, 1876-11-11

soners, and that they should be discharged on
their own recognizances, a course which was
followed in q large number Of cases. Amongst
the cases to which special attention was drawn,
was the case of the Crown Versus AUSTIN.
This has been one of Messrs. HENNEssY's and
SEMPER's pet prosecutions, as will be seen
from the important place assigned to it in the
Parliamentary Blue Books. Master AUSTIN is
a son of the Rev. DR., AUSTIN, the Delegate,
and is a lad about IA years Of age. The
charge against him was a ~fel0niOus attempt to
murder a discharged black soldier named
CLARKE, and Mr.. SEMPER devoted several days
to his duties as Crown prosecutor in the magis.
terial courts with a view to making capital Of
the circumstances The Inspector. General of
Police considered the trial of more Importance
than a riot which was going on in the parish,
and neglected the latter to attend the Magis-
terial Court where this case and a counter
charge against CLARKE for larceny, were being
heard. His Honor characterised the prosecu-
ton as an cutter mistake" and informed the
Grand Jury that he should " not be dissatisfied
if they saw their way to cut both bills" a
course which was subsequently pursued. 1t
must have been Notifying to Messrs. HENNEs-
sly and SEMPER to find a case of which they
had made so much capital melt into thin air.
The conviction Of the ringleaders Of the riots
has in every case been followed by a heavy
punishment. The case which excited the
greatest interest was that Of the notorious
MORRIS, on which there was q great deal of
discussion or legal technicalities. Mr.. MoYLAN,
doing his best for his client, and the Attorney
General displaying q gentle languor in the
prosecution. At some stages In the argument,
the Court was left somewhat in doubt as to
whether Mr.. SEMPGR was prosecuting or
defending the prisoner. The result has been
that Morris has been sentenced to two years
Imprisonment but admitted TO bail until his
appeal to the Windward Circuit Court has been
heard. Should the Police Bill that the Coun.
Gil have in hand become law we fully expect
to see Mr.. MORRIS become a Sub-InSDector.
lie has strong claims which will not be ignored
under the existing regime. If we have Sub
Inspector STROUD, why not Sub-Inspector
MORRIS The most exciting incident in con.
nection with the trials was an application, made
by Mr.. MOYLAN on the opening of the Court
on the second day of the hearing, for q writ
for the summary arrest of Mrs. DILLON, the
prOpTletreSs of the Globe, for contempt Of
Court, and for prejudicing the jury against the
prisoner. MORRIS swore that copies of the
Globe had been circulated amongst the Jury.
The whole affidavit was simply a base fabrica-
'Vu CUuUOCleQ III the interest," OF me prisoner.
We refer our readers to the Globe of 10th ipst.
for the article which was charged in the ahida-
Wit. His Honor refused the application.
Another pet case Of Mr.. HENNEssY's, the in
diofment against Mr.. PARIS and other gem
tlomen at Mount Prospect, fell through for
want Of evidence. We are informed that 1t
came out In evidence that the man BOYCE
whom Mr.. PARIS was charged with a feloni-
Gus intent to murder with a shot from a
revolver, never received a pistol shot at all, the
wound in the leg being proved to have been
inflicted with some pointed instrument, proba.
bly, with one of the iron "pickers' used in
blasting stones, with which a number of the
rioters who attacked the house were known to
have been armed. The case of Mr.. WHlTE-
HEAD, SIR GRAHAM BRIGGs' Manager, for
melting, and the rioters for conducting the
assault on Messrs. PARIS, DEANE and others,
did not come on, Mr. SEMPER having entered
a mol. pros. The case of the Crown verSus
HINKsoN was also ignored by the Grand Jury.
a good deal of discussion has been excited by
this case and The action of the Grand Jury is
strongly condemned by popular opinion. 1t is
hardly Justlhable to condemn the action of the
Jury without knowing the nature of the evi.
dence, and We have no reason to doubt that
the verdict was a conscientious one. There
IS no doubt that In q case, out of which capital
would under any circumstances have been
made, it would have been satisfactory to have
heard the evidence in the case before a Petit
Innr M IL.