Hide Article Text (OCR)
Jim Pipymrheneivabol the Earl of Selkirk at the placé. alone the 120. of August, this: Lorahip wrote a letter,to. dtr, Willi an Gillifray (the principal partner and agent of the North-West Company, who wsllen “at Fore William): to kite, why your? ' ve Ais welt ioe heeral other vérsoris’ from the: Settipmenn eréd@ained,in consequence of witch letter your petitioner AF Aye S000 NS Your petitioner was released, he wad examingil 7 the’ Earl of Seliirks as a Magistrate,iwith' féencett to what PPA er place in: Red River: during'the two last: years, and after-leavin z fully. Sptniled, the circumstances that, had come to his Knowledes, your petitioner was subsequently requested by his Lordship to go to York Factory if Hudson'd Bay, ‘for the pur pose of utiering what had become of the settlers‘who Hat been ‘driven from Ned River, ‘and ‘also to carry ‘into the interior 2 Rinclamation of the Governor in Chief, Sir John Sherbrooke, commanding allows to keep the peace. ‘ Your petitioner, however “when we put to Bake la Plaie, was waylaid and as ‘probet inate night time by ‘two clerks and an armed party of ‘the North: West:.Company, who took him to the person in charge of their trading post near that place, by whom he was told that he had been so seized’by his directions. Your peti tisher as hf MPwards detained -in estudy-about twelve hours, “and from:the expressions mate used he was apprehensive that, all he proceeded,in his journey, he would be assassinated ;—and he, ig: ihe, more convinced that such apprehension was well founded, because it appears that’ Mr., Owen: Keviney say he had ‘been Aepped: when proceeding: from Hudson's Bay to Hed River'sith: same breeding,cattle, for the use of the settlement) was murdered by a clerk of the North-West Company only two days before, at a place not far distant from’ wher your petitioner then was. Snif alors which he must have passéd had he proceed ‘ed in his rout tm search of the settlers... aoe . ‘Thait your petitioner therefore returned to Fort William, from whence, be Soon afterwards went to Montreal'in awar ¥ Canada, at’ Which place ‘he ‘arrived in’ the month “of December 1816.. That in consequence: of ‘the’ before,mentioned.subpoena,: and others of s-similar.. nature, subsequently served upon. him,at va~ houg times at the suit of, Crown, your petitioner was detained in Canada for almost two years, without having it in his power to ‘retin’ to ‘his faritity, ‘or any allowance whatever being made him for his expenses as a witness for the Crown, although he applied Roth the Army General of Lower and Upper Canada for that purpose. “That at length he was advised’ to come to Eng ‘Mh for the purpose of ‘Obtaining: redress if possible, ‘and ascer tainitz to say:protection would be granted to him and the other s es that,while Your petitioner was ‘so detained in Canada, nu merous prosecutions were instituted on thie‘part of the’ Hnndson’s ‘Wee Company, aid of ‘the Earl of Selkirk, against’ partners, sClerks,anti-servants of the North-West Companys for crimes connected; with the arepensive destructions of the Red’ River set élement.. That bills of indictment were found by Grand Juries ‘gerainkt many of these’ persons for murder, robbery, arson, mali- Goasle shooting at the settlers, and for a conspiracy to destroy the Red River settlement. ..That scarcely any of the persons so indicted.—and hone of the principle ones, ~ have bettn tiied 5 hor, as your petitioner believes, will, without special orders, ‘be tried in“Canada under such‘indictments, and that many of the most atrocious..of.the offender, (such as Cuthbert Grant. Bostonois (caneman, and other clerks of the North-West Company, and eaders of the half-breeds, who had been in castbétt‘for nirder, and other’ capital ‘offences, ‘have been permitted to ‘ride their estate, And to return'without trial to the neighbourhood of the Sea Rivens “being carried thither in the canoes of the North- West Company. _ That your petitioner, when at Montreal, was informer,and ‘Believes, that one of Campbell, who had been bribed to commit Tumerous dnlawful acts of hostility against your petitioner and ~othtys at the Sted River Settlement (and against whom several Indictments had been found by ‘Grand Juries for robbery, Arson, and maliciously shooting at the settlers),was permitted to make ‘His eécape without trialy from the prison at Montreal, in conse quence of the unlawful interference, as your petitioner is inform ed, of two of the Puisne Judges at that place, who took upon ‘themselves improperly to discharge the said Campbell. And ‘your petitioner is the more assured, ‘that such discharge was con ‘trary 'today, because,after ‘the liberation and subsequent escape of the said Campbell, a Writ of Habeas Corpus, ‘signed by the Chief Justice of Montreal, and bearing date before‘his liberation, was presented ‘to “the ‘keeper of the gaol by a King's Counsel, ‘employed by the North-West Company, who requested the gaoler to iiven up the said order of discharge which had been signed and delivered by the two,Puisne Judges, and to ante-later return to the Writ of Habeus Corpus’so’presented—a request which was refuted by the sad gaoRen de'he himself informed your petitioner. ‘That,in the prosecutions instituted in Canada by Lard Sel kirk, and also by the Hudson’s Bay Company, for criminal acts écoromitted against their servants and the settlers, by partners ‘and other persons “belonging to the North-West Company, the Law Offters of the Crowt,s-your petitioner has been informed and believes, have refused to allow the counsel of the private prosecutors to interfere in the management of the trials, ‘or to examine or cross-examine the witnesses. “And that he fur ther verily believes that, in consequence of such refusal, Archi Sord McLellia, a partner of the North.West.Company, who wtooL indicted as necessary to the murder of Mr. Owen Keveney, was acquitted of the charge so brought against him: “That your petitioner has recently heard that a Bill of Indict ment has been found against him at York, in Upper Canana, for MercRedly-end deficiently conspiring with others to destroy the ityade,of the North-West, Company. .That ‘a Billo the same Serdmanan, siid forth damé Charge, had“been laid before: the SHdd Jury'at Sandiich, ‘in ‘the said- Province,’ in September inst Cnsion your petitioner.was:on_ the spot. ready. with _ his wit apestes to confute the. charge), at which, time, in order that such Bill might be found, the Attorney General insisted upon “going Before the Grand Jury,to conduct the examination of the’ wit chesses ¢Shillng” that he had a right, as Attorney General; so to doz.That he accordingly went before the Grand Jury, and oc cupied three days in examining the witnesses for the prosecution. “Phat after he had’ finished such examination, the Grand Jury deliberated five days more upon the” Bill; but, on the morning of the sixth, when it was generally believed in Sandwich that the Bill was then to be thrown out, the Chief Justice thought pro per abruptly to break up the Court, and to put a total stop to the proceeding of the Grand’Jury, thereby preventing them from ‘buying the power of formally throwing out the Bull brought against your petitioner.. . . . nor hhat jemedately after these proceedings, a Colonial Act, altering and ‘extending the jurisdiction of certain districts i Op er Canada, passed through the two Houses of Legislature of that Province during their last Session, which Act, although of an un -naval and extraordinary nature, (and notwithstanding a Similar one had been unanimously rejected by the House of Assem bly the Session, before) was assented to by the person ad Muinisterine the Government of the Province, without a clause ‘being inserted thereb’ (as required in such cases by the King’s ‘instructions, as your petitioner is informed) for suspending its operation‘until his Majesty's plessure was known, ‘That your petitioner is also informed ‘and believes, that the said Oil has “never been sent to England by the person administering the Government of that Province, nor that his Majesty’s sanction has been obtained thereto. ‘That in consequence of the Act recently persed, and of the retrospective interpretation given to it (which ‘interpretation, as your petitioner, is further advised, is not borne out by ite enactments), another bill or indictment, for conspiring against the trade of the North-West Company (and exactly simi ler to that which was preferred, but not found against him at Bannwich the year before;I was recently laid before the Grand Jury at York, That the Grand Jury, in deliberating upon the ‘said bill, were improperly induced to admit Mr. Wm. MGui lixray, the principal agent and partner of that’ Company, to at tend them in the Grant’ Jury-room, ‘and to*examine the wit nesses for the prosecutions almost all of them his clerks,and hired : Servants; in consequence of which. a true bill for conspiracy has been found against your petitioner and nineteen other p per sons, most of them connected with, or belonging to the Red River settlement, ‘and many of whose names were inserted in the ‘Gndictment for no purpose, as your petitioner believes, but to pre vent them being called upon is witnesses. That, by, all such vexatious and harassing proceedings, your ‘petitioner’and the ‘said’ settlers have suffered great injustice and ‘depression and ‘he is moreover apprehensive that aggressions, ‘igimis’ to those which have already taken place,will be revitened against himself and his family, and against the other Red Silver settlers, most of whom have again’ returned to cultivate their lands at the settlement. ‘That in order to guard against the hos tility. Which there tiss but too much reason to apprehend from t those of the North-West Company's partners and servants, tho, ,having been indicted, have returned ‘without trial into the “Anterior, your petitioner humbly prays that the case may be'taken ‘ Your favourable consideration,and that such measures be undevised: therein As may, ‘in your wisdom and justice, appear'best ,adapted to prevent those aggressions—the repetition of which “woust unavoidably drive your Petitioner ‘and the other settlers ‘entirely to abandon the lands which they may occupy, and are sarinating ‘in? British: Hath frpeks a fommpel seat by previositg themselves and their families within the adjoining an a rezeopounen boundary of the Dofted ‘States, to seek from ineritan: Government tat ‘protection which they have, herte been wrath:to obtain against the unprincipled persecu Rag eclecinan inmea percy és ; bound, will ever pray. ery 15-10 au, Vs And your pelivon a Spied J: PRITCHARD. London, 7th Juné’ ee
Newspaper Details
New Times
London, Middlesex, GB
Sat, Jun 26, 1819
Page 4
Full Page
Clipped by
Anonymous
CA 14 Jul 2026
Other Publications Near London, Middlesex
London Standard
Morning Chronicle
London Morning Post
London Daily News
Guardian
