as gt

A OC CAD RE ENACT ICE S *

a

™ w

et \ ow

i. ele

THE EXAMINER

VOL. 2. ALMANAG POR FEBRUARY, 1878,

cchndtnhio MOON S CHANGES, m, 2ud day, 4h OSm. a. m., NE.

a7 ] j New Wo ; : = First Quarter, Oth day, 9h. OOm. a, m. NE, Fall Moon, i7th day, 7h. OSm. a. m., N.W. Last Quarter, 23rd day, Lith. 0Om. p.m., NE.

{Sun /Sun | Moon High | Dy’s

i) » WEEK Mi DAT VE WEE . rises sets, rises WwW ater| len. ’ , | | _———|——$ | ‘aH. MH. Mimorn ‘aft n. | HLM. i Friday, ' ‘ ) Saturday, 25,5 00) 7 311k Gt 37) 8 Sunday, 27 2; 7 50,11 40; 4i 4 Monday, 26 4,8 S'morn; 43 . = = 7 . >! —- ; 5 Tuesday, | 25) 5) 8 =1; 0 8 47) 6; Wednesday, 24 7! 8 36, 0 37, 50] 7 Tharsday, 22 9 8 50} 1 9} 52] S' Friday, 19 10, 9 s| 1 40] SF g Saturday is; 12,:9-29 217; St} Ol unaay, iy 13: 9 SS! 2 5910 1 11} Monday, 16} 1510 35) 356° 4] 12 Tuesday, 44| 16911 27! 5 32 i | 13) Wednesday, 1?i J8aft3ti 6 48! 10) 14: Thursday, il 19) 1 62) 8 12) 13 | 15 Friday, 9 23 35) > 37) aa 16: Saturday s 29' 445110 9 19 i7 Sunday, 7} 231 6 11110 55) 22 6| 25) 7 371 BB) 23

18 Monday,

10 Tuesday, 4} 26; 8 55/11 59, 2S

”) Wednesday. ! 28) 10 19 aft 34 31

a1'Thursday, 6 59! 29Ll 40/112) 34] wh Pinay, 57; 3limorn' 1 53; 37

33 Saturday, 55; 33) 0 57; 2 49} 40 24 Sunday, 52, 34 2 10] 3 54] 48 25, Monday, 51) 35) 3 12) 5 19) 46

26 ' Tuesday, 49} 37! 4 4) 6 49) 49 97| Wednesday. 47; 38| 4 43) 7 53! 52

28! Tharsday, '§ 4515 401 5 15! 8 49 56 anal

PRINCE «EDWARD - ISLAND RAILWAY.

TIME TABLE NO. 8. WidTER ARRANSEMERT,

To come int ’ force MONDAY, DEC. 24, 77

TRAINS GOING WEST.

. =— . ; No. 5. No 7 rea" NS Piss ; STATIONS, ‘Express | Mixed a pire | P. M GEORGETOWN Dp. <.& | Cardigan * 9.62} “ ; ° 4 [Ar 10,25! _, Vanr ote j hear wow | Mount Stewart Janet! m \p.10.35 Reyalty Junetion © 11.46] P. M, ey P 4 . 4 ) e 2.49 CHARI: YTTETONW N am - iv i D ' fhe - .

Dp. 9. 00

Ro alty Junctio - 22 |. ee

North Wiltshire |< 49.22] 4.02

Hunter River | *a@aa; * 4.20

Bradalbane i7* see 5.00

County Line b © 33,28) * 35.10 P.M.

“ mai. Ge i }Ar. 12.45 | [Dp. 2.00) * 6.20

Kensington

SUMMERSIDE

Wellington 2.45 Port Hiil “* 62 O'Leary | ** 4.43 Albert« mm | uf 4 Tignish pe ** Gio

FRAINS GOING EAST.

—

se a Na Z No. 4 STATIONS. |Express | MIXxep. Pe reat lvoe. TIGNISH Dp. 8.00} ALBERTON ; ** 8,55) O’ Leary .** 9.52) Port Hill 1 21.07} Wellington : * See P.M, A. M. 2.35 SUMMERSIDE Dn. 2 101 Dp. §,35 Kensington | « 9 4g} ¢ 9.12 County Line | “2801: 4 9:50

| 3.40) * 10.10

** 4,20; ** 10.40

North Wiltshire 4.85) . 10.58

Rovalty Junction © 5.30) * 11.56 : Ar. 5.59

CHARLOTTETOWN, } 1D" 3'05| « 12.20

Brakalbane Hunter River

Loyalty Junction . 7 onl MT. STEWART Juuc. Dp. 3.50! Cardig “5.12! ardigan —~

GEOKGETOWN. Ar.

S BRANCH.

SOURI

Going East.

Going West.

| r STATIONS.| NO | STATIONS. cet a. 3 P.M. Souris iDp. 7.36||Mt. St’w’t Je: Dp. 3.50 Harmony | “ 7.55||Lot 40 © 4,26 St. Peter's ** 9,10||Morell ** 4.32 Morell | ** . 9.42 ist. Peter's * 5.05 Lot 40 4 9.48|| Harmony ** 6.20 Mt St’w’t Jnel Ar. 10. 25)/Souris Ar. 6.45

W. MeKECHNIE Sup’t. P. E. L, Railway.

C. J. BRYDGES, (jen. Superintendent Govt. Railways.

- Totiog to the Public!

‘(i P PLIES for the ‘‘ Soup Kitchen” will s reach the Committee if left at the Store of Mr. Alex. Horne, Corner of Queen and Fitzroy Streets.

Douations of money will be received by them | tacoug Dr. Dedd and Mr. J. Quirk, |

\. Food for the sick carefully prepared | by the Committee.

“Noy, 30, 1877.

CHARLOTTETOWN, PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND,

BOOK & JOB

PRINTING!

neatly and expeditiously executed, |

Povd'ss > lilo 32034 AT THE “EXAMINER” OFFICE

under the careful supervision of

J. W. MITCHELL.

We are now ina position to execute orders for

all kinds of Printing, such as LETTER HEADS, BILL HEADS, CIRCULARS, CARDS. PAMPULETS, DODGERS, HANDBILLS, POSTERS,

AND ALL KINDS OF

Bank and Legal Blanks,

&e. Ke. &e. AT MODERATE PRICES.

( Jie e

Ings Old Stand,

Corner Great Ge orge and Water Streets.

NORTH STAR

COFFEE AND LUNCH ROOMS

—AND—

OYSTER SALOON.

MRS. E. COOMBS, SUCCESSOR TO J. CARROL.

N EALS served at all hours of the day and z evening, at reduced rates.

@WYSTERS sent to all parts of the City at he very low price of

30 CENTS PER QUART?!

Also for sale by the Barrel, Bushel, or Peck to suit purchasers. Ch’town, Jan. 14, 1875—2 aw

| CARD TO THE PUBLIC

\ HILE taking this opportunity of thank

ing our humerous customers for the iiberai manner in which they have patron- ized

OUR NEW STUDIO,

we would inform them that we have now increased facilities for the production of first-class work, and are prepared to make PuoroGeaPpus of a Slyle and Quatily thal has never been before ailempted in this City.

We have on exhibition, at our Rooms, a large number of Photograps «of every variety, including the

BEAUTIFUL PHOTO - ENAMEL

he most beautifat style of Photograph known, possessing a sofiness and delicacy of coloring that has never beed equalled, rhis elegant picture has become deservedly popuar elscwhere, and cannot fail to be- come so here.

Though the fivish of our Photographs cannot be excelled, we would direct atter- tion to the beautitul

Glace Pictures

which we make. They possess a highly evamelled surface, and are practically indes- tructible, ynd will retain their freshness and beauty for any length of time, I[f they becomne soiled they can easily be cleaned, as they will not lose any of their beauty by being wet. ‘This valuadle quality, com- bined with their remarkable elegance, make them very suitable for presents; while the difficulty of their production will prevent them ever becoming so common as to lessen their value. Our patrons can have one or all of their Photos finished in this style—an advantage which cannot be obtained elsewhere.

We give special attention to making Groups of Families, Socielies, Schools, &c

Our pictures of children are sufficient evidence of our success ian this difficult branch of our art.

Our #NLARGEMENTS, finished in India Ink, Pastel, Crayon, Oil and Water Colors, have made a tavorable reputation for them selves throughout the Lower Provinces.

Parties intending to have Photograpbs made will find it to their advantage to sit early, as the number of our cu>;tomers makes some delay in the delivery of the Photos unatoidable. We prefer to have our sitters come by appointment,

Photographs can be obtained for less money elsewhere ; bul in this case we ask that quality be given the preference; as- suting tne public that they will flad our | eharges very moderate.

ROSS BROS,,

Cor. Queen and Dorchester Streets, opposite Connolly’s Bank.

18'78.

ites

i Era

FURNISHES MORE NEWS, FOR LESS MONEY THAN ANY UTHER PAPER IN THE PROVINCE.

It Contains Twenty-sight Columns,

nearly every one of which is in clowely set READING MATTER.

CONSIDER OUR TERMS:

SINGLE COPIES to the 3lst December, 1373—thirteen months—$%1.09 in ad- vance,

SIX COPIES to one address, or addressed separately, as desired, $5.50 in advance.

TEN COPIES to on address, or addresse,. separately, as desired, $9.00 in advanced

FIFTEEN COPIES to one address, or addressed separately, as required, $13.50 in advance.

TWENTY COPIES to one address, or

addressed separately, as desired. $17.00,

IN DULL TIMES

—OGOFRT THE—

CHEAPEST AND BRST |

is acknowledged to be ahead of any other paper in the Province in the item of

-

LOCAL NEWS.

and is always well filled with

Political, Shipping, Commercial and General Information.

The debates of the Local Legislature will be earefully and impartially given. Special tele-

rams and letters from ‘Our Own Ottawa Ccnteopgndiens” will contain everything of in- terest transpiring in the Dominion Parlia- ment.

A Good Story will be made a specialty.

———-:9:——-

The Daily Examiner

Will be sent to any part of the Province, the Dominion, United States or Great Britain on receipt of

For Six Months, - - - - - $2.50 For Three Months, 1.25 For One Month, - - - =: - 50

sx ADDRESS,

W. L. COTTON,

Manager Examiner Printing and Publishing Company. Ch’town, Dec, 6, 1877.

sides of this case, of

The Weekly lxaminer

|

Supreme Court.

Tue following is a short report of Mr. Longworth’s speech in the case of the Queen vs. ‘Vhomas McCloskey :— GENTLEMEN O¥ THE JuURY,—You have lis | tened for several days to the evidence on both | which I am sure you} must, by this time, be weary; and now that | the counsel for the defence has spoken, it is ! my duty to address you-.on behalf of the Crown. | In doing so I shall endeavor to present the | facts as clearly and concisely as possible, and detain you no longer than the necessity of the | case demands. In referring to the able ad- (lress for the defence to which you have lis- tened, | am sorry to observe that the learned counsel attempted to create the impression that the Crown law oificers were e .deavoring to stir up religious feeling during the progress of this trial and to make you believe that the prosecution has sprung from, and is conducted n, the interests of the Orange Association who are taking advantage of a Government prosecution to be severe towards their Catholic besthren: In this course [ will not attempt to follow him, for this is no time, nor is it a case, for arousing sectional feeling or sensation, but will merely state that, pursuing a different line of conduct, the Crown law officers have endeavored to perform their duty aw the neces- sity of the case required. To siir up religious feeling in a Crown prosecution is no part of our duty as counsel ; and I will leave you to judge if, during the progress of the tral, my col leagues or myself have deserved such an im- putation. Does the learned counsel suppose that if the parties indicted were Orangemen the officers of the Crown would not pursue the same course as they are doing now? This prosecution came before this Court in the ordinary way, and the Attorney General, by taking any other course than the one he has pursued, would prove recreant to his duty and unit for bis position, It is unjust Suen to say that this prosecution is conducted in the interest of the Orange Association. Although it be true that some of the witnesses for the prosecution are Orangemen and the traversers are Catholics, that should be no reason for not eutering calmly into the case and conducting it without religious teeling, Nor should the fact of beingan Orangeman preclude any person rom receiving the protection of this Court, nor be a pretext for denying him justice. No, I trust the day will never come when a class would be thus proscribed, but that the in- terests of all alike will ever be the care of the jury, whom we deservedly recognize as the guardians of Public Right. but, gentlemen, the case before you is not of areligious or party character, bt; one of still greater moment and affecting the public welfare. Has wrong been committed ?--peace been destroyed ?— lives imperriled ? are the important questions submitted for your consideration. Ii. such violation of law would be tolerated, how serious would be the result in all evilized communi ties—lives and property, and institutions, would be in danger. They must be protected, and it is your duty to show that the aegis of the law is competent to do so. The learned counsel for the defence spoke with eloquence and vigor ; but I would ask you whether, in the course of his address, he went fairly through the evidence or only dwelt upon the testimony of one or two witnesses who swore strongly in favor of McCloskey. Such treat- ment of evidence may suit the purpose of the defence ; but itis your duty and mine to ex- amine both sides of the case, and thereby en- deavor to arrive at the truth. Then, the ques- tion is, whether those parties indicted are guilty of an attack upon peaceful citizens and of taking the law into their own hands to re- sent real or imaginary wrongs, Whether, in assembling fin front of the Urange hall and shouting, and throwing stones, on the 12th of last July, they are guiljy of riotous conduct— andif so, was thetraverser at the Bar, Thos. Mc- Closkey, one of the parties ; and as such, is he amenableto justice, The counsel for the defence have taken as one ground, and have endeavored to maintain it, that the firing of shots by the Orange Association was the cause of the dis- turbance and brought about the throwing of stones. On this, in opening the case, Mr, Palmer dwelt at considerable length, as well as on the great wrong of which the Orangemen, by using fire arms, were guilty, and promised to bring evidence to show that John Scott, one of the Orangemen, fired the first shot on that evening. While | admit that no mai is justi- fied in using firearma except for protection, | submit that firing the shots from the Hall has very little to do with the case, and can be con- sidered no justitication for riotous conduct on the part of the crowd on the street, 1 refer yeu to the decision of Mr. Justice Peters in a former prosecution, who gave it as his opinion that firing a pistol could not be considered a violation of law, if done for protection and to intimidate a crowd. In view of that decision, it will be for you to say whether or not the shots were fired on that evening for self-pro- tection or to intimidate the crowd. A John Scott firing the first shot, 1 would ask you, has the evidence borne out such a charge? You have heard Scott swear positively that he neither fired a shot nor had a pistol in his hand that day, and when you put that evidence azainst that of witness s for the defence wlo appeared as if they had agreed to swear to the

As to

A ee te eS ee Rn ne ee Se ee a ee ee ee ee

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1878.

NO, 243

fee! satisfied that in dealing with-this case you

will sweep ail such matters from your consid eration, and act, not with a view to the secur- ity or interest of any body of persons, but the dischargeof your duty as pradent mien in the in terests of society. Ji anonymous jetters have been written to the counsel for the defense they should have given evidence of such, and brought the guilt home to the parties; but it is irregular to refer to them as Mr. Hodgson has dene, for | am persuaded they were written by no one connected with this case, Mr. Hodg- son says we have failed to prove our case, and asks the reason for not producing on this occa- sion John Moore and Daniel Stewart, two of our principal witnesses in the former trial. We did not call them simply because it was «n- necessary todoso. He also asks, when referring to the anonymous letters received by the coun- sel for the defense, why no Orangemen were called as witnesses after he put the question to the witness McKenzie if he knew anything about the letter; but our answer is, that seven Orangemen were a‘terwards examined as wit- nesses, none of whom, however, did Mr. Hodg- son think it prudent to question about the let- ter. Now, gentlemen, as to the question, was there a riot? (Here Mr. Longworth referred to the evidence of Stanley and Sergeant Allen.) On Mr, Stanley and Sergeant Allen Mr. Hodg- son was particularly severe; but aide avoids the latter’s evidence about the shots, which evidence we have seen has been borne out by other witnesses. In referring to? Mr. Stanley, who, as you are aware, swore ta the parties engaged in the riot, Mr. Hodgson, mstead of entering into the character of the evidence attacks the witness himself, andithe paper on which on the evening of the distur bance he wrote the names of the parties en- gagec. in it. But the counsel descriptions of the witness and his paper hava nothing to do with the case, and you have to take Stanley’s evi dence which you have hevrd given that the parties whose names were written on the pa- per were engaged 1a throwing stones at. the Hall, and shoutiug to haul down the flag. Now, gentlemen, can you account for the con duct of those parties assembling at the Orange Hall, and there remaining for an hour or more, shouting, throwing stones, and destroying the windows—in any way consistent with their innocence, Were they acting im concert in de- stroying windows, attempting to haul down the Orange flag and insulting the officers of pece>, (Here defendants Ccuasel replied that they were shot at.) The learned counsel says they were shot at; but the evidence does not show that such was the case. Did not their crtes and shouts import unanimity of faction? It is immaterial to say they were shot at for a3 I have already observed even then they would not be justified in taking the law into their own hands to remedy their own wrongs or act the arbiters of justice. The very act of attacking the Orange flag the law wilk not tolerate, for it was under the protection of law so long as the Orange Association is recognized and sanctioned by law; and the legal right of the order the learned counsel were silent, Even if shots had been tired from the Hall be- fore stones were thrown those who fired them were not violating the law as laid down by the learne 1 judge in a former trial, and, therefore, those engaged im the disturbance can not from any such admission, obtain any justification for their conduct. Lut we can prove that the Orangemen were not the agressors; that the disturbance was commenced before any shots were fired from the Hall. :

(Here Mr. Longworth read the evidence of several witnesses for the Crown.)

I refer you to the testimony of nine witnesses showing that the attack on McKenzie, near the door of the hall, was the commencement of the ‘‘muss.” McKenzie, as you have heard, was in the act of crossing the street wearing, as one witness said, his Orange scarf under his coat, and out of sixteen witnesses for the defence only one swears that he had the scarf in bis hand. That witness would not swear that he shook the scarf. McKenzie was struck shortly after leaving the hall door by Sweeny and some other person not known. This assault we have shown was the first act of violence on that evening, and is the index of the whole case, and shows the object for which the crowd had assembled. Again, shortly after this, whea McKenzie and Daniel Stewart came out of the hall they were saluted with shouts ‘*‘ Here come the beaver hats,” and were immediately attacked by the crowd, Did this not import unanimity of ace tion? Witnesses for the crown swear that the shots were fired after the disturbance com- menced and McKenzie was struck down. And although a great deal has been said about the shots being fired which might lead you to:be- lieve that the stones were thrown in self defence and therefore justifiable. Leaving out the question whether the firing was justi- fiable or any justification for the action of the crowd in smashing the windows, let us ex- amine this ground of the defence. was given in evidence that the first shot was fired |trom Quirk’s gangway, and some were of opinion that this was the signal for attack. You have also heard it sworn by Laurie that the man who fired the second shot was the same who struck McKenzie—the maa who fired that shot could have'beer no friend of McKenzie. As tothe first shot we have the evidence of Newson, Dawson and others that it was fired from Mr. Quirk’s gangway, and

same statement, I think you will conclude that Mr. Palmer has failed in his attempt to prove this part of the defense. They also stated that

roll, and brought a witness to prove that he saw Diamond struck, but not by Carroll. They did not know at the last trial who struck Dia- mond, but now they do, although they refuse to produce the person. On this evidence are you prepared“to throw out the statement of Mr. Diamond, when the law says you are to believe the man who swears positively to have been struck. What does Mr. Palmer mean by stating that on this oceasion they could pre- sent a stronger case and give stronger evidence than on aftormer trial? I hope no meaning lurked in that expression to the effect that the jury are not doing their duty, for you have

been selected with great care and are old enough to know the responsibility of your position.

You have to deal with the evidence, and that

only, laying aside all party feeling and outside

issues. With attacks of newspapers and an-

onymous letters you have nothing to do, and I

Mr. Diamond was under a misapprehension in | swearing that he was struck by Martin Car-| have endeavored to support by evidence; but

we find on referring to Mr, Quirk’s evidence _ that be does not deny but that such might be ithe case.

Then this is the ground which the defence

have they done so. Has Mr. Palmer succeed—

ed in proving what he stated in his opening ad-

dress that no pistol shots were fired by the crowd that day, and that pistol shots were firca from the Hail before any attack was made on MacKenzie. We have brought ten witnesses to prove that the pistol shots were fired by the crowd. You wlll see then that here the de- fence fails, and if they intended to find justi- fication for their conduct from the firing of the shots they have put the saddle on the wrong horse. I will now refer to the evidence to see whether there is sufficient to satisfy a jury that the windows were broken before any shots were fired. You have heard the witness who swore that the stones were thrown before any shots

came from the Hall. Dr. Jenkins swore that

he heard the cracking of glassbeforeany shots ;

aud Mr. Griffith, a witness for the defence,

admits that some of the stones first throwy

Sts dein ee

aa

<A I SC ENN Ne RET ct tae Gt

an

9

fred

a Sais

es 5

=

)

sane sR gl

cole es a ae ea aaa ae WE oe amie

ee a i oe ee Fe ee eee

£

Spear:

aa a ee

outer

oe Se wet Ok 2

enc Rec ibis ili

ee a ake

ew

yee

. a