IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I ItilM |25 US ^ ^" ■tt Itt 12.2 S Hi ■" : us 12.0 IL25 II 1.4 6" ^j* A* '/ FhotograjM: Sciences Corporation 23 WIST MAIN STMIT WIBSTIR.N.Y. UStO ( 71* ) 173-4503 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Instituta for Historical IVIicroreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiquas Technical and Bibliographic Notaa/Notaa techniques et bibliographiques The toti The Inatitute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Feeturee of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter eny of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. Q .. Coloured covers/ ZJ Couverture de couleur |~n Covers damaged/ D D D D Couverture endommagte Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^ et/ou pellicuMe □ Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque loured maps/ Cartes giographiques en couleur Coloured inic (i.e. other than blue Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured maps/ n~| Coloured inIc (i.e. other than blue or blacic)/ I I Coloured pletes and/or illustrations/ D Planches et/ou Illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ RelM avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shsdows or distortion along interior margin/ Lareiiure serrAe peut causer de i'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge IntArieure Blanic leeves added during restoretion may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these hsve been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certalnes peges blenches ajout^ee lore d'une reetauration apparaiasent dans le texte, male, iorsque cele 4tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas M fllmtes. Additional commenta:/ Commentalree supplAmentaires: L'instltut a microfilm* le meiileur exempieire qu'ii iui a *tA possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exempieire qui sent peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliogrephlque, qui peuvent modifier une imege reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mithode normale de fiimage sent indiqute ci-dessous. D D D Q D D D n Coloured pages/ Pagee de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagtes Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurtes et^ou peiiiculAes Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages dteolor#es, tachettes ou piqutes Pages detached/ Pages dAtachAes Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of print varies/ Qualit* inAgaie de I'impression Includes supplementery meterial/ Comprend du materiel suppMkmentaire Only edition available/ Seuie MItlon disponlble Pagee wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totaiement ou partiellement obscurcles par un feuiilet d'erreta, une pelure, etc.. ont 4ti filmAes A nouveau de fa9on A obtenir la mellleure image possible. The post ofti fiimi Orig begi the sion otha first sion or ill The shall TIN! whl( Map diffi entii beg right requ metl This item Is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document eet fllm4 au taux de rMuction indlquA cl-deseous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X • 3 12X lex 20X 24X 2IX 32X lair* I details |uas du t modifiar igar una • filmaga Tha copy filmad hara haa baan raproduead thanka to tha ganaroaity of: National Library of Canada Tlia imagas appaaring hara ara tha baat quality poaaibia conaidaring tha condition and iagibiiity of tha original copy and in kaaping with tha filming contract spacif icationa. L'axamplaira filmA f ut raproduit grica A la g^nAroait* da: BibiiothAqua nationaia du Canada Laa imagaa auivantaa ont tti raproduitaa avac la plua grand aoin, compta tanu da la condition at da la nattatA da l'axamplaira fiimA, at an conformity avac las conditions du contrat da filmaga. 1/ u4aa Original copias in printad papar covara ara filmad baglnning with tha front covar and anding on tha last paga with a printad or illustratad impraa- sion, or tha back covar whan appropriata. All othar original copias arc Mimad baglnning on tha first paga with a printad or iliuatratad impras- sion, and anding on tha last paga with a printad or illustratad imprassion. Laa axamplairas origlnaux dont la couvartura an papiar ast ImprimAa sont filmte an commandant par la pramiar plat at an tarminant soit par la darnlAra paga qui comporta una amprainta d'imprassion ou d'iilustratlon, soit par la sacond plat, aalon la cas. Tous las autras axamplairas or'ginaux sont fllmte an commandant par la pramlAra paga qui comporta una amprainta d'imprassion ou d'iilustratlon at en tarminant par la darnlAra paga qui comporta una taiia amprainta. Tha last racordad frama on aach microfiche shall contain tha symbol -^ (moaning "CON- TINUED"), or tha symbol V (moaning "END"), whichavar applias. Un daa symbolas suivants apparaftra sur la darnlAra imaga da chaqua microfiche, salon la cas: la symbols — ► signifia "A SUiVRE", la symbols V signifia "FIN". Ira Maps, platas, charts, ate, may ba filmad 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 framea as required. The following diagrama iiluatrate the method: Lea cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre filmAs A dee taux da rMuction diff Arents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre reproduit en un seul cliche, ii est film* A partir da Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche h droite, et de haut an has, en prenant le nombre d'Images nAcessaire. Las diagrammes suivants illustrent la mithoda. ly errata ad to mt ina pelure, ■9on A 1 2 3 32X 1 2 3 4 5 6 NOTICE OF THE TRIAL or LIEUTENANT JOHN MAITLAND, BT COURT-MARTIAL: WITH A PULL REPORT OF THE DEFENCE. TORONTO: PBINTED BY HU «H S CO BIE, WBL I.I!« G T O N BUILDINGS. 1841. '<22: i^/^S ^hO ■( i i ( ■A -I ■ \ * \ I h t' ^* % ) NOTICE or THE TRIAL OF * LIEUTENANT JOHN MAITLAND, n BT * COURT-MARTIAL WITH A PULL REPORT OP THE DEPENCE. TORONTO: PRINTBD BT BUOH SCOBIEy WEIiIiIITOTON BUIIiDlNOS. 1841. *^^''" PREFACE. t' PuuMc attention having/ been a good deal occupied by the Proceed- ings of the Court Martial, assembled to try Lieutenant John Maitland, upon certain charges preferred against him by Major Thomas Magrath, the Editor ventures to hope that the following pages may not prove unacceptable. It had been his intention to have presented the public with the proceedings in detail, but they have been swelled to such an inconvenient size as to render that design impracticable. And he regrets that impossibility the less, as the evidence quoted in tho following pages has been carefully compared with tho record of the Court, and is so fully stated as to enable the reader to form a judgment on the whole case without difficulty. The Editor forbears, at present, to make any comment on the patient temper and impartial spirit displayed by the gallant Colonel who presided over that Court during its whole proceedings. Those points will bo canvassed elsewhere. Nor is it my purpose to impugn its verdict. However unlocked for, that verdict has pronounced Lieutenant Maitland to be guilty of a breach of military discipline. But the public will decide what the Court has left undecided. They will pronounce upon the moral guilt or innocence of the parties, and they will consider how far it is consistent with the honour of Her Majesty's service that matters should be allowed to remain in their present position. Toronto, 13th April, 1841. « « « The evidence for the defence was not concluded for several weeks after the Court had opened; when Lieutenant Maitland, feeling himself unequal to the task, desired that his counsel (Mr. Blake) might be permitted to read his address, and cited in support of the application the case of Lieutenant Curtis, tried in January last, when such permission was granted as a matter of course. The Court, however, declined to comply with his request : and has thus, it is to be feared, by such high sanction, re-established a custom no less absurd than inconvenient. *a DEFENCE. Mr. PiiBsiDBrfT AND Gbntlbmbn,— I shall not follow the example of the Prosecutor in this case, by asking your indulgence for the minuteness of detail, to which I shall be obliged to descend in conducting my defence, becauue I am confident ihut I address those who are as deeply impressed a:i I can possibly be with the vital importance of the ennuiry in which they are now engaged, not only to the individual accused, but to Her Maje-ity'a service throughout the Province. And, Sir, I trutit that I thuU not be betrayed inlo the glaring inconui»tcncy into which the Prosecutor has fallen,— .who, while he expressed his ecnso of the painfulne.^s of his situation as Public Prosecutor, and that too in a case where " the accused was an OfBcer, the establishmen'. of whose guilt would in all probability be followed by the losu of his Commission," and who would therefore one might suppose, have left the facts of the case to speak my ffuilt, did nevertheless found that guilt, no:, upDn tho3e facti, but upon his own frequent and strong cxpre^j^ion of tlie hardihood of my conduct, the malignity of my feelings, and the baseness of my motives. I, Sir, shall not follow that example, but I shall (wi hnut indulging in any invective against the Prosecutor,) grouni my defence upon the facts of the case; and if in tho opinion of the Court tliose facis shall not be considered sufficient '.o hive warranted the conclusion which I have drawn from them,— niy, if the Court shall not be of opinion that those facts imperatively called upon me to purauc 'i.he cour. e which ( did adopt, in justice to myself, in justico to ihe public, in justice to the service to which I have the honor to belong,— then. Sir, I cannot con- sistently with my feelings condescend to ask their indulgence; be- cause, however humble my rank, however infinitely beneith the notice of the Prosecutor it may have placed me, in his own estimation, and however truly humble it is compared with your rank, Sir, and '.hat of many of the Members of the Court before which I am arraigned, yet, Sir, I can yield to none in my jealousy for the honor of Her Majes y's service; onl I could never consent to hold by suffjrance a Commis- sion, of which m the opinion of those to whose judgment I shall most cheerfully bow, my conduct shall have rendered me unworthy. I did not think, Mr. President, that I f^hould have been obliged to call a witness to prove, that tor sevcml years past, my exertions had mainly contributed to i he increase of the Race funds of i he City of Toronto. I thought, and do still think, ihat (with the exception of the Prosecutor,) not one person will be found in the least acquainted with ^i the matter, who will not be able to answer the queition " Have the Race fiinda been incroaHCf] by Lieutenant Maitland'a exertiona, and if au, to any conHidcrublu uxtcnt?" unheHitatingiy in the affirmative. Hir, I became Secretary to thoaeRacea in 1830,— the aubscriptiona for that year amounted to HJxty poundtf. I have continued Becrctary ever tiince; and in the year 1840 the Subbcriptions amounted to five hundred pounds. In the year 18dU, I had, up to the day of the Races, collected a cunuideruble uum,— amounting to two Farmer'a L /£rA\ X^^vi-*^*^ hundred and/s.*'iht3i fwnntlii, — which I placed in the Farmer*! /// *^f^^^ Bank, to the credit of Colonel Mackenzie Eraser, the Preaident. Sub /:'/jm- dJL.//i*een in your pocoeitsion t>re thi*. 1 am happy to find that the balanoa of £8 68. 6d. is in my favor, and hope you are in funda for the same reason. It will most probably be wished to be known on Friday afternoon the 1001 that was raised last year, as a kind of guide for the present. Yours, &c.| (Signed) J. MAiTX.Ain». Major Magrath, Ikc. To this note Major Ma|rrath replied, by the communication marked No. 3, also in evidence before the Court, expressing his inability to unders::and the accounts. To remove which hinorance I sent to Major Magrath a further note expressive of my opinion that no difficul- ty exis ed, which a little patience could not overcome. Up to the 6th of IVIay, however, no acccount can have been furnished, because the fol- lowing communication from myaelf under tbtt date^ ia in evideBM before the Court :•— kve the and if Mr Di4a Sit,— Toronto, May 6tb, 1840. I herewith Miid you (enoloted) Colonel Mackeniie Fraier't cheque (elvht) tnd the >laif>maiit from tho Farmi'r'* Bank, *h« Riicefi of June, 1839, a Htntomi nt of th<> funds for tJint meeiiiip, iKithine of tin" Uiml, howcvi-r, liiis hoen fiirriishrd, even after the Inife of iwilvi' months; but us you hnvo from titno lutime during that period frequently ixaiml, on your beint; ho railed upon by me, your imving sometimes lost, Hotl iliuu fiinnd ilio Sulisciipiion Book, a RJniilar fate yru also Btnted to have III fiitlcn tlic balnnee Slieet, and Original Kntiies for the Races, and last, ihou«li not lea^t, viirinu* mjm* of money whieli have been recently received by you hail quite e:«-n|*e ject. At a meeting of the Stewards preceding these Races, Mr. Peter Buchan< nn, yourself and I, were appointed us Members of the Committee of Finance for the purpose of collecting funds to m^ei the expenditure caused on account of the I- aces. Mr. B not having time to take part, this business fell upon vou and I, and dm-ing tho time wo were so occupi*-d, and throughout the ilaces, I have no particular oliservatiuns to make. 1 paid all the subscriptions and entries received before the Races into the Farmer's Bank, in the name of Colntiid Mackenzie Fraser. the Fresidint, which amounts covered the sums required to pay tho dilfi'rent monies run for. On the Monday or Tues* day evening after the Races, 1 waited upon you at your quarters in Bay Street, by appoititment, agreeiihio to your anxious wish, and paid over to you the motiies I had ftirthcr reonived. exceeding the sum of fifty pounds, (£■50) and asKsis'ed in making at the same time a Balance Sheet from the Subscription Book, &c. &c., shewing a healthy stato of the funds, which I also I'ft with you. Many sums of money I know as a tnatter of course were afterward!* paid by you, and many more received, some of them through me, and this went on for some months, when Mr. Heath came to the Military Secretary's Office and inPirmed tno that you were (uit of funds, and request* ing that Colonel Mackenzie Frii-er be aiked to give you a cheque or order for the remaining motn-y in the Farmer's Bunk, (£38 odds) I iti-tantly wrote the Colonel a note containing the suNstance of yoiu' message, and was always given to unilerstand that you had received the amount from the Bank until the other day. All this may be verv fine sfiort to you, but to me it appears lather be* yond a joke, that I sh< uld bo caused all this trouble, and a great deal more, on account of your memo y or curelessnes"', or some other cause. However, I must now inform you, that unless \o» for/hwifh make u taiitfactory slntC' ment and sett Itmtnl oi y»\T intiomissions with the Ru>-e funds, 1 wii! consider it a duty I owe to the subscribers and to myself to call a meeting and lay the case before them. I I am, &c., th th de ha (Signed) Major Magrath, Sec. John Maitland, Secretary Toronto Raeet. This letter, Sir, having been received by the Prosecutor only on the 24th of July, the Court may not perhaps be surprised to hear, that he appeared at a meeting of the Stewards held on that day, not with a clear statement of his account and refutation of uiy charges, but with tiiis letter in one hand and a number of loose papers in the olher; and these were handed to Mr. Bouiton, the succeeding Treasurer, with a decloTdt'on, that "considering our relative silvatiun in society, and my having served as private in hi:j Iroop, he, the Frosecntor, could neither recognize, nor have any fur. her coniniunicaticn with me." I bay, Sir, that the Court may consider ihe cunJict of the Probecutor on that occasion, not unre syonable, under the circumt lanceu. But burely at the next meeting on the Ulth July, to the appoin.uient of which he was party,— at that meeting culled for the express purpose of investigating these account-1, then at leat.-t lio will have appeared with a minute detail of every fraction received, — then he will not only have shewn the whole amount received, and his vouchers for the tlisburKements, but he will have spread out upon his account i every particular of the place where, the person from whom, and the time when, he received such sum. NoW| at least his memory will have been refreshed, and we will find him with a body of evidence, calculated to convince the Stewards that I who had embezzled these funds, was basely seeking to charge them upon him,^ conduct for which I ought to be btrippel of my Commission, and brand- ed as a villian for ever! At that meeting, Sir, he appeared with this account in his hand: — RACING ACCOUNT FOR 1839. :/! Dr. The Toronto Races with MAJoa MAoaATH, for 1839. Or. 1839. To amount of sundry bill.4 pnid per vouchiTs hi^rHwiih, £108 15 9 Leii unaccounted for U 1 1 3 s. 103 4 8 £I0:{ 4 3 1839. £ s. d. By iimoiint received by Major Mauratli (or 1839, from smidiy persons, per stale- merit liiruwiih 26 10 By ummirit puid Mitjor Mu- ^ritli l)y Mr. .Miiit'lnnd... 50 2 6 By linliiricu due to Major Ma> gruth 31 12 2 £108 4 8 'Vt^t'tr^ (Signed) March 31st, 1840. Thomas W. Maorath. Which was not only perfectly silent as to the sum of £28 7s. 6d. but was accompanied by an unquuiilied, a thrice-repeated denial of its receipt. Now, Mr. Pre!;ident, had I under these circumstances, stiunped aa I had been by the Prosecutor, as a person whom he could neither re- cognise nor communicate wi.h, had I publicly accused him of that pecu- lation which he sought practically, and so unfairly to lay to my charge^ ■■ % i/ \\ ._^ ^ „..*- ^,_— . ' '• V by producing an account so general, and consequently (as h« tiiought) so incapable of refutation as this, I do fearlessly say, that however I might have infringed Military Law, humanity at least would have pro- nounced me guil.:less! How much lees then, could I have been consid- ered culpable, had I sent into the world for my own vindication, that Pamphlet, the letters composing which have been read; and the publi- cation of which the Court will bear in mind forms no part of the charges against me. But, Sir, I did neither the one nor the other; I thought that the matter was of such a nature as to warrant the General Ck>m- manding in taking cognizance of -t, and under this impression I encloaed the Correspondence contained in the Pamphlet to Colonel Ward, the Commandant of the Garrison ; and I shall take the liberty of reading to the Court the letter which I enclosed with it to that Officer, and hta answers, as well that on receipt of them, as the one which accompaiiiMl them when returned:— Copy Letter to Colonel Ward. ' ( Assistant Military Secretary's OrrtCE, '* ( Toronto, 7th AvgvitflQiO. Sir,- ^'■'■'- i:. -•— ; - ■'• I have the honor to transmit copies of correspondence, &c. &c., on the subject of certain transactions arising out of the Toronto June Race Meeting of 1839, with which several Officers at present in Garrison here are intimately connected. I consider it my duty to put you in possession as soon as possible of these circumstances, which are now matters of notoriety. I have the honor to be, &c. (Signed) The Commandant of Toronto. John Majtluxd, Lt. ith Bait. Jn. MMHa. Ov Copy Letter from Colonel Ward, Toronto, 8th August, 1840. Sib,— I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of yesterday's datti, transmittinsT copies of a Correspondence, &c., on the subject of certam trans- actions arising out of the Toronto June Uace Meeting of 1839, and having perused them,~I consider it my duty to transmit them, which I sbrU imraed^ ately do, to the A>sistant Adjutant General, to be laid before His Excellency (he Major General Connnatiding. I have the honor to be, Sir, ^ Your most obedient humble servant, (Signed) Jolin Maitkad, Esq., Toronto. W. C. Wabo» Lt. Cot. Royal Enginurt. M \ Copy Letter from Colonel Ward. Toronto, 11th August, 1840. SiH,— In returning the copies of a Correspondence, respecting certain transactions connected with the Turf Club, which you transmitted to me, and which were laid by the As->istant Adjutant General, betore His Excel- leney the Major General Commanding, 1 have tu inform you, that His Excellency has no controul over the proceedings of the Turf Club, and that be is of opinion that they must settle their own accounts and disputes amongst tbeouwlvee. I have the honor to be , Sir, i, Your most obedient humble servant, ' > , ., ,^ (^gned) W. C. Wakd, Lt. Col. R. E. Commandant, John Maitland, Esq., Toronto. Mr. President, I did on the 17th of August publish this Pamphlet. I felt that I was dhven to it under the circumstances, and I suppose I may assume, that it contains in it nothing criminal, inasmuch as the Prosecutor has not made il the subject of one of hi» charges. It contains, Sir, those letters which I fear the Court has already too often heard.— It contains the statement of a fact that I asserted that Major Magrath had received £28 Ts. 6d. from Colonel Eraser, that he denied that as- sertion, and it then states the proof of the tru;h of my assertion. And how is this Pamphlet met? Is it by a similar statement of facts rebut- ting those which I had put forward? Is il by a manly avowal that when he denied the receipt of the sum of £<28 7s. 6d., (for he admits a denial on the 27th of June) he did so under a mistake which he subsequently detected? ^ He meets it, Sir, in neither way, but he appears before the public, with a declaration, that my whole statement had been « wilfully and maliciously" concocted by me to cover my own embezzlements But, let us turn to the Pamphlet. It opens at page 1, with a repetition of the statement made before the meeting of the 24th of July, as foliowst <* I would premise, by stating the writer to have formerly served as Corporal in the Troop under my command, as a reference to the pay list now in my possession, attested by the signatures of Colonels BuU lock, Halket, and Jarvis, and his receipted account will prove; and that be is now employed as a Clerk in the Militiry Secretary's Office."— And not to speak of the general style of the Pamphlet, we tind at, page 5t the following passage:— "It is perfectly correct that I received in addition, a sum ' exceeding £50, as stated in page 5.' That the •obscriptioDS were received is true, bit that Mr. Maitland paid them to me and did not retain himself, is not only false, but it is wilfully and maliciously false." The charge of peculation mav seem black in the eyes of Officers and gentlemen, but me'^hinks it fades away, it becomes P«1b» compued with the charges of embezzlement effected by the •tttanent tf wiUtol and malicious falsehoods of another. .' f ■ ^«w^'iSlKBiaBI«*<»*>«ewi*«»'--^«j.-'^ t'y' ' I' < At page 8, we find the following paragraph:— "By Mr. Heath'i request 1 have also appended hereto, a < correopondence' which epei^ for itself, and which, if any thing can do bo, mu&t place Mr. Maitland in the unenviable po.jition in which Mr. Heath properly places him, of having 'paid an utter disregard to the truth.' " Sir, upon the appearance of thi'^, I will say, scurrilous Pamphlet) I did publiyh the letter in the Brilish Colonist, which forms the subject of the fif;;h charge against me, and I did send to the Stewards of the Races for 1839, appended to my statement of the accounts, the letter which forms the sixth charge against me, — at '.he s"me time demanding from the President a meeting, for the purpo,';e ot'investig'tion. I felt. Sir, that the facta of which I have now . f-iketched an outline, justified the conclusion which I had dnwn from them, and I felt that the circum- stances imperatively called upon me, in justice to myself, in justice to the public, in justice to the service to which I have the honor to belong, to pursue the course which I did adopt. And nov), Sir, I feel that, with these facts beneath me, I can stand erect, and get at naught, ilike the malignity and zeal, of even this public spirited prosecution. For, Sir, I am conscious, that truth, like the sea beaten rock, however it may be sometimes obscured around its ba^e by the dark and boding tempe;jt, does yet ever rear its summit in the open day, a beacon clear and eternal as. nature itself. And, Sir, when he alleges that I charged upon him the receipt of sums, which I was con- scious he had not received, I point to thof^e fact.-', and I require him to inform the Court why he did not refute the charge, — why he denied the receipt of those sums, — and why he did not explain the fallncy into which I had fallen? B it, Sir, when he claims from the Court indul- gence for his memory for having denied the receipt of ihose sums, and for not having explained the cause from which that denial sprung, I present him his own Piiamphlet, and tell him that if his memory enabled him to remember even his own case, I would call the blush of shame into his cheek. What, Sir, is the Court to be toll, that after my letter of the 6th of May: that after the angry altercation of the 27th of June; thai after the meeting of the £4th and the 27th of July,theProsecutor can claim any indulgence for his memory as to a fact, which a reference to his "own Cask Book,'' in which all his money matters were regularly entered, has it seem j set for ever at rest? And, Sir, when the Prose- cutor defines for the Court, the word peculation, and asks, even if every thing I had stated were true, how 1 could jus.ify the publication of such matter concerning " a Brother Officer," I again present to him his Pam- phlet, — I point him to his accusation of me, compared with which, all that I have charged ugainst him is innccenre itself. I remind him of his declaration of the 24th July, — I point him to the firs-.t page of his Pamphlet, and I say shame! shame! Am I to be trampled on as a "Corporal," a "Clerk," so long as ony fair purpof..e of invefctigation can be stifled; and do you now dare to demand against me the rights of a "Brother Officer?" If we turn, Mr. President, from these general obeervations, to the evidence in detail, by which the Prosecutor has attempted to sustain the fel thl 7 <■•> h /•'■,,/, v/'.^.K-,'/^ Heath'i :h speaks Maitland liim, of different allegations, we shall, I think, find at every step these general observations confirmed and elucidated. With reference to the^rst charge I shall trouble the Court but with few remarks, because I think I may safely assert, that no force of ima- gination can strain the evidence adduced into proof of that charge; for the Court will observe, in the firbt place, that that charge is confined to a statement said to have been made by me on the 27th day of June last; and secondly, that the force of the charge lies in this, that I made that statement, "knowing it to be false." Now, when we examine the evidence, it does indeed appear, that I stated on the 27th of June, that I paid a sum of £28 7s. 6d. to Major Magrath, and that on his denying the receipt of it, I said I had paid it to Mr. Heath; but. Major Magrath himself, does not in evidence here state, that I on that day charged him with the receipt of any sum of £28 7s. 6d. different from the one which he now admits that he did receive; for, at the close of his evidence in chief as to the first charge, when detailing the particulars of the rather singular directions given to Serjeant HolIand,(upon which I shall have to trouble the Court with some observations at a future jieriod,) he states to Serjeant Holland that he knew ^^from my man- ner I intended to charge him with a secottd sum of £28 7b. 6d. ; so that Major Magrath's information was not derived fiom what I stated, but was a conclusion at which he arrived from "my manner;" and yet we find by his answer to the 44th interrogatory, that he did not explain to me on that occasion, that he admitted to have received any such sum. And when Mr. Heath is asked by the second cross interrogatory, « Was the sum of £28 7s. 6d. which Mr. Maitland said he had paid to Major Magrath, and then to you, the balance which remained in the Fanner's Bank to Colonel Eraser's credit?" he answers, « 1 do not know." And when he is asked by the third cross interrogatory, < what sum of £28 7s. 6d. did you understand Mr. Maitland to speak of?" he replies, " I did not know what sum it was." Now, Sir, the fact is, that a sum of £28 7s. 6d. had been paid to Major Magrath, and unless the Court will consider his conjecture, from my manner, or Mr. Heath's utter ignorance upon the subject, as pron/that I meant a different sum, I am at a loss to conceive what evidence it is the Prosecutor relies on in sfiimort of his first charge. In truth, Sir, had I been called upon to defondmyself solely on this point, I should have troubled the Court with very little enquiry on the subject. But it will I think be plain be- foi tinned, that the said Major Magrath had not paid certain men of the said 1st Troop of Incorporated Dragoons the amount of a certain purser called the Troop Purse, run for at the «aid Race Meeting in )839^ and won by certain men of the said Dragoons, and that he the said Lieut. Maitland had been informed by two men of the said Troop, who were entitled to receive a portion thereof, that the same had not been paid to them i>y Mojor Magrath, or any one for him, and that they had not received their proportion; he the said Lieutenant Maitland well know- ing, when he made the said statement, that the said purse had been paid b ' Major Magrath, and that no man of the said Dragoons, entitled to receive any proportion thereof, had made any such declaration."-^ Now, when Holland, M'Lean, M'Donald, believed at the time men* 11 lioMed in the charge, namely, in November, that the Troop Purae had not been distributed, I want faculties to perceive what shadow of proof has been adduced to shew, that when I then etaterl that the Purse had not been distributed, ' on him? Or if he shrunk from pursuing that course, was it not incum>- bent upon bim at least to have taken every sum which had been disputed before the Court of Enquiry, and made it the subject of a distinct cbargel Then, Sir, hia failure in proving any one of such charffes would havt been the justification of my general statement as to nil conduct? But seeing that he has thought fit to adopt neither of these courses,— seeing that he has thought fit to select from the different items of that account only two auma, which he found best suited to his purpose, I put it to the Court, whether I am not entitled to assume that he admits the correctness of the residue? And if it be admitted,tbat in any one instance the Prosecutor denied the receipt of money, which had in truth been paid, then are my statements upon which the fifth and sixth charges have been founded, proved to be at least true. But» Sir, I am not driven to rely upon this conclusion, however just, for my posi- tion will I think be found proved by the testimony of Colonel Mackenzie Fraser, Captian Arthur, Mr. Atkinson,— in fact by every witness present. ui On reference to that testimony, it will be seen that I stated bef«i^ the Stewards in November, that Mr. Domvilie had subscribed £& to the Races of 1839,-- that Mr. Domvilie had paid such subscription .0 me by a cheque for £7 10s. or thereabouts, I handing back to Mr. Domvilie the balance. It will further appear that I stated the whole cheque had been paid to Major Magrath either by Mr. Domvilie or myself, and that therefore, inasmuch as Major Magrath had only creditr ed the Race funds with £5, it would be found that he was still indebted to that fund in the sum of £2 10s., the balance of the cheque. But Major Magrath met this charge by stating that he did not recollect t» have received this cheque. The previous discussion on this subjeotj and those accounts, copies of which had been sent, as he has himself proved, to all the Stewards, had not it seems afforded him sufficient opportunity to refresh hia memory. His cash book is silent, not only as to the receipt of this sum, but also as to its ^sbursement. He has himself no recollection on the subject, and Captain Magrath (asappeara by his answers to the 34th and 35th interrogatory,) is produced to dfii- pose to a conversation said to have taken place at the Military Secre- tary's Office, for the purpose of shewing that the cheque had not been received by his brother. Yet, on the next meeting the cheque is piro- duced, and it then of course became apparent that this chafge to correct. :: ..^iiiu '\ 13 A good deal of hilarity was exhibited when one of the witnesses for the defence utatod that Major M»gralh displayed eume Hurpriue and confusion when tliis ciicque was produced before the {Stewards on the the second meeting. But will the Court be pleaded to remember, that Major Magrath came to the enquiry after an interval of months allowed for recollection, and with my account in his hands, making that very charge in language not to be misunderstood. But if, notwithstanding this consideration, the Court should think it incredible that Major Ma- grath could possibly feel some little confusion when the cheque which had been denied on the first meeting was drawn from him on the second) ^f the Court will agree with the Prosecutor, in considering the state- ment, that he displayed some little degree of feeling on that occasion, as a libel on his self-possession, and in itself sufficient to discredit the testimony of a witness, I shall of course bow to their superior judg- ment. On reference, Sir, to the testimony of Colonel Eraser, and the several other witnesses examined as to the proceeding of that Court, it will further appear, that I did upon the same occasion charge Major Magrath with having received and not accounted for a sum of £l 58., being the subscription of a Mr. Murchison. 'But here we find that the memory not only of the Prosecutor, but what is somewhat more extra- ordinary, of his ca$k book, is again at fault; for the Prosecutor statesi that this sum had never been received by him ; and his cash book when produced, says, that however strange it may appear, still true it ia, that this entry certainly was not (as is usual) the notification of a visit already made to the Major, but the precursor of one intended to be inaf|<9 at some future period. I ; n Now, Sir, to make no comment upon the singular entry in a ea$h hook of <' money to be paid "■^not to dwell upon the fact which mu$t be obvious to every eye, that the words «fo be paid" are written with different ink, different pen, and were to a moral certainty, made at a time altogether different from that at which the rest of the entry wa# made. Not to detain the Court upon these points, in themselves suffi- ciently worthy of notice, it will I think be found, on reference to the evidence of Mr. Robert Maitland, that at the time this entry was inade> the sum of £l 5s. was not " to be paid" but had in the ordinary course of business been already paid. Hi ' ■■ It will be found also, that the receipt of the sum of £53 17s. 6dt was denied by Major Magrath in November, but as I shall be obliged to trouble the Court at some length on this sum, I shall at present only refer to it. It is not charged against me that I alleged that " Major Magrath had received these sums, well knowing that he had not re- ceived them," nor are these allegations of mine m any way impunged. Yet, Sir, although tliey have been studiously excluded, still if I have been enabled to shew the Court, that the receipt of these sums was denied by Major Magrath in November last, (for it is a matter of indif- ference what he now admits or denies, ) and if I have proved that siich denial was inconsistent with the truih, then I do very humbly subtiaH that I have proved enough to shew that my statements are n^t}^ "false nor maliciovs." '''"' ""^ ■ '■) ') (i / —sii^. Bir, before I enter into an investigation of the evidence as to the ■urn of £53 17s. G(]., I (.hull take the liberty of stating to the Court the facta as I ailcgo them to have happened, and as thoy are said to have taken place by Miijor Magroth; and I bhall then contrant th« evidence with each, in order that the Court may bo enabled to see with which state of fictu it iy mobt conisistent. But, Sir, I cannot help paus- ing here for a moment:, while I roHcct upon my peculiar happiness, in being able to support my case, not by direct tediimony alone, but by such a body of circum.'il,aiitiul evidence as nothing less than the hand of Providence could have oupplied. Had I been driven to reatmy defence upon aired evidence only, I should have felt much the painful position of the Court, in being obliged to decide between such conflicting testi* mony; but inasmuch as every minuto circumstance which I have been enabled to call to mind, huo when invcbtigated, brown additional light upon the subject, I do led, that these scattered ruys when collected into a focus, will prove of force uufiicicnt to dispel every shadow of doubt ftom the least reflecting mind. The Court will be pleased to bear in mind, that up to the 19th day of June, 1830, the dny on which the Races commenced, I had paid all aums received into the Farmer's Bank to the credit of Col. Mackenzie Froser. So far all ore agreed. / btate, that on that and the subequent day, I collected upon the Roce course a sum exceeding £53,— that on the third day of the Races I collected a sum of £25, and which being of inconvenient size as I was about to ride in the hurdle race, I took from my pocket and banded to Mr. Tod. I : tate further, that finding it un- raitable to pay the various small claims upon the Race funds at the Military Secre-ary's Office, Major Mugrath offered to receive the monies and make the disbursements; to which proposal I acceded. That in consequence of this arrangement, I did on the 24th June, 1839, pay to Major Magrath the sum of £53 and upwards, — that I informed various persons who had applied to me for payment, that they must moke appli- cation to Major Magrath, who wao in possession of all the funds,— -tiiat in consequence of such information several persons did apply to him, and were accordingly paid, not only debts of recent date, but some of old standing,— that I did, (probably sometime in July, 1839,) pay to Major Magruth a further sum of £16 10s., being the amount of the Inn- keepers' subscription, — that Major Magrath did through Mr. Heathy apply to me for the balance of the monies which had been deposited in the Farmer's Bank to the credit of Colonel Mackenzie Fraser, and that in consequence of such application I wrote to Colonel Fraser, who in compliance therewith sent a cheque to Major Magrath, upon which he received the balance, namely, £28 78. 6d. Such are the facts as I allege then to have taken place. , , , Major Magrath on the other hand states, at page 5 of his pamphlet, that upon the evening on which I assert that I paid him the sum of £50 odd, I did really pay him a sum of £1G 10s., and that with the exception of Mr. Cumming's and Mr. Eastwood's subscription, araount- illg to £5 5s. no other sums were paid him by me. He admits also, ^at he received a sum of £28 7g. 6d. from Colonel Mackenzie Fraser: but he states, that when he credited the Race funds with the sum of £50 that I contril Bocr^ then,! his sepa ment t ' Im '. r ' im " i ~ J' - 'r : Tr.'s:r~ -j«wj.'X i w aa to the tno Court ^« said to •ntrjiKt the fo see with "^'P paug- opineM, in .1^ but by he hand of yy defence Jf position W^g testi. jnave been ■^nai Ugi^^ Jctedinto of doubt 18th dor paid all acltenzie ibeqnent -that on being of ok from S it un. ' at the monies rhat in pay to vopioug B apph, >— that to bim, >nie of pay to elnn- feath, ed in I that ho in h he sag £50 tfl. 6d., he did not mean to charge himself with a gross sam of that amount received from mc in additiun to those three items; but on the contrary, he tjoyu they were incliulod in, nnd in tact composed the sum BO credited. That M ijur Mngrath did receive a cum of £50 Sa. Od. then, is not to be denied. lie hau hiiuucU' always credited that sum in his accounts, but whether ^yhen he did to crcrit i^, he intended it as a separate and dihitinct &uni, or meant it to comprih^c the threo items just mentioned, in the itjsuc to bo decided upon by the Court. Now, Mr. President, I do not think it unwortiiy of observation, in the first place, that the nalurul mode in which un uccount of this sort would be made out, in which the three items were received from djf- ferent pertons, on different accounts, and at periodo tvidelif different, the natural way, I buy, in which biicIi an account would be transcrib^d (and that too drawn as Ciptain Magruth has iiworn in his answer to the SOth interrogatory, frum the very cabh book produced,) is, not by giving credit for a gross sum, but by entering the afferent bums conse- cutively, as they appeared in the book. I have eaid, Sir, that a distinct entry of these three sums is what one would naturally expect; but the Court may perhaps bo of opinion that the professional habits of the Prosecutor, unused to the vulgar details of business, will have suffi- ciently accounted for this deviation, — and Buch may be the catse,— pos- sibly my mind may attach too much importance to this circumstance, yet surely I am justi6ed in expecting to find, on the £7th of June, a display of that manly, straightforward candor which has ever distin- Suished the character of a British Ofiicer. We shall not I presume nd him laying a snare to entrap a Brother Officer; or if some infirmity of nature shalThave led him into so unworthy an act, his better feeling will have loathed its baseness, — we shall not at least find a serjeant summoned to chronicle and record it. Now, Sir, may I entreat the attention of the Court to the degree of information possessed by Major Magrath on the 27th of June. Upon the 6th of May I had addressed a letter to him as follows:'— «I herewith send you (enclosed) Colonel Mackenzie Eraser's cheques (eight) and the statement from the Farmer's Bank, shewing a balance of £28 7s. 6d. currency, on the 18th of July, 1899, lying then to the credit of the Races, which sum as I mentioned Colonel Fraser gave a cheque for in your favor sometime after." ^ In this letter I enclosed a statement from the Farmer's Bank, which permit me to remark, cannot have escaped the observation of Major Magrath, or upon the alteration of that account, he subsequently founded a grave charge of forgery, and the principal entry upon which that charge of forgery was founded, is the following:— "To balance drawn out by Major Mag-rath, £28 7s. 6d."' But this is iiot all; Captain Magrath has informed the Court, in his answer to the 20th and 21st interrogatories, that he hod some days previous to the 27th of June, (at Major Magrath's du rticit/ar andfrt- quent request,) mode out the Racing Accounts, from the very book 7 16 ■poken of, and at the moment of my arrival Serjeant Holland was em- ployed in copying the account so mado out. Now, Sir, upon the !27th of Juno, on that occasion when so much tMgry discussion took placo; on that occasion when it wm thought nocesaarv to despatch a mcssonjyfor for Mr. Hnath tu contradict me; and on that occasion of which it was doomed expedient tu direct Mr. Serjeant Holland to keep a written record,— -how did the sum of £28 78. ed. come to be questioned? Lot Major Miigrath speak ; for he was asked by ihe lUth nroas interrogatory, "H>>wdid the sum of £28 7n. 6d. become a matter of question on the 27th of June?" and his reply was, « by Mr. Maitland asking me if I did not receive that ■nm from him, nnd he did not see it credited in the accountB." Is it then pons ble can any man in his senses believe, that if Major Mograth's statement be true, namely, that this sum of £50 is. 6d. was originally intended to include the^e three items, he would not have aflbrded some explanation of a dispute, originating as he has himself described this to have done? Is it possible, if such statements are true,thut with my letter ot the 6th of May in his possession,— with the ^*J'orged" Fanner's Bank account in his hand, both pointing to the receipt of the sum of £28 7b. 6d. from Col. Mackenzie Eraser, — that after making up of the account by Captain Magrath at his frequent and earnest request, and with Serjeant Holland at the moment copying such account, — is it pos- sible, I say, that if such statement were true, he would not have been frepared to state what sum he did receive from Colonel Mackenzie 'ra8er,and to inform me that such sum was included in the£50 28. 6d.? Is there any man with a mind so curiously formed, as to believe, that if the sum of £50 2s. 6d. was then intended to include the sum of £28 7b. 6d., Major Magrath would not have thought during all that lengthened discussion,— would not have thought while Mr. Heath was being sent for,— would not have thought, while the accounts were being looted over, of opening his "cash book" (which was proved to have lain constantly on his table,) in which "all his money transactions were regularly entered," for the purpose of satisfying himself on the disputed point. But hear his own statement. He is asked by the Court at the close of his examination, (I think in the record it is called the 44th cross Merrogatory,) "Did you explain to Mr. Maitland, when he was atyoiu" house, that you included £28 78. 6d. in £50 2b. 6d.<" and what is the reply? "No, I did not;" but he stops not here, he goes on to explain his reason,— "It was in consequence of a reference to my books that I ascertained positively that I had received the sum of £28 78. 6d. from Colonel Eraser, and not from Mr. Maitland, after Mr. Itwtland had left my house." And truly, I feel, that however singular itbe past history may have been,— -however unaccountable the utter ignorance of Major Maerath may seem, notwithstanding the frequent premonitions to which I nave so often alluded— Jiowever difficult of com- prehension such things may be, they are not more extraordinary than the sudden illumination which succeeded them, nor in the least degree more unacconntable than the effect produced by such illumination! Major Magrath '^as sworn at the close of his evidence in chief upon the first «lia^e "that when Mr. Maitlud left the room, he told Serjeant HoUanI reason f him (I side th{ alread3 answc grath withoc the 7tl Magral mediatl directif provesj suppoB Holland to mttke a memorandum of tho convefjation, telling him hii reaaontbr doing sowa?^ Ihstfrom Mr. Maitland'o manner ho wanted him (Major Magrrath) to aciincm ledge nfi'thir sum of £28 7b. 6d. be- ilde that whichlie had received from Coiont i Franer, which ho had already credited to tho R»<'o fundi*." >">erjcant llulland uwcara. in answer to the Id, drl, and 4t^ cross mtorfogatories, that Major Ma- grath gave him this direction irninediatcly after Mr. Maitland leftf without conaulting any boo]{ or paf/< r. And Mr. Heath is asked, in the 7th interrogatory, by the Prosecutor, "Did you iieaf Major Magrath mako any remark as Mr. Maitland left the ruom, or im« mediately after;" to which ho answers "Yes," and then states th« direction to Serjeant Holland. Tho rapidity of this rtference clearly proves Major Magrath's familiarity with the item of £28 7b. 6d. I Boppose!! and its exact position in his books. But, Sir, singular as this sudden illumination may seem, so sud- den that no persion was ablo to trace its progress, so great that it at once dispelled a darkness which had prevailed for months,— sin- galor as all this may appear, it is not in tho least more singular than the remarkable effects which it produced. For what use is it natural to expect Major Magrath would have made of this newly acquired knowledge? Is it, or is it not natural to expect, that h6 Would have taken the book, and pointed out to Mr. Heath the entries which had thrown so much light upon the dispute? Yet Mr. Heath says, in his answer to the 44th cross interrogatory, that he was ignorant of the fact that Major Magrath had received the sum of £S8 7s. 6d. from Colonel Eraser on the 27th of June. Is it not natural to suppose, that he would have taken the book and pointed Out to Holland, thoso entries which justified him (Major Magrath) in the dispute with me, and warranted the memorandum he had ordered to be made? But Serjeant Holland has sworn, in his answer to the 6th interrogatory, that no entry was pointed out to him. Was it too much to expect from a "Brother Officer," that he should have taken his pen and apprized me of the mistake into which I had fallen, **ftom not seeing the £S8 7s. 6d. credited on his account?" ri And now. Sir, I earnestly a» ^^'Btamoheh entered to the credit of the Race fundt, intended to eMi- priiietlwffwee itemt gpc^en of; or wua it separate from thefnf remaiiw C \ IS to be decided by the Court. Before entering upon the evidence, hoW' ever, which brings us down to tho meetings in July, I must beg the attention of the Court to the fuct, that this case has at no pcrira as- sumed any vory definite shape in the mind of iho Prosecutor himself.— Had I no evidence but that which has been delivered by the witnesses before the Court, it might perhaps be postdlile for the ingenuity of man to cast a shadow of doubt upon the truth. Though 1 cnn hardly conceive this posnible. But, Sir, I have happily lived to verify the wise as- Eiration of the man of sorrows, when in the bitterness of his soul e exclaimed, "Oh! that mine adversary had written a book!" Mine adversary, Sir, " has urittcn a book," and from it I shall shew the Court, that tho memory of the Prosecutor, (especially as to the sum of £28 7s. 6d.) has constantly varied with every varia- tion of circumstances, and that his case has been again ana again patched and mended, to suit these varying circumstances. Let us then consider the view which the Prosecutor took of my charge against him as to the sum of ££8 7s. 6d., when he published that Pamphlet on the 20th of August, 1840. At page 4, he states, < /.■ :( nCJ NoWf Sir, I should say, that it is tolerably clear from the word- ing of this whole passage, that Mojor Mograth knew perfectly well that only one sum was intended, because. Sir, he says, "in the pam- Shlet he avers that it was paid me by Colonel Fraser." Now, if Major f ttgrath was under an impression that two or more sums were charged against him, the expression "rt" would never have found place in that paragraph. But it cannot at all events be denied, that he then professes that his mind is undecided upon this point. On reflection, however, Major Magrath finds that he has denied the receipt of 9, sum of £28 7s. 6d., and therefore, unless it was asserted that he had received /wo sums of that amount, his denial must prove untrue; and consequently we find him at page 6, stating: — " Soon after Colonel Fraser's return I waited on him, and for the first time found that the £28 7s. 6d., as stated by Mr. Maitland, as having been paid by him, Mr. Maitland, first to Mr. Heath, and then to me, to be one and the same sum that I had received from Col. Fraser, for J. Maitland and P. Buchanan, which was at the time Mr. periu had i\ Idence, hofi^ lust beg the \o period as- pr himself. — k witnesses J"ity ofman Idly conceive Ihc wise as- lof his Boul ok!" it I shall ipeciaily as very varia- ana again Let us my charge >lished that tates, "So have I em- ely accused nd has re- ^28 7s. 6d. It Holland, unphlet he ue on the ibstantially or whether statement »' proving !t It in its the word- Bctly well the pam- V, if Major e charged I pltice in he then eflection, eipt of ^ »t he had rue; and Maitland brings the charge against me credited to the Races, and in eluded in the sum of £50 2s. 6d." ! for the land, as Lth, and >m CpJ. me Afr. We find here several propoeitions worthy of notice, some express- ed directly, and others by impHcation. It is stated, that up to the period of Colonel Fraser's return, Major Magrath hud believed that I hod charged two sums of £!i!8 7s. Ud. against him. That upon the occasion of his interview with Colonel Frasor, his mind was disabused of that idea; for he then found that only one sum wus intended. And lastly, it id implied that Major Magrath had always admitted the receipt of £28 7s. 6d. from Colonel Fraser. But replete as this paragraph is with matter, I cannot help feeling surprised, that inasmuch as the Pro- secutor found it expedient to point out the time when his mind was dis- abused as to the erroneous notion of two sums being charged upon him, he did not also hint at the manner in which that change was brought about. I cannot help feeling surprise, that while he fixed accurately the moment when his mind was at lengh opened to a perception of the fact (iVhich no person but himself ever doubted) namely, that the only sum I ever charged upon him was the balance which hod lain at the Farmer's Bank to Colonel Fraaer's credit, — I feel surprise, I say, that he did not also explain the means by which his sudden, though very late conversion, was eifscted, For when we turn to the particulars of that interview with Colonel Fraser, we do not find him explaining to Major Magrath any of my views on this mutter. Indeed it docs not appear to the Court that Col Fraser bad been apprized of these views, as he had just returned after a lengthened absence. Major Magrath has himself informed the Court, that his receipt was not shewn to him; so that all that passed during this interview, (so far as we are informed^ may be stated shortly thus. . Major Magrath made some en- quiries of Colonel Frasor as to the sum of money which had been in the Farmer's Bank. Colonel Fraser said it had been paid to Major Ma- grath. The Major declared he did not recollect it. To which Col.Fraser replied, that he must be under a mistake, as he held hia receipt. What it was in this conversation which so suddenly disabused Major Mograth's mind of his former erroneous idea, and convinced him that I only in- tended to charge him with the receipt of one sum of £28 7s. 6d. remains for his ingenuity to explain. But, Sir, wo must not stop here, for singular as it may appear, yet true it is, that we have within the short compass of nine pages, a third view of the case, essentially different from either of those befoie 0tated. The arbitrators, (as Major Magrath pleases to call them) though I beg otice for all to refer the Court to the 8th page of his own pamph-r let, to shew that they arc in reality no arbitrators, but merely volun- teers, / having no concern in their appointment. These gentlemen, however, had found that MajorMugratli Imd received a su'u of £!i28 7s. Gd. and that that sum wai< included in the sum of £50 2s. 6d. Thg Prosecutor of course, with characterit.tic sagacity, must make the most of thb verdict in his favor, consequently we find him at page 9 stating; "This extraordinary charge may be thus summed up; I am accused of 20 receiving £38 Ts. 6d. from Colonel Fraser, and of subsequently 4f4' n3ring its receipt. I have proved to the satisfaction of the araitra* tors, that the balance with which I credited Mr. Maitland £50 Ss. 6d. was corre>:t, and was made up of three sums, one of which was ^e very sum of £28 7s. 6d. received from Colonel FraseJ*. i "Now, unless another sum of precisely the same amount can be shewn to have been received by me, and this has not ever been a$- tfrted, my refutation of the slander is complete." We find then, that he sets out professing his inability to decide whether I meant to charge him with the receipt of two sumsof £28 7s. 6d* or of only one. He would next explain away his denial, by declaring, that up to the period of Col. Eraser's return, he conceived himself to be charged with two sums, and he then for the first time, was made aware of the fact, that the balance in the Farmer's Bank aione was said to have been received by him. And lastly, in order to make the finding of the ^^arbitrators" namely, "that the sum of £28 7s. 64« received from Colonel Fraser, was included in the sum of £50 2s. 6d.*' conclusive, he stoutly avers that it had ^^ never been even asserted," that he had received a sum of exactly similar amount to the £28 7e. 6d. admitted to have been received from Colonel Fraser, and already ere? dited to the Race funds. Amidst these ever varying statements, which have not at any two periods remained the same, it becomes a matter of some im-. portance, that we should establish upon what footing it is that the. Prosecutor has launched his case in this Court, in order that we majl* see how that case is substantiated by the evidence; and I may safely say, that every member of this Court must have seen, (independ- ently of any reasoning of mine,) that the case with which the Prq4 secutor has come into the Court is, that I did charge upon him the receipt of two sums of £28 7s. 6d. ; because the Prosecutor having denied the receipt of one sum of £28 7s. 6d. must, (unless he com- promise his truth) shew that there was another sum of £28 7b. 6d. in question, beside the one which has been proved to have been re- ceived. But although I may be wrong in arguing from these premises, to the conclusion that the case is launched on the ground that I had charged two sums of £28 7s. 6d. upon Major Magrath, yet I can- not at least be mistaken in the conclusion itself. Because, unleai it is launched on that ground, the first charge is perfectly futile; nay, it is more, it is a prostitution of the power of this Court for the purposes of private malice^ without even a shadow of reason. Fov Major Magrath cannot be ignorant that the criminality of aa act conn sists wholly in the intention. » Now, Sir, when I charged Major Magrath on the 27th of JoJ^e with the receipt, of £28 7s. 6d., if 1 intended to charge him only with the receipt of a specific sum, (namely, the balance in the Farmer'g Bank, a sum which he admits to have received,) I am at i^ lopi ta we toryJ Jqueatlv 4^ the (utitra. £50 is. 6d. which was aej-. ountcan be ver been a$- ty to decide ■£28 7s.6d, '^iog, that mseif to be was made filone wa^ ,.to make t28 7s. 64. 50 2s. 6d,'' uaterted,** e«8 7s. 6d. ready ere- ct at any some im~ ' that the t we may nay safely indepeni theprp^ him the "■ having he com- '«. 6d. in heen re- useci, to t Iha4 • I can- unleas futile; for the . Fob ctconn Ipiow how any awkwardness in my mode of expressing such intention could constitute a crime. It is then plain, that it' the Prosecutor's case be not this, that I charged him with the receipt of two sums of £<28 7B.6d. then has he come into Court, stating in hit) first ciiarge, what he luiew t o be false, a case which I will not presume. When we look at the evidence too on the part of the Prosecution, we shall find Mr. Heath stating, in answer to the 57th cross interroga- tory, that I did charge Major Magrath "with the receipt of two apec\fic nMn# 0/£.2,& 7s. 6d." And we find the Prosecutor in the 6th interro- Ktory in chief asking Colonel Airey the following question: <'Oid lin Maitland on that occasion insist that there was another sum of £$8 7s. 6d. beside that credited in the £50 2s. 6d.?" A question which from its peculiar and artful frame would in all probability have drawn from any witness less clear-sighted than the one then under examination an answer prejudicial to my case. But as I shall be obliged to enter minutely into Colonel Airey's testimony by and bye, I merely state the question now for the purpose of drawing attention to the case which the Prosecutor meant to have established. With reference to Mr. Heath's evidence as to my charging two aoms, inasmuch as I find it opposed by all the other testimony m the case, I shall not trouble the Court with any minute investigation into it. I shall, however, with permission of the Court, state it to be my firm persuasion, that Mr. Heath did not mean in any one particular to pervert what he thought to be the truth. But while I most gladly make this declaration, I must also in justice to myself state my further, persuasion, that the frequent conversations, which from his habits of intimacy he must have held with Major Magrath on this subject, have in his mind assumed so much of the appearance of the recollection of past transactions, that he is unable to draw the line of distinction, and that consequently his evidence will not be entitled to that weight which: under other circumstances it would undoubtedly carry. ui I think I shall be able to shew the Court, that this observation ox^, Mr. Heath's testimony is just, by referring to one or ttoo instances of his utter ignorance upon points which had not probably been the sub- ject of conversation, but which could not potaibly he unknoion to any person having such a knowledge of those transactions, as to render his testimony of any value. I asked Mr. Heath, in the 47th cross interro- gaioiy, " Are you aware that it was a matter of question on the 27th of ^uLy, 1840, that Major Magrath had received £28 7s. 6d. from Col. Jfraser?** His answer is, <nd I ahail N 7s. 6d. It account stake WHa 'Count bad the S7th 's must be as sworn, » »nd find »nd tbem h the re- ^ in addi> jnt to be e27th of ^eiy ac- 6 produ. ^0 oat in ore than 1 shouid '^ith an luivocai, >W of a sequent ^e war- ting-,-, fbein^ hadow io dis- Bcided lirey, fsay) [».'.' 'iiif> or up e of you that Jou had admitted to have received the sum of £28 7b. 6d. from Colonel ^ 'r^r?" To which he answers: bliK « I did explain to the Stewards, that the £28 7s. 6d. that I got fWm Colonel Fraser, together with all the money I received on account of the Raceifi, was included in the sum of £50 2s. 6d. then before Col. Airey in the account." an, He subsequently corrects this by confining his explanation to CoL Airey, as Captains Arthur and Markham were ^^not atlending." Again, at the 42d cross interrogatory, "Did you declare that the 0um of £28 7e. 6d. had been receivefl by you from Colonel Fraser, and that that sum was included in the gross sum of £50 2s. 6d., at the meeting of the 27th July, 1840?" To which he replies: utixm "I did. When asked by Colonel Airey if I had received the sum pf £28 7s. 6d., I said / had, and that I included it in the sum of £50 2s. 6d." Now, Sir, let us turn to Colonel Airey's answer to the 5th cross interrogatory. The question runs thus: « Did I understand you to mean in your answer to the 5th interro- gatory in chief, that Mr. Maitland charged Major Magrath with £28 7fl. 6d. in addition to the sum of. £50 2s. 6d. included in his account!" And this is the answer: " Major Magrath implied, that all the monies he had received were included in his account, while Mr. Maitland insisted that the £28 7s. 6d. received of Colonel Fraser, was separate, and in addition to the amount so credited. At one of the meetings of the Stewards, Mr. Maitland said, that he paid Major Magrath £28 7s. Bd., or thereabouts, which Major Magrath denied having received from Mr. Maitland. As Presi- dent, I observed, that it was a matter of little moment whether be had received it actually from Mr. Maitland in person, — upon Which great stress appeared to be laid, — or whether he had received it through Mr. Mr.,|4aitland's intervention. To this Major Magrath stated, that all this sums that he had received, formed part of an amount of which the sum' total was £50 2s. 6d., or thereabouts. To which Mr. Maitldnd replied, that the £28 7s. 6d. to which he alluded, was either dfiereiit tioro; 6r in addition to the component parts of that amount, in which Major Magrath said that £28 7s. 6d. was included." '- 4^''** ^-* Hear him again, at the 6th cross interrogatory: *< I wish to direct your attention to your answer to the 7th inter- rog[&tory, and to ask you whether Major Msgrath ever gave the Stewards a positive answer, that he had admitted to have received the sum of £28 7s. 6d. from Colonel Fraser?" " He positively said, that he had not received it from Col. Fraser's hands." Again, he is asked in the 7th cross interrogatory, " Did he posi- tively state, that Colonel Fraser had paid him the sum of £28 78. 6d. in any wayl" 24 n i( .1 " No, he did not. He denied positively that he had received it from Colonel Fraser; bu'. in his answer he implied that he hiA received 8o much from Colonel Fraser, because he insisted that that sam would be found a component part of the Bum credited in the accoaDt)-»the sum of £50 Ss. 6d." I have been fearful, Sir, of trespassing too long on the attention of the Court, and have therefore taken the evidence by sample, rather than enter into that general and minute investigation which I could have wished; and I trust the Court will indulge me while I refer to one or two answers of the other witnesses on the point. Major Magrath'a receipt to Colonel Frasjr is produced to Mr. Boulton, and he is asked when he first saw it? and that question is followed at the 16th interro- gatory by the following question: « Was the existence of that receipt consistent with Major Ma- grath's statement, at the meeting in July?" Which wad answered thus: " Decidedly not. The impression on my mind, when the receipt was produced, tor the £28 7s. 6d. was, that it was at direct variance with what Major Magratb said, with respect to that sum, at the July meeting of the Stewards. Mr. Maitland charged him with hanrinff received £28 7s. 6d. in addition to the £50 2s. 6d. and Major Magrra denied it." He is then asked, << When he first knew that the sum of £50 2s. 6d. was- composed of the items into which it is now divided?" And he answers: « At the meeting held in August." He is next asked, « Whether he knew it at the meeting in Julyf ' To which he answers : «No.'' ■.tlA V If we now turn to the evidence of Captain Arthur, we shall I think ^ndi tlxe same facts more clearly, because more succinctly expressed*-— H(3 is asked at the 7th interrogatory, " How many sums of £38 7s. 6«(* did '^. Maitland charge Major Magrath with having reqeived at tii«i meeting in Julyr ^,,,^,. /! lotoM « One sum." At the dth interrogatory, "What snm of £28 7si 8d. did you nndeiBtand that to be? I mean was the source from which it vrai'dflp riV6dl OMntioned?" wyi-aiury aw, .,a4rtuAiirfi "I understood it to be a check from CoJonel Fraser for that amtfuntl"- At the 9th interrogatory, « Did Major Magrath ndmit tha^ ofi had received that sumr '.^» «] « He denied having received that sum." m 95 t^ I. At tOa lOth interrogatory, «Did Major Magrath inform the Stew- itdi that he admitted to havo received the sum of £,28 7s. 6d. from Colonel Fraserl" ir:M«H6didnot." ^-bdio -fi i' ,; At; the Uth interrogatory, " When did you first seethe receipt fron^ $ajor Magrath to Colonel Fraserl" '" «Ori Colonel Praser's return from Lower Canada." V •■'r. ■ ' At'the Iflth interrogatory, "Did you consider the existence of that zWMHpt consistent with what Major Magrath stated in July]" , ^''Dlreeily at variance." ti 'Captain Morkham is asked by the 6th interrogatory, «Was the som of £ft8 78. 6d. spoken of by Mr. Maitland on that occasion, as hnviiig' been paid to Major Magrath, and not accounted for by him?"— To which Caotain Markham replies, not directly, but by giving an ex- planation of the whole matter as he remembered it to have occurred. '«n .**Mt, Afojtland said, that Major Magrath had received a sum of £28 oddf or thereabouts, which he did not account for in his accounts. l^uor Jf agrath prodaced his account in which he credited the Club with & f^ss sum of £50. Mr. Maitland then said, llaoatjoii of "the part of Ition is his jitiinpoiti^ i to the Arthur, proved it hhooe out bich for a ' " J »e part of fa sum of then this a^imon uponthia to prove jrath did |m in dis- p sum said Ihewn the 3 that that >sed, then no power plication; inost tri- secution, Bdonthe i ' '' fprolix- 'a fitate- sayiuff hur and Dd Mr. it, ad- though or Mr. lid not » upon 'asim- ist the J who guard 27 hia evidence so cautionslv, I must confess, that my astonishment was at its height when Ifound the anxious pertinacity with which he sought to prove what it was that he had stated at that meeting, out of the mouth of whom? — of Captain Markham, who had (according to the Prosecutoi'g own evidence) paid no attention to what passed on the occasion mentioned. But, Sir, 1 will not refute that fallacy by appeal- ing to the evidence either of Captain Arthur or Captain Markham, be- cause they possibly found nothing in the scenes then pre.->ented to attract attention, or distract the even tenor of that conversation in which the Prosecutor has described them to have been absorbed!! But, Sir, I will appeal to Colonel Airey, — I will appeal to the man to whoso peculiar attention all the Prosecutor's statements (as well direct as implied) were addressed; and when Major Magrath's pamphlet is placed in his hand, and he is directed to read the paragraph which says, " In presence of Colonel Airey and all the Stewards, on the 24th of July, I did ttate, and do still, that I never did receive the sum in question from Colonel Fraser, in addition to the sum at that moment credited to the Races; and it must appear to every one, that Mr. Maitland wanted me to ac- knowledge the same sum twice." And when Colonel Airey is asked at the 9th interrogatory, whether any such statement as that was made, what is his replyl '' I have no recollection of Major Magrath's denying having received the sum of £28 7s. 6d. tu additiooj because I do not remember the conversation's taking that turn." I have now, Sir, concluded my observations upon the testimony of these gentlemen; but I cannot pass on to the consideration of the evi- dence adduced on the defence, without expressing to the Court the very keen sense which I feel of the injustice done me by the Prosecutor, in not having called these witnesses on opening his case. They, Sir, were not the aep^;;idants, the friends, the relations of the accused. These gentlemen occupy the most exalted station in this country. Their testimony was above imputation. They were not the mere casual ob- seryers, the uninterested spectators of the facts which they have related and the scenes which they have described. They were the very best witnesses. The persons whose business and duty it was to know and decide upon the very point at issue. And I assert, without fear of con- tradiction, that the conduct of the Prosecutor, in declining to call such witnesses, was what would have imperatively commemded any Judge, sitting in a court of criminal justice, had I been arraigned before him as n felon, to have ordered my acquittal. And am I to be told, that this is the Court, this the sort of proceeding in which the Prosecutor is to be allowed to bring forward half a. case? Does the Constitution extend its protecting shield over us, when our lives, our liberty, our property is at stake? and does it leave us altogether defenceless when those interests are attacked which are dearer than life itself? Is the Prose- cutor to pursue towards me with impunity in this Court, a line of con- duct which would have insured the acquittal of a common felon? Mr. President, had that evidence been adduced by the Prosecutor, I should not have troubled the Court by calling a sing-Ze witness, because the only testimony upon which my condemnation could proceed, upon which it could be grounded, would have been shewn to be unworthy of 38> r belief ; but inasmuch as I have been obliged to call thoBe witnesMS my- self, I have felt it to bo my duty to brin(T forward such further evidence as I (loemcd conducive to my defence. And truly when I reflect upon the clear and convincing evidence of the dental of the receipt of theMim of £28 7b. 6d. proved by those who ought to have been the witnesaeg of the Prosecutor; and when I add to that testimony the denial of it at the Farmer's Bank, before two of the officerH of that institution; (and then at least the denial was simple,— -then at least the Prosecutor ceased to work by rules of ^'addition;") and when I look to the denial of the receipt of the sum before Mr. Robert Maitiand; when I consider that such denial was continued up to the time of Colonel Frasei's return, aa is palpable from Colonel Frasci^s evidence; when I consideT these things, I cannot help admiring the hardihood of the conduct of the Pro- secutor, who has dared to come into this Court to seek my condefnna- tion, on a case necessarily based on his uniform admission of the ileceipt of that money. Sir, had my defence rested on my brother's testimony solely^ t should perhaps be induced (however reluctantly) to trouble the Cdurt with some observations; but happily his evidence (as in «jvei7 other particular, so especially in this,) will be found so^m/yboFod 'in tmtb, and so strongly supported by circumstantial evidence, tnat I Ao liotfeel it necessary here to make a single remark. I must, however, before passing on to the next branch of the case, say a word or two on th^ subject of these cash-books, which some gentlemen have thought enti- tled to so much weight. I shall not trouble the Court with the enquijry whether these books are or are not legal evidence, in support of tl^M prosecution, though I apprehend that it could be shewn upon very plain principles that they could not be used as evidence against me; but I shall without any investigation upon that point, proceed to eni]^ttire, to fphat weight they are entitled, considering ti.L'^.inifKieivabtS 09 eyidt^nce. .Now, Sir, if these books are of any force against me, that ^irce inu9t 'bq derived from an argument somewhat of this sort. There is found in these books no entry of a sum of £50 2s. 6d;, but thethr(ie,'|iein£[ ,Bpoken of do together equal £50 28. 6d., therefore the credit, of £5Q 2s. 6d. in Major Magratb's Racing accounts must be i^tendd^ ip ^pave been composed of these three items; and I am prepared to admits 'that under certain circumstances, this argument would be one of the most conclusive nature. But in this case, as it is detailed in the eyi- ;dence f9r the prosecution, the argument is not only utterly powerless, ,^qt see^is to me to be an insult to common sense. Had these books contained, as Major Magrath declared they did, "a. regular entry of all his money matters for the last two years,'* one might indeed conjecture from the absence of an entry of the sum of £50 2s. 6d., that no such sum had been received. But when ^ asked Captain Magrath to point .to the entry of Mr. Domville's cheque, of Mr. Dunn's subscription, Mr. Cayley's, Mr. Hewson's, Mr. Dixon's, Mr. ^trachan'e, &ic. £».»— and when I was informed that no such entries were to be found in these ' books, — ^when in short we learn that the onrfmon to enter sdins-relative to the Races seems to have been thei general nUe, and the entry of such sums the earcejjft'oTi,— however fairly we might atgue from the (mission that the sum had been received, — ^I must confess that t feel at a lose to i -3 M" evidence eflect upon of the Mjin witnesse* , >ial of it at ition; (and itorceaoad 'nialofthe eider that return, aa 'der these tfaoPro- 'ondeftina- 'teileceipt soTeljry I the Cdurt ^ery other in troth, ?o riot feel CT, before yo on the ught enti- ce enquiry rt of t^i; very plain fne; bat I sn^uire, to evidence. •rce mngt I fpiud in redit Jqf ^dedtp ioadmif e of fte the e,\ri- werless, B books ly of all ijecture no such point >n, Mr. t— and 1 these elative )f»uch t«MIOft lose to coiuectaTe how mu^.tfiiiMion affords any pound to conclado that it haanot been received. Bat then it is said Captain Magrath caiiffbt very early glimpses of the conspiracy which 1 had formed against his brother; and he has informed the Court that my straitened circumstances, and other matters which he more darkly hinted, had induced him to disap- prove of such entries being made in these books, and to advise Major Maprratb to discontinue them ; find the Prosecutor informed the Court, when he stopped my examination of Captain Magratb, as to the entry of these sums, and admitted that the^ were not to be found in his cash book, that it was in consequence ot such hints from the witness that these entries were omitted; and in meeting thiij argument, I do not mean to consume the time of the Court, by dwelling upon the difficulty which I felt, while this witness was being examined, (and which diffi- ealty reflection has not diminished) in accounting for the mdde inteUA the regular entry of monies received by Major Magrath, amid forward that conspiracy which I had formed against him; nor shall I nialce way comment upon the ipirit in which that witness made his relation. The Court will no doubt remember those remarks, although some of them were not entered upon its proceedings, and will judge mote impartially than I ca% whether they fell from the lips of one constrained by a io" kunn sense of that oath which ho had token, or whethoc they prooeedai from thi^ Unrestrained passion of a malignant heart, -.it wlmadJ hi il -'■• . ■ • ' ■• ,' But, laying aside these difficulties, it will I apprehend tax the in- genuity of' the ProseCntor in some small degrOe, to ezphiin holtr the priident forethought of Captain Magrath, which had been excited by the discovery of certain Race entries in this general cash book, can ac- count for the omission of Mr, Domville's cheque. That, Sir, was the first sum received by Major Mbgrath on account of the Races,— yet there is no entry either of its receipt or payment ; and in truth, tho totod cUiviCn into Which the matter of this cheque had sunk, on the oecOf flion of the me^ng of the Stewards in November, suggests the passing thought, that however these omissions might enable the ProAoeutor te carry into «ifect a eonsptrcu;^ agaiW me, (if I am not guilty of (oe grata & brbach of courtesy in jUst supposing such a thing possible for argumeni's sake^ it is not very conceivable liow my sChemQs eouldibo farther^ by such m^ns. But how can this acqutescence on the part Major Magrath, in the prudent caution of his brother, be made to, ac* eount>fotr Uie^miission ofthe very first sum which ought to haire been enteiledl Can theCbptain have foreseen that thetfumsof £lfi 10s. and £28 7s. 6d. would be entered; and further, that such entries would materuUy assist a certain conspiracy about to be formed against tbe Majorl (For the payment of Mr. Domville^ money preceded the Major's appointment as Treasurer;) and foreseeing these things, can he have instructed the Prosecutor to omit the first sum recdved, and then to make the siAaeqitent entries to vimrrant the omission - pUoatiop of the Prosecutor can have no tendency to secure the ocquii^ tal of the prisoner. I am not indulging in r«ertminat awaken 'in the Court (under any cireumstamies) aJively niipieiont biit inbst especially, when the pei^on producing the book so taitttilated. Is desirous of provmg, that all the entries in tmt book added together, amount to a oertain sum, and no moret Will the Court be leased to examine thai book, and say Whether the fVefplent i blaiAe ttf be found in ahnost every page of it, is hot a circumstance ito «Vmken in tiie' mind of the Court a most lively suspicionl Liook at fh^ entijiatf thetnselvee. Contrast it with its predecessor, though erven thiit IS' far fVom iinmaiculate. But if the Court should not deem tliese c^nridMations deserving of that weight to which I hwe been always tiught to connder them entitled^ I call on tbei^rosecutor at least to ehew,' how all that prndient caution which caused the ' ontisaioh of JSlt. Demvillei's oheqne^ lettmv eoMpireuyy tkould sitMead^-^whicli ioaiisei th«^ oiftiihision of Mr. Dunnes of Mr. Cayley's, of Mr. Hewsen's of Mi^ i^twehaii'tJr'k added ourt b« once io ^U fn«»en fife ed'to Dent mbj- to tile 1st'- lid 31 have been withheld for two yearg, and then come to light exactly when required, to cutnploto the uuin of £50 Sa. 6d. For Mr. Eaatwood when Eroduccd, Hwoars, that he novor attended the Racea but oncet and that e did on that occasion, and on that occaaion only, (which waa in the year 1897,) Hubsoribo Do. to tho Races. So that having kept the aum from the^ear I«i37 to lUBi) in mv pocket, at length (moved, lauppoie, by the atmgs ' 'conscience,) I dropped it from my avaricioua graap!— The conclusic i, J!^ir, is worthy of the premiMs, therefore the aum of £30 2s. Od. must have boon intended to have been oriffinallr compoaed of these items. But I have said so much in disproof of thia poaition before, that I daro now only mention it to the Court. Mr. President and Gentlemen, I shall introduce the few remarka which I mean to oiTer upon tho evidence for the defence} by directing the attention of the Court to the brief hiatoriea of thia caae, aa related by the Prosecutor, and by myself. These histories are expreaaed in figures, (if I may so speak). I have had the honor of layins eeveral copies upon the table, for your information, Sir, and that of the other members. The factshave been in each case in part derived from the same source, — namely, from Major Magrath's admissions of the paymenta made by him, and the dutes of such payments in evidence before the Court. But in other parts,— namely, as to the receipts by Major Ma- grath, those facts have been derived in his history from his own evidence and admissions; in mine from the evidence of the defence. i\ 1 F * n I- n u n uI'A' hco , .>fla .tM To' : .'flfft I^fui ,;iv>iii> !•. : :■ '• . !iii$ fii ^nv (1.1(11 vv ! . ii ' — !')-i«!i'"iii'oni"!7ii yiu ' /it ti . It. UIL'-.-. :jii r (VUi'tol'jrii tf*''"»i> ■ -.'^ ')iij M'.a.'finlf:.; ii^ii j}tfU;>'ritIi ■.•(! ,ooc/tKi orit -.'oi : ai ly'Sii'jiqy.o run y.ohijJairl otio-s •uulio of^i 'lo ffliU bnn .v.'m ?Ji«i3^*^ 0) to ^ e eo CO «^ «rt ^ jOOOOOOOO w) r- O C4 O CO o ,mu)tnooio>no o-HoirtOicio "5_ V.J h « I" S; a ^ P3' -^^S- &"° »» o> S P <« •a bo oH-« g.S '1 bo I'wg s§i go 2 g "s -a -XJ £ g m 1 nj «j li-ti -° J= >- •■» S b J3 s ;: § bo J be bo JiK " * S en B 1-4 (N CO 00 o> CI C4 Ct CO • • PI ^ 0(0 CO v (0 oeo o 0> »-< 1-^ 1-1 go «^ ^OOOOOOOO O^OC'IOWO .mmooou^mo o>^o>nomm ^0*Heoco&i^O(N CJO^WCJOO 18 CO ^ (O o o o r« o o o ^ to >o V . . IB ••• . CO !^ s ^ ^ » ^ 8 o e -WES ; o j!j g »o -a ho « 2 § »..S « - s»^ a " " "• R bo c •E 3 T3 >« s 3 s°ss ** — ^ N ■" r- .9 a> S^J S m (m (M ^ O O . b » .. w, a> = 2 a ■*- S 5> u IS p 3 5 c ^ « ^ QUO ^232 C "TV, •> o a $P d d CO *5 ^ . S J'c So •2 to u ^ S ^ ^ c • . • C4 S^-S =* C C ^ ^ o a ■a 'a o o o T3 -fl "TS CO CO oo s i -a •a B CO •a . ^ '? 3 O u at a 9 s J n 03 >Aioooujmi "' 1-1 r-i 1— I 1 {jOi-ICOCOCI^O( •■a J I - » a„ > w o-a 3 a =« n 3 S >: o> o^ S-fl-S^ O C w (A o§ ?i o- CO s ^ o s-a 11 1"-?! J g -a o » < 'S ** 2 I Si - ^ <• u B S E peig>PH&H o OS rH CO 03 03 F-i a 5 ■; 3 3 ; 3 •-S ^ «^ lO «t<' 't i. ■ . i. - 'f - 'f' i i . I .1 .*.. .( .. I J ^J \ I have before touched upon the inconsistency of the Prosecutor, in pursutDfi; the course which he has adopted instead of first calling for a Conrt-Martial upon himself, in consequence of which we are now witnesses of rather an anomalous proceeding; for while the party ac- cused is permitted to screen himself by his own evidence, I (who am in fhct the accuser) cannot be heard to support my charge. But not to dwell longer on this point, let us see which of the statements is most consistent with the nature of the thing itself, and with that part of the eviiience which is undoubted. If Major Magrath's statement be true, he wilt at the thne he paid Mr. Scarlett, have received but £21 10s. while he will have paid £41 Is. 9d.; that is, he will have been at the date of that payment, £23 lis. 9d. out of pocket He will, when he paid Mr. Atkinson, (who has been examined )efore you) have been £31 Ir. 9d. out of pocket. And at the date of his payment to Mr. Duggar, he will have expended £100 9s. dd. having then only received £24; that is, he will have paid from his own funds £76 9s. 3d. Sir, it is not my purpose to argue, that the payment of this sum by the Prosecutor out of his own pocket was impossible; nay, I shall not press the Court with any argument founded on the improbability of such a proceeding; nor shall I urge upon your consideration Major Magrath's well-earned character for prudence, as increasing that proba- bility in a tenfold degree. But what I do say is, that such a supposi- tion is at perfect variance with all the evidence in the case. Can any man believe, that when Mr. Scarlett called upon Major Magrath, on the S9th of June, and received his demand, such payment was made not from Race funds, but from the Prosecutor's private purse ? Who that heard Mr. Atkinson's clear and explicit statement, will so outrage his own common sense, as to allow any amount of direct testimony to per- suade him, that at the time of that payment, the Race fund was indebted to Major Magrath £30 and upwards? How is it possible to make such a state of things consistent with the payments of that stale debt to Mr. Willard, in the manner he has detailed in evidence, — a debt due for 11 months upon my note of hand. But when Mr. Duggan asks Major Magrath for the £35 due to him, and that too an old debt, (of the pro- priety of paj^ng which, at all, out of the funds of that year, the Prose- cutor entertained serious doubt) how is he answered! Is he informed of the desperate state of the finances? Does Major Magrath inform Mr. Duggan, that he was a creditor himself for a larger amount than Mr. Duggan, and consequently could not discharge his claim?— Quite the reverse. Major Magrath does not then put forward any claim against the Turf Club, bjt he pays Mr Duggan, « stating, that as he is not sure how the Racing accounts stand, Mr. Duggan must repay, if it should turn out that the funds were insufficient." Uncertain bow the Racing accounts stood ! Why, Sir, will it be believed, that at that period Major Magrath had received but two solitary sums, amonnting together to £24 ; so that we are to believe, that with the sum of £24, Tdiich had indeed been disbursed before it was received, the Ptosecutor had paid £66, and yet was not certain, when Mr. Dug- KD demanded his £35, whether enough did not remain to pay that too. It what is the language of Mr. Heath, when he called at the Military QtettiufB Office in August? Does he complain to me of the injustice D f day he was out of funds. ^ ' ^ ^''^ ^^^^ the Major say the otter Nonego." " ^'■^'^" Judoeus appelia ^ v ^. , erpaid, must have preceded any reSfhS M ?^ ^,! ^^'^^ ^hich . ^ Let us now turn from that . . "^ •'°' ^'^'■**^^- credit abou[ thattS^P r' ^^I^ °^ J""^, I83mL lTA"ff«'th was paid to me .^iuTS'''' ^* 5s. bad notes «nw? ^ ^"*^ hiui takinir * 5^1"^„TSeil:j^te - woS ?1S J„To„tt„ '/ statement tallies wih ♦! -^ ■'*ragrath. But «pp >.«. *?**' *he 35 being due 11 months, the other two years,) we shall have ossiffned to UB the less difficult task of believing, that having Rnce funds in his hands, he discharged those old demands; for, at the time lie paid Mr. Duggan, he will have received £90 Os. 9d., and paid £100 9s. 3d. And then Mr. Heath's statement at the time that he visited the Miliary Secretary's Office, — namely, that he heard "the Major say the other day that the disbursements exceeded the receipts," instead of being perfectly inexplicable, falls in easily and naturally with this state of things. We will not then have a balance left in the Bank for months, while Major Magrath was paying old debts to a large amount out of his own pocket, but we will have that balance asked for and received, as soon as the other funds wero exhausted. And lastly, when the sum of £8 6s. 6d. was paid me, wo shall find Major Magrath indebted to the Race funds in a sum of £20 or' £30, as I always asserted, instead of those funds being indebted to him in a cimilar amount. And now, Sir, I do feel that this statement is so clear; that it accords so perfectly with the whole testimony in the case, and is illustrated so fully by the casual testimony which I have been ena- bled to adduce; it accounts so exactly for the paynoents proceeding "pari passu" with the receipts, (instead of leaving the matter in that inextricable confusion in which the other statement has placed it,) I feel all this so sensibly, that I will not consume the time of the Court with any comment on the subject. One glance at the account will have more effect than whole volumes of argument. But I cannot conclude without making an observation or two on the testimony of Mr. R. Maitland; and the Court will first of all be pleased to observe, that the conversation of the 24th of June, I8S9, deposed to by the witness, was not a single, isolated conver- sation, which having taken place, was never again brought before the memory of the witness for fourteen months, (as the Prosecutor would represent it,) but it was a conversation, the main features of which were again and again brought back to his mind, by a variety of circumstances detailed in evidence. The conversation of Tuesday recalled it. The applications of the various persons during the week recalled it. The direction to Mr. Scarlett, to Mr. Atkinson,— the explanation to Mr. Duggan, — all these circumstances recalled and fixed it in his memory. And having made this general observation. I shall not trouble the Court with an investigation into the detailed manner in which he gave his evidence, — with dates and places always specified, — thus throwing open the widest field to the cross-examin- ation of the Prosecutor, which was certainly urged to a rather extraordinary extent. Had I, Sir, presented a false witness to prove the payment of the sum of £50, three sentences would have effected the object, without fear or cause of contradiction. But I might appeal to every part of the cross-examination as a test of the clear- ness and truth of that witness' testimony. The deduction of Mr. Murchison's subscription from my lodging money, was pressed with no ordinary pertinacity; and now, I am entitled to say, that unless Major Magrath can produce some written evidence to contradict ,. 36 lum,— unless he can n-^j to a Court, everr mtS „? ^i.'"^' ">»' never wL. "f"""'! on tij, not be distorted and crvi/L if®': "'^^e'f Mr. Vait^^^^^ of Mr. Scarlett, mT Afk ''''*' ''»* ^ appeal cSi 5' ^^^^nce caS! DodswortbfMr wt \^°"^ "i^st judrre FtT ^"i?"^*!!, or w^ E ^ffer The sums sfet®"' ,^^'. wllEs ?C*''" *^««ony ^f &* ^« the C S"^'87«t upon manyi/^eg-^J^d^ "pon wWch ^f ,&^^.^t?n^^^^^^^ j:n"er,. when in shS A^%°°«' '^d^its to hall ?^^^ was fe "■iiiMs^p^ ) '^'^^ 1840, lamination ^<=^ demon. ^nt on tj^ Preaentei 9 out ,u)d preserved ■■ovidence 'ceedioOT ice con- fividence ait pa^. get the •e^torjr, ^llecl dutic," And Now, Sir, I shall trouble the Court with no comment of my own, but shall simply read ihe argument of Lord Erskine, upon which Captain Bailey was restored to his office, and the criminal proceeding against him crushed in its inaption :— " My Lord, a man can not be eniliy of n libel who presents erievancpi be- fore a competent jiiriiirliction. although the fiictH he preoenu should be false; he may indeed be indictrd for a miiliiMous pronccution, ntid even there a probable cause would protect him, but he can by no construction be considered at a libeller. L " The case of Lake and King in lat Levieux, 390, but which is better re* ported in Ist Saunders, is directly in point; it wa!i an action for printing a Petition to the Memlteri of a Connmiitee of FHrlinment, charging tho Plainiiff with gross fraud in the execution of his offii^e; 1 am aware that it wai< an action on the case, and not a criminal prosecution; hut I am prepared to shew your Lordship, that the prec dent on thnt account makes the stmnger for us. The truth of the matter, though part of the plea, whs nr)t the point in contest ; the justification was the presenting it to a proper jurisdiction, and printing /t, as in this case, for more commodious distribution ; and it was first of all resolved by the Court, that the delivery of the Petition to iili the Members of the Committee was justifiable ; and that it was no libel whether the matter contained were true or false, it being an appeal in a course of jutitice, and becaijse the parties to whom it was addressed had jurittdiction to determine the matter; that the inten- tion of the law in prohibiting; libels, was to restrain men from making themselvea their own judge*, instead of referring the matter to tho^^e whom the constitution bad appointed to determine it ; and that to adjudge such reference to be a libel, would discourage men frcm making their own enquiries with that freedom and readiness which the law allows, and which the good of society requires. But it was objected, he could not justify ihe printing, for by that means it was published to printers and composers; but it was answered and resolved by the whole Court, that the printing, with intent to distribute them among the members of the Com' tniitee, was legal; and that the making many copies by Clerks, would have made the matter more public. " I said, my Lord, that this being an action on the case, and not an indict* ment'or information, made the stronger for us ; and I said so, because the action on the case is to redress the party in damages, for the injuries he has sustained as an individual, and wtiich he has a right to recover, unless the Defendant can shew that the matter is true, or, as in this case, whether true or false, that it is an appeal to justice. Now, My Lord, if a Defendant's right to appeal to justice could, in the case of Lake and King, repel a Plaintiflf's right to damages, although he was actually damnified by the appeal, how much more must it repel a ciiminal prosecution, which can be undertaken only for the sake of public justice, when the law says, it is for the benefit of public justice to make such appeal 7 And that case went to protect even falsehood, and where the Defendant was not particularly called upon in duty as an individ'ial to animadvert, — how much more shall it protect us who were bound to enquire, who have written nothing but truth, and who have addressed what we have written to a competent jurisdiction V Such, Sir, are the arguments upon which Captain Bailey was acquitted and restored to his command. Of the force of these argu- ) t s ) 40 1^ menta to maintain the genorui proposition of law, which I hare htd tbd honor of submitting, and of their applicability to the present case ti^e Court will judge. Before obiierving in conclusion, Mr. President, on the 5th mnA only remaining charge aguinst me, I would beg of the Court, if posnbls^ to blot from their memory every particle uf evidence adduced on the de- fence. I would bog uf thcin to allow me to bring before their niindi the principal facts of the case, upon the assumption that Major Ma- grath's statements as to his receipts are true, and mine incorrect. And nrst. Sir, let me direct your attention to the position in which I etood in the spring of 1840. It cannot, I think, bo argued with any degree of fhimess, tnat then at least I had any motive for charging Major Magrath with the receipt of any sums which I did not honestly think had been paid to him; for I do not suppose that any deeire to encreaae the Race funds can be considered as a sufficient motive for sach ctm- duct, and I have as yet perceived in the evidence no traces of that conspiracy which Captain Magrath had foreseen. A desire to screen my own embezzlement cannot possibly have actuated me, because no man accused me. Nay, it would appear from the evidence, that the secret was buried in my own bosom. Under these circumstances did I involve the matter in mystery? Did I keep back my statements oatU the afiair had lain so long dormant, that Major Magrath ooald not hare been expected to retain any recollection of it? And did I then bring it forward with an invidious and malignant design to entrap him? Did not my letter of the 6th of May, plainly state to Major Magrath the sum which I alleged he had received, the source from which that sum was derived, and the mode in which it had been paid? Can any man look at the Bank account enclosed in that letter, and say, that the entry of the cheques there added, was intended to entrap, and not inform^ Does the hand in which these entries are added, resemble that in whieh the amount is drawn out? Does the careless manner of the addition bespeak fraud? What then is Major Magrath's conduct with all this light before him? What is his statement to myself on the 27th of June? What is his statement at the Military Secretary's Office? What is his statement at the Farmer's Bank? He upon all these occasions denies the receipt of that sum. What construction the Court may put upon these denials of Major Magrath, it is not for me to enquire; but they have been so frequent, and in such various forms, that 1 feel 1 may for the purpose of my present argument, assume them to have been, (aa they were under ttood to be at the time,) general. Ac the Fanner's Bank, it would seem that Major Magrath only denied the receipt of that sum fVom Colonel Fraaer. On the S7th of June he only denied it from me. And on the 27th of July, he denied the receipt of it ttom Colonel Fraser ae well as from myself. But then that was only meant " m addition." These explanations may be deemed sat^actory to the Coart, and I have no desire to cavil at them, because I think that when all those to whom the denial was expressed, understood it to be nnoMU lilied, 1 cannot be blamed for falling into the general error. Uliwr- standing then his denial to be unqualified as I did, I ask whether my letter ^ the 24th of July was unwarranted? Woald any member of tldi Coort have written less strongly under the same circamstaiicesW 41 r Ami BOW Ae q«eftion-preient« itaelf,— Who cait the flrat itoMi Mj letter of the fl4th oF July wu private; but how ii it metl It i» taken by Major Magprath to a meeting of tho Stowards, and there made pub> lie 1* the manner described in the evidence. Tho Stewardi who were present at that raeeting have all be«ii uxnininud, and have stated upon oath, that Major Magrath'a then Btatomcnt as to tho sum of £28 7b. Bd. wma inconaiatent with truth ; and tho production of the lotter was prefaced by the meet insulting exprossions to myself, which I must take leave to r wen Equally untrue. For, although it bo truo that Capt. Magratb, lO bad not been with the troop during tho whole period of my serviooi • aubsequently appointed to the conuniHsion which I had been led to expect^ and drew tnat pay which I hod hoped to have received; and altnoogh it be true, that I was then driven to the alternative, of signing the pay-list as " Coroorait" ur contonting mysolf without any pay, yet it was also true, tnat for the whole period of my service, I acted an Adijutant, and not as " Corporal" and hud during all that time the tpeaJcable honor of being the niess-mato of Major Magrath ! wh( The matter having been thus published to tho world by' the Prose- cutor, and tho Major-General considering it an affair proper to be decided by the Race-Club, I did (on tho return of Colonel Fraser) feel bound in duty to myself, to moot what every body understood to have been a denial of the receipt of the sum of £28 7s. 6d. by the publica- tion of that receipt which had been given to Colonel Fraser by Major Magrath when the sum was paid. Of this act, ho who had thrown the first stone,— who had published my letter with a denial of the truth of my assertion, had not I think just reason to complain. But who is guilty of the next irregularity? Upon the return of Colonel Fraser I applied to have a meeting of the Stewards for the purpose of investiga- tion, and Capt. Arthur has also in his evidence deposed to my frequent complaints and earnest desire for enquiry. Major Magrath, however, prefers an appeal to the public, and sends abroad a publication, in which he not only accuses me of embezzlement effected by the invention of "wilful and malicious falsehoods;" and glories in having demonstrated my utter disregard to the truth; but with a malice which needs no comment, adds to the publication, and gives to the world a report upon my accounts of 1837 and 1838, with which he has himself stated that he had no earthly connection. Sir, I objected to the Court receiving evidence as to tho accounts of 1837 and 1838, not because I shrunk from an investigation of them, but because I considered the receipt of such evidence to be contrary to the most elementary principles of law; for I apprehend, that the pub- lished paper, style^ " Sketch of the winding up of the Race accounts for 1837," will appear to ordinary minds sufficiently plain. It speaks for itself. And to any mind not endowed with that profound metaphy- sical discernment displayed by Major Magrath, — to any mind less gift- ed with the power of drawing these refined distinctions, by which every thing that the world took to be false, is clearly proved to be true, and all that the world held true, is with equal clearness shewn to be false, —to any mind, I say, less enlightened, the report of Messrs. Stanton •ui Cmmtob ttuft ippBU aqaaXLy imxMeMt* Of <1m tetmmtk^tt 1987, Ifliiall-oBlj mjt that it hM neror beoi tiwil to keqp oj ott* thui the SnbMription-book tod the youohen; bat if Mr. iiw^f^ who kept the mmiiafl and made the disboneideiita for the year of lt87» could be produood, I am certain that if he could not prodMe TOoiAMBafc Jie could at least depoee to the proper applicatie» of «ai«0rfnta. Am noW) Iwill eiiariy ask theCourt, whether I waa bound bymiy wwidfiviM or human, to allow the ffrave chai^res ooatained in that pamphlet Mr k^ msin uncontradicted? Can it be conddered forthehonov of HarHajaik ty^a iierTiee, tiiateven a "(hrporar should idlew such chaifMita remain uncontradicted, during tne interval which moM have wapaad between that publication and the investimtion in NoTeanbetl- ^aa i| not my solemn duty to myself, to the piiblict to my Sovereiffn, to rep^ those charges, directly, and at the tame itihmal he/ore mi/ck Mt^or Mugratk had arraigned am,— namely, the tribunal ofPiMie OpAttsa/ But, even though tM Court should conclude that in taking this step' I have been guilty of a breach of Military law, yet I do ttvuit, that the consideration of Major Magrath's conduct, (of which I have just sketch" ed tiie outline,) will ensure to me this concession at leaat,pplthat it waa an error committed under such gross {nrovocation, as the feelinga of ear conmon nature have ever been found unable to aiduri! ' .1 APPENDIX. MB »»—»'— ma y. '^ *• m t ^# y- -*— i APPENDIX. •IK ii ■.- :■■■'". MiLiTU General Order: ^ Adjutant General's Ofhcb, I Toronto, Bth ^pril, 1841. Before a General Court-Martial of Militia, held at Toronto^ OQ the 8th day of February, 1841, and continued by adjournment until the 19th day of the ensuing month. Lieutenant John M ArrLANO, of the 4th Battallion of Incorporated Jldilitia, was arraigned on the following charges, viz:— Scandalous and infamous behaviour, unbecoming the character of an Officer and a Gentleman, in the following instances, viz:— First. — Having stated at the City of Toronto, on or about the ■ 'h Tune, 1840, in the presonco and hearing of George B. Holland, e leijeant of the First Troop of Incorporated Militia Dragoons, that * ;,.ie said Lieutenant John Maitland had paid to the said Major T.W. Magrath the sum of £28 7s. 6d. currency, he the said John Maitland at the same time well knowing that he had not so paid the same. Charge the Second. — ^Having stated at Toronto aforesaid, on or about the 19th day of November, 1840, in the presence of Colonel Alexander Mackenzie Eraser, Assistant Quarter Master General to the Forces, Colonel Sir Allan Napier Macnab, Third Regiment of Gore Sedentary Militia, Colonel Richard Bullock, Adjutant General of Mili- tia, and Captain Frederick Leopold Arthur, Aid-de-Camp, that he the said Lieutenant John Maitland had paid to the said Major Thomas W. Magrath the sum of six pounds five shillings, currency, being the amount of the subscription of certain Officers of Her Majestys 43d Regiment, to the City of Toronto and the County of York Race Meet- ing, for the year 18.99, he the said Lieutenant John Maitland well knowing at the same time that he had not so paid the same. Charge the Third. — Having stated at Toronto, on or about the 19th day of November, 1840, at a Meeting of the Stewards of the City of Toronto and York County Race Meeting for the year 1889, that he the said Lieutenant Maitland was prepared with proof, that the said Major Magrath had received the sum of six pounds five shillings, cur- rency, being the amount of the last mentioned subscription of the Offi- cers of the 43d Regiment, for the purpose of endeavouring to entrap the said Major Magrath into the admission of the receipt thereof ; he the said Lieutenant Maitland at the same time having no such proof, and being well aware that the fact was contrary to his said statement. Cf ^ % iv Charge the Fourth. — Having stated at the time and place, and on the occasion last mentioned, that the said Major Magrath had not paid certain men of the said First Troop of Incorporated Militia Dragoons the amount of a certain purse, called the Troop Purse, run for at the said Race Meeting in 1838, and won by certain men of the said Dra- goons, and that he the said Lieutenant Maitland had been informed by two men of the said Troop, who were entitled to receive a proportion thereof^ that the same had not been paid to them by Major Magrath, or any one for him, and that they had not received their proportion; he the said Lieutenant Maitland well knowing when ho made tiie said statement, thttt the said purse had been paid by Major Magrath, and that no man of the said Dragoons, entitled to receive any proportion thereof, had made an^ such declaration. ' Charge the Ft/KA.— Having written and published, or caused to be written and published, at Toronto, on or about the 31st day of August, 1840, in a public newspaper caiied the " British Colonist, a fals^ scan- dalous, and malicious letter, with intent to injure and defame the cduur- acter of the said Major Magrath,as &n officer and a gentleman ;^ e:spre«»* ing therein and thereby, that a certain statement published as the result ofthe examinations of the Toronto Turf Club Accounts for 1899, was fl most bundling and barefaced attempt to cover the peculation of the SiM Major Magrath. Charge the Sixth, — ^Having written and published, at Toronto, on or ^bout the 10th day of October, 1840, a false, scandalous, and noali- jciovs statement, tending to injure and defame the character of the said Major Magrath, as an officer and a gentleman, in reference to theRacQ funds of the City of Toronto and County of York Race Meeting for f 899; whereby he accused the said Major Magrath of having attempted peculation of the said funds, — such conduct bein? contrary to the iiile* and regulations of Her Majesty's service, and subversive of good order and muitary ^scipline. The Court having maturely weighed and considered the evidence in suimortof the charges against the Prisoner, John Maiilan^ Lieutenr ant 4th Battalion Incorporated Militia,— his defence, and the evidence adduced in support of it, — is of opinion, that with regard to the first charge, he the Prisoner, John Maitland, Lieutenant 4th Battalion Incor- porated Militia, is not guilty, and do therefore acquit him of the same. With regard to the second charge, the Court is of opinion, that the Prisoner, John Maitland, Lieutenant 4th Battalion Incorporated MUitia, is guilty. With regard to the third charge, the Court is of opinion, that the Prisoner, John Maitland, Lieutenant 4th Battalion Incorporated Militia, is guilty. With regard to the fourth charge, the Court is of opinion, (hat the Piia NSUlt was the 't on said •ace for pted ulee ^der nee en> Bce xst or- ■ a With regard to the fifth charge, the Court is of opinion, that the Prisoner, John Maitland, Lieutenant 4th Battalion Incorporated Militia, is guilty. With regard to the sixth charge, the Court is of opinion, that the Prisoner, John Maitland, is guilty. The Court having found the Prisoner guilty of the second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth charges preferred against him, which being in breach of the Articles of War and the Miliiia Act now in force in this Province, do sentence him, the Prisoner, John Maitland, Lieutenant 4th Battalion Incorporated Militia, to be Cashiered. The Court having performed its duty, cannot separate without re- cording its opinion upon the description of defence attempted to be set up by the Prisoner, to wit, that he had received a provocation sufiicient to justify on his part a breach of Military discipUne— a doctrine subver- sive of the fundamental principle by which all armies arc governed^ and entirely at variance with those auihorities which are equally binding upon Military and Civil Tribunals. Yet notwithstanding this attempt upon the part of the Prisoner, no testimony has been produced by him, even if his position had been tena- ble, sufficient to justify the Court in acquitting him of any one of the charges of which he has been found guilty. His Excellency the Governor General has been pleased to approve and confirm the finding of the Court. Mr. John Maitland will cease to receive pay in Her Majesty's ser- vice from this date. The General Cfourt-Martial, of which 'Colonel Vahoughnett, 5th Battalion Incorporated Militia, is President, is dissolved. By command. (Signed) RICHARD BULLOCK, Adjutant General Miiitia, at Bd »^-• •' t. V ,•■'"- ^4 • ■ '% 'B ■i", Sao. \ • A.I *| \ir «-. ;n'»t (■ f V. ;i7i- •■Jk!»;n :: ' cC'a||:«.:j(: I ir/i'/ laiis^n ■.i»»«ww?>i~'s?wr«-' Statement shewing the Total Amount of Receipt and Erpen Colo 1839. 'Ur, ; . June 19' 20' 2,1 ixH 24- July Aug. 10' 1840. April 6 To amount of money paid into the Farmer's Bank 1 Mr. Maitland, (to the credit of Col. Mackeni Fruwer, Prcijidont of the Races,) between the 2 day of May and tlie 10th day of June, 1809, us p Bank Statement, being the amount of subscri tions collected before the llaccs,and theentranc for ohe Platea " Catih received by Mr. Heath, — viz: six entrances i 10s. each, for the Race for a Jockey Saddle — f] Hucka — v.hich Saddle was won by Cat;h'd b^ mare, •* " Cash received by Mr. Heath, — viz: four entranc at 10s. each, for the Race for a Jockey Saddle- for Ponies — which saddle was won by Mr. Hov cutt's bay pony " Cash of Captain Meade, 43d Regt., paid to Maj. Magratli, < Amount collected by Mr. Maitland and Major M' grath on the Race Course, on this the third d.; of the Races, and deposited by Mr. Maitland the hands of A. Tod, Esq., before riding in tl Hurdle Race j " Amount collected by Mr. Maitland and Major M grath on the Race Course, on the first and scco) days of the Races, (19th and 20th June, lC3t and handed over to Major Mn grath by Mr. Mai land, on the evening of this day, Monday " Money collected by Messrs. Bell and Balker, Ini keepers, paid to Major Magrath through Mj Maitland \ " Captain Cummins' subscription paid to Major Mi grath through Mr. Maitland - " Outstanding subscriptions received by MajorMagraj " Mr. Murchison's subscription paid to MajorMagra^' " Amount to be accounted for, brought down ; 40 a Discoveries lately ma^de, also te be accounted for by Major Magrath. Short credited on Mr. Domville's cheque • Overcharge on payment made to Mr. Wil- lard Mr. Joseph Heughen's subscription Mr. John Dodeworth's do Mr. Henry J. Williams' do. Mr. Henry B. Williams's do 2 2 10 10 10 c 10 (J 1839. Statement ahetving the Total Amount of Receipt and Expenditure of the Funds of t\ Colonel Mackenzik Fraskr, ' 18S9. June 19' 20 21 24 • July Aug. 10 • 1840. April 6. 256 15 3 To amount of money paid into the Farmer's Bank by Mr. Maitland, (to the credit of Col. Mackenzie Eraser, President of the Races,) between the 2 id day of May and the 10th day of June, 1830, as per Bank Statement, being the amount of subscrip-j tions collected before the Race9,and the entrances' for the Plates | « Cash received by Mr. Heath, — viz: six entrances at lOs. each, for the Race for a Jockey Saddle — for' Hacks — which Saddle was won by Cash's bayl mare, • j " Cash received by Mr. Heath, — viz: four entrances at 10s. each, for the Race for a Jockey Saddle — for Ponies — which saddle was won by Mr. How- cutt's bay pony I " Cash of Captain Meade, 43d Regt., paid to Major Magrath, " Amount collected by Mr. Maitland and Major Ma- grath on the Race Course, on this the third day of the Races, and deposited by Mr. Maitland in the hands of A. Tod, Esq., before riding in the Hurdle Race Amount collected by Mr. Maitland and Major Ma- grath on the Rac3 Course, on the first and second days of the Rujes, (19th and 20th June, 1839,) and handed over to Major Magrath by Mr. Mait- land, on the evening of this day, Monday Money collected by Messrs. Bell and Baker, Inn- keepers, paid to Majoi Magrath through Mr. 1 Maitland i 16 Captain Cummins' subscription paid to Major Ma- grath through Mr. Maitland , Outstanding subscriptions received by MajorMagraih Mr. Murchison's subscription paid to MajorMagrath d. 2 fi 25 53 17 6 10 o 26 1 10 " Amount to be accounted for, brought down Discoveries lately made, also t» be accounted for by MajorMagrath. " Short credited on Mr. Domville's cheque • " Overcharge on payment made to Mr.Wil- lard " Mr. Joseph Heughen's subscription " Mr. John Dodsworth's do " Mr. Henry J. Williams' do. « Mr. Henry B. Williams's do 46 8 V 1 2 1 2 6 10 10 10 10 "■"" ■—11 396 2 6 48 13 d| 1839. Juno 25- B; L B B 1839. tpenditure of the Fundi of ihs City of Toronto and York County June Race Meeting, 1839. )LOMUL Mackenzik Fraseb, President. ink by kenzie 10 2id us per, (scrip- j ranees • » • « • I ces at e—for' 'a biiyj ranees ddle— How-' Major ir Ma- rd day and in in the' ir Ma-' leeond 11839,)! Mait- Inn- Mr. Ma-; ... . j Igraih Igrath 8 7 H. d. S56 15 3 2 6 5 25 53 17 6 16 10 5 2J 6 1839. June 25' 26 1 10 5 396 2 6 48 13 3| By amount of tho cheques drawn by the Pre- sident of the Races (Colonel Mackenzie Fraser,) paying Plates, &c., including the balance transferred to MajorThomas William Magrath on 13th Aug. 1839 < Le"s amount so transferred to MajorMagrath By cash deposited in Mr. Tod's hands ac- counted for Paid Mr. Domville, A. D. C. diflercncs of cheque £3 10 Paid the balance to Major Magrath when handing him the follow- ing accounts discharged* • • • :i 8 3 Mr. Dalton's ac-count paid by Mr. Maitland. 5 80 Messrs. Watkins &i Harris' do do 13 9 Mr. Stanton's do do 4 Messrs. Wragg Si Go's do do 6 Mr. Scobie's do do 3 By amount of sums claimed by Major Ma- grath as paid by him Less amount charged for Troop Purses* • • • By Amount to be accounted for to the Rac- ing fund by Major Thos. W. Magrath- By amount (the saddle entrances) to bd ac- counted for to the Racing fund by Mr. Heath £ s. d. 256 15 28 7 6 25 5 18 3 19 1 9 19 1 9 108 6 4 8 41 8 7 5 £ s. d. 228 7 6 19 1 9 102 4 8 46 8 7 396 2 6