the magistrate in this case. Yet it was proved that the associate was off the bench. Upon that the man was reprieved until the question should be decided by the judges. The judges decided that the objection was fatal and the trial a mis- trial, and that the man must be tried again. He was tried at the next assizes, and of course convicted again, and upon the score of the time that had passed, though there was not the slightest ground otherwise, his sentence was commuted. Now, the hon. Minister of Militia referred to what he called the evidence with regard to the Letter of General Riel Middleton to Yet he did not satisfy me that ' Kiel did not surrender on that letter. The state- ment of Colonel Boulton ;^read by the wUryt 2h the for ^ iOTXB of it hon. not be Ddit the i^hiohl gnisant he diB- King- rith the of pria- ) whose a great his case. a little )uto and •ing the ad been lurder ©f aa found ras tried, last mo- as raised be on the nounoedi The asso- case as et it was ofif the reprieved cided by that the al a mis- be tried tt assizes, md upon d passed, ist ground ommuted. a referred ith regard leton to Biel did rhe state- >ad by the 99 Minister was directly to the contrary, and if we remember the wbole cir* oumstances of the case — the time Oenefal Middleton wrote the letter, and the condition of things stated by the First Minister on one of the discussions last session as to papers, I do not think that is a fair inference from the evidence. But the hon. Minister said he would prove the purpose for which that letter was g'ven, and he proved it bv reading a tter from the laeutenant Ueneral, who, he said had been told by some one that Biel was afraid of being killed in the camp. That was not very good evidence against Biel as the hon. gentleman knows. The intent with which General Middle- ton sent the letter is of no consequence. The question is wJiat does the letter filhly import 1 The authority of General Middleton is not of any consequence, if thai were disputed, though I do not sup- pose it is. Now, the question, to my mind, on this subject is just this; Is it for the honor and credit of the volunteers of Canada that it should be declared that' that paper was sent in order to wari'ant the prisoner, if he surrendered himself, against lynch law 1 Is it to the credit and honor of the volunteers to say that it was necessary for a Major General in the British army to give assurance to Biel and his council that they would not be lynched if they surrendered them- selves? I should be sorry to come to any such conclusion ; and then, the ques- tion remains : Was it not reasonable to believe that the result of this statement was, you shall not, in fact, be exposed to the very worst that you can possibly be exposed to if you ai-e caught, that is death. I think the liberal interpretation of that letter, in the sense and spirit in which such letters and assurances have been interpreted in all events of this de- 8(»iption, would have led to that con- clusion. I turn to the subsequent ques- tion, the promise, of inquiry and the expectations of commutation. I turn to the very important statement by the hon. member for Hochelaga (Mr. Des- jardins) on that subject, and to the language of the Ministerial press, and I say that those expectations ought not to have been aroused, thiat that 'attitude ought not to have been taken unless they were to bo acted upon and abided by, truly, faithfully and loyally, because if they had not been aroused, other steps might have beon token, other evidence might have >)een brought forward, other facts might have been presented to the Executive, which naturally would not be brought forward if there was an understanding that there was to be a& efficient inquiry. For my part, I always believed there would be in this case, a commutation, having regard to the circumstances und the testimony as to the prisoner's mind ; and I believed that if there was doubt in the mind of the Govern- ment on the question of The Mental Oondition of the Prisoner. that doubt would have been attempted to be solved by an efficient and proper medical enquiry; particularly so when we find that Dr. Howard was not called. Now Dr. . Howard said in Montreal he could do Biel no good, because, under the law, although he obviously implied he did not -'agree with the law, he would have been obliged to prove that Biel was responsible. Of course he would. He thouyht Biel wm irresponsible avd that the law wa^ wrong. He could not have disturbed the verdict, but his evidence would have been import- ant as to to the state of Biel's mind with a view to the awarding of punishment afterwards. So Mrith Archbishop Tache who, we aee, in his letter declared that he had formed the conviction thai for twenty years, with all his I rilliant gifts, this uu- fortunate man was the victim, of megalo- mania and theomania. So with reference to Bishop Orandin, whose letter the Minister of Militia read, dated Jane, in which the bishop characterises Riel as a miserable maniac. So with reference to a number of pieces of evidence I have collected and gathered from newspapers which were acoeesible to Ministers, bat which I will not trouble the House witk »b ,^^1i(mir. ffowiih reference to ^e ifyjjiMpk c9nUtint indnbU«U>U tracts a iwnrdcnd mind. So wi^h refer^noe the last e^u«ion I have re«d, the pro- l^heiiy of ^e|(ina, which no num can read 'u/iihifut comtng to th$ concluaion that he who wrote it %pai diaordered in his mind. So with referonoe to the papers not brought down. I have boen told that of the Orders in Council of tbo provisional jjovernmi nt, which are in the custody of this. government, the very first is an order declaring Biel a prophet, something after the fashion of John the BaptiHt. I have shown you he called himself Eliaa and ^Peter, and this order, I believe, repre- 'sents him as John the Baptist. The next order was one altering tlie days of the week and so forth. All these things and many statementB that were made, some of theni at an earlier period, as to circum- stances which had occurred, wera worthy of attention. So were the Icbters writ- ten with reference to the trial. At the close of the trial, the correspondent of the Mail repoi*ted that Dr. Clarke, after l^vi^g heard the evidence which was oialled since Biel's examination, and after Ijia'ving heard the prisoner himself speak; was quite convinced he was in- ear I say the case was one in which IT WAS INCUMBENT ON THE ADMINISTRATION, IF THKY PELT A DOUBT AS TO THE PROPRIETY OF f^OMMUTATION, TO HAVE A THOROUGH HfEDICAL EXAMINATION ANI) F^NQUIRY. The medical examination they caused was limited in scope. Sir John A. Kacdon- ald's letter expressly points that out. We have not the instructions to these gentle- men, but Sir John's letter to the Minister of Militia pointed out that it was limited to the (question whether Kiel's condition had b^ccMne so n^^ch worse since his trial that he was no longer capable of knowing right frora wrong. It was not therefore s^ch an enqniry as has been frequently made in cases infinitely weaker than this ; it wfts not an inquiry which involved the rc;i^i,qi^tion : What was the condition of liis n4nd ^ the time of the pffeoce, irj^ch ,con^tiiate^ the criop^e %Q comniit- ^1 What ▼&& the condition of his mic d before that time? So with reference to the y^itj important point of heTeditftij insanity. I have read in the MaU ike statement that his mother went into • state of absolute oraeiness during the ro- belUon, and a statement of her famng into the same condition at a subsequeiit period, when she heard of the con- viction — a circumstance, the importance of which, in considering what the real condition of this man's mind was, cannot be overstated, as must be extremely fa- miliar to all those who have made mental alienation a stndy. These gentlemen were not specialists. Dr. V'^lade cer- tainly was not ; Dr. Lavell had verj limited experience, having had, for a short number of years only, the charge of ^e criminal lunatics in the Kingston peni- tentiary, because up to a comparatively recent period the criminal lunatics were transferred to Kockwood which was under other orders. Dr. Lavell also, if I be rightly informed as to his views upon a late occasion, that of Lee's exttmination, was a very improper person to send to find Riel sane or insane, because upon that occasion, if I am rightly informed, his opinion was that the man was sane, though the others found him insane. The experts also who had been examin d, at the trial took no patt in the subsequent examination, except perhaps Ur. J ukes, who did not take any real part in it. Then we have not the reports of the commission, we have only this edition of their reports which has been laid on the Table, and we do not know what their instructions were or what were the reports on which the government acted. I say however that for the purpose of a pro- per discharge of the duties of the Ex cu- tive in cases of disordered inlelle t though not amounting to irresponsibility, those reports, even such as they are brought down, were of the highest importance. They prove the genuine existence of delusions and hallucinations on the sub- jects of religion and politics, on the \ery subjects on which the delusions and hall- uoinations were prioved, in respect of w^ich the criiine wap committed. Thef show that these were persistent, and m^ 'Conclusion ia clear that Riel was to dia- 61 UlT bo • le r©- ;ioio luettt oou- tanoe real innot ly fa- lenUl lemen 3 c©r- very .short peni- itively were \x was JO, if I I upon Qation, end io 3 upon [ormed, sane» insano* .min d, lequent Juk08, in it. of the tion of on the it th^-ir ■re the icted. I of a pro- Ex cu- though those ibroughfc ortance. ;encei of the sub- the \erj nd hall- spect of Thef and t»y I io dia- •{ftdtrmi in mind at not, within the accepted rule, to have been a proper evh^eet for the capital eentence. It ii impoMihle, in oa«e of aeriooB delusion or so called monom- aniA, to be sure how far the flaw has affected the conduct in question. It may not have affected it in some cases, though whether it did or not is very frequently a question beyond the wit of man to deter- mine. Bu^ here we know it did, because we know that the Haw hud regatd to these very two points of religion and politics up- whioh this rising and these events turned. Criminal responsibility, then, for public security there may and must be, though there may be some mental disorder; but not responsibility unto death ; and here again |come in the political nature of the offence, the general rules relating to these offences and the special circumstances of the conduct of the Government in this matter; and my belief, therefore, is that the maximum sentence for the »ame crime of which Biel was convicted, had he been tried under the milder procedure of the modern law under which his colleagues were tried, namely, imprisonment for life jifould have been the proper and adequate disposition of his case. But if the Government doubted this there was an imperative call for thorough and efficient inquiry, for an inquiry going far beyond what was possible at Regina, and extending to the con- dition of the' criminal not only at that r^oment, bub at other times, there was imi^erative ground for such an inquiry before a determination should be reached, that the sentence should be executed. My own opinion is, then, that a great WRONG HAS BEEN DONE, AND A GREAT BLOW HAS BEEN INFLICTED UPON THE ADMINIS- TRATION OP CRIMINAL JUSTICE ; AND FOR THIS THE Executive is responsible to us. I know the atmosphere of piejudic<^ and passion which surroujiclsi cKis css^ ; I know how difficult in wi^i be . Ihr fhsra to come to penetrate that