The Sun.
London, England, 1867-03-30 00:00:00

EXAMINA.TION OF EX-GOVERNOR EYRE.

MARKET DRAYTON, Friday.
In anticipation that this would be the last day of
the Market Drayton investigation, and the magis-
trates would to-day deliver their decision, either
committing the ex-Governor to Salop Gaol on the
charge of being accessory to murder or relieving him
from the charge, there was a more than ordinary
pressure at the doors of the court some time before
the hour fixed for resuming the proceedings, but
the accommodation within being limited, and the
police firm, there was no inconvenient crowding
indoors. Mr. Eyre arrived at 10 o'clock, and
was followed by his counsel. The magistrates took
their seats shortly after 10 o'clock ; the only seats
unoccupied at that time being on the bench.
The magistrates on the bench were Sir Baldwin
Leighton (chairman), Mr. Egerton Harding, Mr.
P. Broughton, Mr. J. Taylor, and Col. G. S. Hill.
Counsel for the prosecutor Mr. Stephen and Mr.
J. H. Payne, instructed by Messrs. Shaen and Ros-
coe; counsel for the defence Mr. Giffard, Q.C.,
and Mr. Poland, instructed by Mr. Rose.
On the opening of the court,
Mr. Stephen, addressing the bench, said that before
his learned friend Mr. Giffard addressed them it
might be convenient for him to call the attention
of the Court to the Articles of War, which he had
not by him when he addressed the Court before.
We would refer them to section No. 3, No. 106 and
107 of the Articles of War, on courts-martial and the
constitution of courts-martial. General courts-martial
by No. 106, were not to be of a less number of officers
than seven, but in certain circumstances beyond the
seas, where a larger number could not be obtained,
courts-martial of three were authorised. General or
detachment courts-martial might sentence officers or
soldiers to death. Neither of those sentences, how-
ever, applied to this case. He also cited sections 115
and 117 of the Articles of War, and section 2 of the
Mutiny Act, which defines the classes of persons
subject to the act—officers, non-commissioned offi-
cers, privates, suttlers, camp followers, &c., none of
these classes being of the position of G. W. Gordon.
Mr. Giffard, Q.C., then, amid a deep silence, rose
to address the bench. He said he bad the honour to
appear before them, with his friend, Mr. Poland, on
behalf of Mr. Edward John Eyre. He usod this
word in its nearest meaning, and in no idle form of
speech. Before he proceeded to discuss the questions
which arose on this inquiry he thought it would be
better that he should clear away what he could not
but think had been a great misunderstanding on
the part of his learned friend of the question before
them, and he was sure the bench would understand
that in discussing what the bench were trying he
would not in the slightest suggest that he should be
the judge of what the duty of the bench was, his ob-
ject only being to destroy two mischievous fallacies
which had run through the whole of his learned
friend's case in regard to the duties of the bench. If
his learned friend was right in the construction of
the duties of the bench in investigating a charge of
murder, the bench would become alternately either
a register office to record any accusation that any
person might think proper to make, or a college of
doctrinaires discussing some nice questions of law

for the purpose of amusement. He ventured to say
that in neither the one capacity nor the other was
he now addressing them. If he were to do so, the
whole of these proceedings from the commencement
to the close would be nothing more than a solemn
farce ; for if neither his learned friend nor himself
had to do more than to convince the bench that
difficult questions of law might arise, and, there-
fore, the Bench were to hold their hands and not
decide ; and if, when important questions of fact
arose, the bench were not to exercise their own
judgment, what was the use of a bench of magis-
trates ? Any person might at once proceed to put
the criminal law in force. He had always supposed
that the object of a preliminary investigation was
that in order to prevent, if possible, private malice
from assuming the form of public justice any one
must go before a b.uch of magistrates, and that the
bench should consider and determine whether there
were grounds for subjecting any person to the
angui4h.and anxiety which must always result from
a charge of a criminal offence. He was sure his

earned friend did not mean to be disrespectful to

the Bench ; but, analysed to its true extent, was
not this, he asked, a disrespectful mode of treating a
legal tribunal ? But he was not surprised that his
learned friend should have taken this course; know-
ing, as he well did, what the evidence was both on

Lie question of law and of fact, he, on the part of

the prosecution, did not dare to take any other
course. Knowing what must be the ultinute deci-
sion of this case, he said—" Only let me suggest that
difficult questions of law may arise, then your func-
tions are gone ; let me suggest that questions of fact
exist which may be proper for a jury to determine,
and in that case also your functions are gone." His

learned friend had come to that court and made a
speech, and expected the Bench would, sic volo sic
jubeo, commit Mr. Eyre on this charge. He had
said there were two questions-1, questions of law ;
2, questions of fact ; but he would not lead him (Mr.
Giffard) into a discussion of what the law was,
though, protesting as he did that he did not agree
with his learned friend, he stood there as the guar-
dian of Mr. Eyre's honour, and if by any technical
phraseology or by any appeal to points of law he
could succeed in inducing them to dismiss the charge
against Mr. Eyre, without any reference to the
grave charge behind which was involved in it, he
should decline to do so ; he should refuse to obtain
a dismissal on any such ground. Mr. Eyre was

there ready and anxious to meet an investigation
of the facts, and that was the issue which he, on
his part, was there to challenge. He should, how-
ever, take a brief review of the law as laid down by
his learned friend, and should prove from that
that there was not the slightest pretence for the
charge—he would use no epithet--the charge that
had been made against Mr. Eyre. He then referred
to the case of Governor Wall, which had been cited
by Mr. Stephen, and the opinion of Chief Baron
M'Donald upon it, in connection with the speech of
the then Attorney-General (afterwards Lord Ellen-
borough) upon it. He quoted the learned judge's
definition of malice, and went on to say that if there
was in this case apparent a prima facie case of ma-
lice he had not another word to say ; but if the
Bench saw, as he believed they would see, that there
was not a pretenc;e for that allegation, then it was
enough for him to say that in this as in any other
case the consideration which would lead the Bench
to decide whether they should send the case for trial
or not was the fact whether there was a reasonable
belief that they had before them facts which would
warrant a committal. He would venture to say
that the Bench would not be swayed in any parti-
cular direction because they were urged by impor-
tunity or covertly threatened with persecution or
abuse if they did not decide the case in the way in
which they were wished. He then proceeded to dis-
cuss in detail the evidence that had been brought
before the Court, and said he was confident in be-
ing able to show that there was not the slightest
pretence for the charge that had been made. His
learned friend had been telling the Bench what was
his definition of murder; but though, perhaps, the
Bench might not think this was a compliment to
them, he thought he might say that that the Bench
knew what was the definition of murder at a time
when he and his learned friend were ia their cradles.
(Laughter on the Bench.) He should leave that and
approach at once the facts of the case, and would
appeal at once to the Bench on the part of Mr. Eyre
that if they could find in these facts evidence of
malice on his part they should at once commit him
for trial. First, as to the Mutiny Act, which had
been produced that morning, that had nothing to do
with the case. After some remarks on the way in which
the case had been got up, he said Mr. Eyre would,

through him, maintain that the death of G. W. Gordon
was necessary. He pointed to the fact of the rebellion,
to the proportion of black population to white-
-13,000 whites to 330,000 black and 80,000 coloured
inhabitants; the nature of the population, --ex-
citable, and in a nature savage ; and then he came
to a consideration of the events of the month of
October, 1865 ; and first he came to consider the
events antecedent to the rebellion of October, 1865.
There had not been au effort to show, notwithstand-

ing the exercise of the most malignant feeling, that
Mr. Eyre bad stated a word that was untrue. At
present he took it that Mr. Eyre's statements,
raked out as they had been for the purposes of the
prosecution, were true, Mr. Eyre in his despatches
described the comparatively prosperous and loyal
and contented condition of the island in 1864, when
he made a tour of the island. At that time he found
a general system of content and happiness prevail-
ing. In July Mr. Eyre had stated the existence of
disaffection, and this was corroborated by those
parts of the blue-book evidence which had been
forced in by him. Those statements manifested
that for some unexplained reason a movement was
known to be going on among the blacks. From
every class of persons in the island reports were sent
to Mr. Eyre of the most alarming character, and
there could be no doubt there was a feeling among
the blacks likely to break out into a revolt. Mr.
Eyre therefore thought proper to take precautions
which showed both his wisdom and his bravery.
That there was a rising contemplated he took it for
granted by the general concurrence of facts. Pro-
bably the month of August—the Ist of August—
was fixed for the rising, but the measures taken by
Mr. Eyre averted the danger, and on those measures
being taken some person—be did not say who—ap-
peared to have postponed the stratagems of the
insurgents until October. It was clear that in Sep-
tember—the intervening month—great uneasiness
existed. The rainy season came on, and the first
symptom of the postponed rebellion, as be ven-
tured to call it, appeared. Then it broke out.
The learned counsel next referred to Baron
Kettelhodt's letter to Mr. Eyre, detailing his con-
victions and the outbreak. On that letter being
received by Mr. Eyre efforts were made to send
assistance. It came too late. On the 11th of
October the rebellion broke out, and here he would

call the attention of the Bench to the mode in which

this case had been got up. One would suppose that
if for the sake of public justice the prosecutors
wanted to bring a criminal to justice, the question
arising whether it was a real rebellion or riot ; if
these persons who were prosecutors knew that was
the issue to be tried, he should have thought that if

there was the least pretence for honour or fair deal-

ing they would proceed to prove the facts. If they
meant to say this was no rebellion, but a mere dis-
turbance, as his learned friend called it in the first
instance, what was thereto prevent this non -existent
body, the Jamaica Committee, from proving it?
They had not called one witness to prove it. They
had carefully excluded every witness from whom he
(Mr. Giffard) could extract that confession, and they
had done it deliberately to murder ➢lr. Eyre. He
charged them with that; he deliberately charged
them, and he thought lie could prove it. his learned
friend had stated that the deliberations at the Court
house had been much exaggerated. Where did he
obtain that inforination from ? An exaggeration was
alleged as to the report of the case of Lieut. Hall in
Mr. Eyre's despatches.

Mr. Stephen here referred to theblue-book, point-
ing to Mr. Eyre's reply to the question in reference
to the case of Mr. llall and the treatment of his
dead body.
Mr. Giffard resumed—Although no doubt it was
a terrible account of what was donetothe dead body,
he (Mr. Giffard) had more to do with what was
done with the living. If that was the only point in
which exaggeration could be charged, what could
Mr. Eyre know of that ? He reported it as what he
had been informed of, and not as being a fact with-
in his own knowledge. Mr. Giffard proceeded to
quote from the passages referred to in the extracts

from the despatches readyesterday as to the burning
of people alive, cutting out a man's tongue, &c.
Mr. Stephen here calling upon Mr. Giffard to
read the whole of the passage referred to,

Mr. Giffard did so ; but he intimated that he
should henceforth follow his own course, and not
accept the dictation of his learned friend as to the
manner in which he should conduct his case, trust-
ing the Bench would believe that he would not mu-
tilate any passage, or quote it unfairly. " The
women and children," it was said, " were spared."
That was the passage which his learned friend wished
him to read. lle had real it, and would add that,
instea I of this being a good trait in the proceedings
of the rebels, these women and children were saved
from death for a worse fate. The learned counsel
then referred to the Blue-book, pointing to the evi-
dence which showed that applications had been re-
ceived from numerous places for troops at the out-
break of the rebellion, and that he could not satisfy
these demands in many cases until after the procla-
mation of the atnnesy. The Volunteers were ineffi-
cient, having been but recently embodied. The
learned counsel then invited the attention of the
Bench to the condition of things prior to the out-
break of the rebellion as shown from the evidence,
and the uncontradicted statements in the despatches,
and said that the island was at that time like a barrel
of gunpowder with a lighted match ready to be ap-
plied to it, which might scatter the whole constitu-
tion of the country to the winds. He would call the
attention of the Bench to the map which had been
handed in by the prosecution.

The Chairman said they had no map before them.
Mr. Stephen said he had produced a map, which
was considered as not evidence.

Mr. Giffard continued—The evidence of what
was said had been put in, but that which was in-
corporated with it, and virtually formed part of it,
was withheld. That was entirely of the character
of the whole proceedings of the prosecution. He
went on to maintain that the apprehension of G.
W. Gordon at the place where he was was necessary.
Was that contradicted ?

Mr. Stephen said he could have proved that the
information given was untrue, but that evidence
would not have been legal.

Mr. Giffard argued that it would have been com-
petent for Mr. Stephen to prove that. The Bench
would say whether he was right. He maintained
that every act of Mr. Eyre might have been proved
to have been niala fide, if it really were so ; but no
attempt at that kind of proof had been made. They
must consider that there was one pressing necessity
for help throughout,hthe whole island of which Mr.
Eyre was the Governor. He next came to the ques-
tion, as it had been put, of the necessity for the cap-
ture, trial, and subsequent execution of Mr. G. W.
Gordon. His learned friend had been good enough
to tell Mr. Eyre that he might have kept Mr. Gor-
don as a hostage. He (Mr. Giffard) would venture
to say that Mr. Eyre was probably even a better
judge than his learned friend as to the necessities of
the case ; and it was, no doubt, much more easy to
judge of what was right when sitting quietly in
Market Drayton than in the midst of a rebellion.
But even governors were not infallible, and he
might and that other persons were not infallible
either. He maintained that the trial and execution
of Gordon were necessary to maintain the authority
of the Queen, and to protect the lives and honour
of her Majesty's loyal subjects. It had been said that
technically Mr. Gordon could not have been ar-
rested ann tried where and when the trial and exe-
cution took place. He maintained that if martial
law had not prevailed, and if Mr. Gordon had been
taken and summarily hanged, his death would have
been justifiable under the circumstances. He con-
sidered Dr. Fiddes had disgraced himself by juggling
and quibbling with evidence, as he hail done in his
evidence yesterday, as to the residence of Gordon,
in order to evade the truth. The objection that a
man could screen himself from martial law by step-
ping over the boundary of the proclaimed district
was a mere quibble. If a man committed an offence
in Shropshire, and got away into another county,
was it sail that he could not be fetched out of that
other county into Shropshire and tried for the
offence ? Then Mr. Eyre had said that Gordon was
hiding. Ile (Mr. Giffard) thought there was some
evidence that he was hiding. At all events there
was no evidence that he was not. Then it had been
said that Mr. Gordon was ill, that he was " threat-
ened with pulmonary consumption." Perhaps that
might be fairly said of all in that room in such wea-
ther as we hail lately. But usually if a patient
was' ill his ordinary medical attendant waited upon
him ; but they had no evidence from Dr. Fiddes
that he had attended him for some time pre-
viously. It had been proved that a policeman
had endeavoured to apprehend Gordon with a war-
rant, but had not been able to find him ; and then
Dr. Fiddes came there to tell them that he found him

at once when he went to look for him. No doubt
he as a friend had good information from a relative
of Gordon's whereabouts, which was not available
by the authorities. It was said that Mr. Eyre had
gone out of his way to personally apprehend Gor-
don. The facts (which he reviewed) did not support
that statement, but it mattered little whether he had

personally apprehended him or not. It was alleged that
the court-martial was a mockery; that Mr. Eyre bad
sent him to a tribunal already prejudged, and that he
had conspired to put thin man to death. If that was
the charge, it was a vile--a false one. Let them not
compliment a man, at the same time telling him he
was vile and false. A more base, more wretched,

more hideous piece of treachery than this that
was charged was never perpetrated. " What !
you, Mr. Eyre who have been complimented on your
great bravery—you ? Why did not you execute
your own mischief yourself ? Why did you not
shoot the man through the head at once yourself,
and not go through the miserable mockery of send-
ing him to a tribunal which you had already biased
against him, and as working your mischief by the
bands of others ?" Was there, he asked the bench,
a pretence for this accusation, which, if true, would
make the three officers of the court-martial a vile
trio of conspirators. If there were any grounds
for this charge, let them be produced. It was true
that Mr. Eyre approved all that had been done, but
when it was alleged that he had interfered with the
prerogative of the military in doing what they
thought proper for the suppression of the rebellion
(excepting that he did not interpose his prerogative
of mercy), then his friend had been mistaken. Mr.
Eyre had no more to do with it than any other person
in that court. But this was the argument which
had been made use of in order to make the death of
G. W. Gordon a murder, that Mr. Eyre might be
made amenable to the charge of being an accessory.
His learned friend had spoken of his trial and sen-
tence as a punishment for a past offence, and not as
a measure of repression. He (Mr. Giffard) main-
tained, on the contrary, that this was a necessary
act for the suppression of the rebellion. Mr. ES re
had, as he had stated, " after six hours' search into
the evidence," come to the determination that there
was enough before him to warrant his putting G.
W. Gordon upon his trial, and he had therefore
directed his trial. His learned friend had said that
this court-martial was a colourable action to carry
out a foregone decision. He (Mr. Giffard) main-
tained, on the contrary, that this was a real and
substantial action, and not a colourable action. To
say that it was a colourable transaction was as ir-
reconcilable with the character either of Mr. Eyre
or the gallant officer to whom he communicated his
decision as it was irreconcilable with the facts.
After some further remarks on this part of the sub-
ject, the learned sergeant went on to say that he as-
sumed now that he had shown that there had been
an intended rising of the blacks in August, and said
it was the grossest accusation against the officers of
the court-martial after the evidence that had been
brought before them— the placard and oral evidence
--to say that they had not been fully justified in
the decision which they had arrived at. He would
maintain that it had been shown that this was a re-
gular plotted, planned rebellion, and which, if not
checked, would have eventually overwhelmed the
whole island. The court-martial had found Gordon
guilty. He need not refer to the circumstances of
the trial. A witness who was present (the reporter
Lake) admitted that the trial was open and fair and
patient. He formed that opinion, he told them, at
the time, and he still held it. It had been shown
that Gordon had been looked upon as the leader of
all who would join his standard, and that being the
condition of things at that time it was a strange
thing to say that it was not necessary to put this
man Gordon to death. Stress had been laid on the
fact that Mr. Eyre had written to England that the
rebellion was crushed ; but he objected to these
words being taken alone and without their context;
read with their context they had a different mean-
ing. His despatch was written on Oct. 20. It stated,
—" In the lately disturbed districts the rebellion is
crushed ;" but it added that in others it was not,and
might break out again at any moment. In another
place he added his opinion that " Jamaica has been
and still is iu the greatest jeopardy." Proceeding
with this part of his subject, and especially referring
to the statement on the part of the negroes of their
intention to do what the llaytians had done, the
learned counsel pictured to the mind's eye the con-
sequences of a successful rebellion, the carnival of
lust and rapine that would ensue, and the conse-
quences upon the defenceless white women of the
island, and here he became quite overpowered with
the ir.tenseness of his feelings, and was obliged to
pause in his address. He was about to resume his
address, and had apologised to the bench for this
exhibition of feeling, when
The Chairman suggested that it being now two
o'clock it would be a convenient time for a short
adjournment.

Accordingly, the Court adjourned for half an
hour.

Mr. Giffard then resumed his address, which
lasted in all for nearly seven hours, and at the con-
clusion was greeted with a burst of cheering, which
the officers with difficulty repressed.
After consultation, the chairman, Sir Baldwin
Leighton, said--We have very anxiously considered
the evidence which we have before us, and we have
listened with the attention which they so well merit
to the speeches and observations which have been
made by the learned counsel on either side, and we
have now to announce that the evidence which has
been adduced before us does not raise in our minds
a strong or probable presumption of the guilty
malice imputed to Edward John Eyre in the alleged
murder of George William Gordon, and we are con-
fident that if the same evidence was brought before
a jury a verdict of acquittal would be recorded.

This was received with a burst of cheers, which
the chairman, by the most urgent entreaties, could
with difficulty repress.
The Chairman continued—lt now only remains
for us to direct the discharge of Edmund John
Eyre. Mr. Eyre, you are discharged.
Mr. Eyre rose and bowed, but said not a word.
Lord De Blaquiere, who has been with him, cor-
dially shook him by the hand, and the ex-Governor,
with much feeling, thanked both Mr. Hardinge
Giffard and Mr. Poland for their exertions ; the
latter learned counsel having been most assiduous
in helping the case. The large crowd cheered most
lustily on the decision being announced, and so
high did feeling go that the church bells rang a
merry peal of congratulation immediately after the
bench broke up.