, 1866-09-14

ONs
distinctions-you tell another, with refer
ence to some object he wants to achieve,
If you want to do it quickly, tbs is the
sway ;'' but your friend has still to con
slider whether he has a right to take that
way. Mr.. Eyre assumed that he had a
right and in this defence of himself
there is still the same assumption. Thus,
with respect to the Gordon trial, lis eff
fectiyeness is his defence Of it. "In my
"opinion the prompt trial and execution
"of G.. w. Gordon had more effect in pre-
evening further raisings in other parish
"es than any Of the steps taken by the
"Government. Mr.. Gordon was
regarded by the negroes generally
~"lhroughout the island as an Obeahman
sis by his Immediate neighbours-as
.'all-powerful and beyond the reach Of
'ordinary jurisdiction his trial and exc
"cution removed this delusion." The
statement assumes that whatever was
necessary 10 the Governors idea for ac-
complishing the greatest amount OF des-
patch in the suppression of this rebellion
was absolutely necessary, and that what
ever that step was it was his duty TO
take it.. In the same temper the ex-GO-
vernon adds, "Mr. Gordon was the prox-
climate occasion Of the insurrection, Of
'phe cruel massacre Of particular indlvi-
1'duals, whom he regarded as his person
"al enemies, Gad therefore he suffered just
aIv." But whether Mr.. Gordon was NOR
ally guilty or not is not the question, was
there evidence of his completely in this
particular outbreak and the crimes con-
nected with il? Mr.. Eyre seems 10
think that trial before a Court-martial
changes the nature Of the evidence upon
which conviction should take place; and
that whereas in an ordinary Court Of
Law there must be evidence of the par
ticular crime, at a Court martial it is
only necessary TO have evidence Of the
general intention and objects of the ac-
cused. But, whatever technical LITER
ences there may be IN the rules Of the
two Courts, the nature Of the evidence
they require is substantially the same,
and il is just as wrong for a Court-mar-
tial as it is for a Criminal Court 10 hang
q man upon suspicion. The object Ola
quicker access to justice, not to super
sede the tests of justice.
The Ex-Governor, then, has, in his de-
fence of himself against the Report of
the Commission, mistaken the point at
issue. We do not dispute the despatch
with which the Jamaica rebellion was
suppressed; but if we were to- admit
even that the despatch with which it
was suppressed was due to those very
steps for which Mr.. Eyre has been tried,
and that without The execution of Cor
don it could not have been put down SO
promptly, the admission would go no
way to answer the charge against Dir.
Eyre. He may have attained a great
public object more speedily in this way.
but the question still is-had he a right
to take this way to attain it7 It'll quite
possible that another person in Mr.. Eyre's
Situation might have escaped his faults Of
government and escaped his punishment,
and yet been vastly Mr.. Eyre's inferior
in talent, in energy, in public spirit, and
disinterestedness !; and it is quite possi-
BILE that under such an officer the Jamaica
insurrection might have dragged along
indefinitely. There are some Governors
with whom in such an emergency the
first question would have been, allow
ssshall r save myself9" and the second