TRIAL OF FENIAN PRISONERS AT HOKITIKA.

Westport Times, Volume II, Issue 216, 9 April 1868, Page 3

TRIAL OF FENIAN PRISONERS AT HOKITIKA.

(Before G-. G. Fitzgereld, Esq., E.M.) RIOT. (Continued from oiir issue of yesterday.) The document was then read by the Clerk of the Court. It was an agreement to let to John Manning the premises latterly known as the " Celt " Office. Examination resumed—The premises alluded to in that agreement are those occupied as the " Celt " Office. I don't know when the last rent was paid. I don't know who the proprietors of the " Celt" are. I know who the supposed proprietor is. It is the prisoner Manning. The witness w r as not cross-examined. Alfred Frederick Fitzroy Etheridge, examined by Mr Button—l am a clerk in the office in the Chairman 'of the County Council. I produce a coppy of the " Celt" of the 27th March. I purchased it at the office of the "Celt" newspaper, from a person in the office behind the counter. The witness was not cross-examined.

John Crerar examined by Mr Harvey. lam a bookseller, in Revellstreet, Hokitika. I remember purchasing certain numbers of the "Celt" newspaper. I purchased at one time a file of fifteen, and at another time a file of seventeen, making thirty-two numbers. I delivered the file of seventeen to Mr G-. ~W m Harvey. I ordered them from Mr Crowley, clerk at the " Celt " office. I delivered them to you. I paid for them to Mr. Crowley.

This witness was not cross-ex-amined

George William Harvey examined by Mr Button. —I am a solicitor. I produce a file from No. 1 to No. 17 inclusive. I received them from Mr Crerar. I produce others that I have received from Mr Crerar, from No. 18 to No. 23, inclusive. These were left at my office, regularly on the day of publication; I had previously ordered them.

The witness was not cross-examined. The Court at this stage, adjourned for half-an hour, The Court resumed at a quarter past two o'clock, and the prisoners being again placed in the dock— Mr Harvey proceeded to read a series of extracts from the " Celt," commencing with No. 2 p. 7, published on the Ist November, 1867, entitled "Fenian Trials," the motto at the head of which was—" Prisoner at the bar, what have you to say why sentence of death should not be passed upon you ?" Mr Harvey said it was not necessary to take down the whole of what he read; it would be quite sufficient if the clerk of the court simply made a note of the articles as he read them, in which his Worship concurred.

From the same date Mr Button read an article entitled " Fenians, awake; Ireland's uprising!" Mr Rees remarked to his "Worship that it was hardly possible to go through the twenty or thirty articles proposed to be read by the council for the prosecution. Leaving out of the question the bad pronunciation, and the weak attempt at elocution, of his learned brethren, he hardly thought his worship would like to sit there till midnight hearing alternatively Mr Harvey and Mr Button. Mr Harvey could very well conduct his own case, and forthwith proceeeded to read an article from the issue of November 22, giving the latter portion, entitled Judge Morris and the Government Spy System in Ireland, being a comment on the character of Judge Morris at the conclusion of a trial over which he presided. A very racy production.

The next article was read by Mr Button, dated the 28th November, and was headed " Ireland before the Union."

Mr Harvey then read the from the same number an article entitled " The Abyssinian Expidition." The portion of the article he read was the latter part.

Mr Button next read the leading article of the 3rd January ; he could not give the page, as they were not paged consecutively, commencing at " What, then, are we to expect ?" Mr Harvey read an article from the same number, same date, (3rd January), entitled " A Momentous Question :" and also one from the publication of No. 12, p. 4. 10th of January, entitled " An Irish Priest—the Maynooth Oath." The article although purporting to be quoted from the " Waterford Citizen," yet internally bore evidence of being written in their own office.

Mr Eees thought this last one bore evidence of being writen from America.

Mr Button next read the leading article from No. 14, p. 8, the publication of the 24th January, entitled " The Martyrdom of Irishmen ; or, the Execution of Allen, Larkin, and O'Brien." He read the whole article.

The next was an extract, read by Mr Harvey, entitled, " The Queen's speech." He only thought it necessary to read two or three lines.

Mr Button read, from the number of January 31st. p. 8, an article on the " Death of Allen, Larkins. and O'Brien," with the motto, " Let all thy deeds be thy Country's thy Cod's and fear not." Mr Button read the whole article, which was a long, firey one.

Mr Harvey next read, from the number of the 21st of s ebruary, p 10, an article entitled '• The Demonstration of the Irish in Charleston." In the same number also, a leading article, headed, "Demonstrations in Charleston, and Reprisals at Home," also a quotation from aMr Doyle's speech. Mr Button next read an article from the number published on February 28, p, 5, entitled, " Memorial Crosses." Mr Harvev then read from the same number, p, 6, entitled, " Lamplough—(from onr own corespondent)."

Mr Button read from the same number, p. 9, two articles, entitled, " The Fenian, Orange, and Mavnooth Oath," also, " The Brigands, Oath." The next was from the 6th March, p. 3, entitled, " "War Declared"—an extract from the "Irish Citizen," of New York. Mr Harvey read the next, from the same number, entitled " More Blood." purporting to be an extract from the "Irish American." Mr Button then read an article from the number of the 13th March, entitled —" The Processiom Next Sunday ;" also, a long letter from John M'Eldon.

The putting in of these extracts from the " Celt," concluded the case for the prosecution. His Worship here asked the prisoners if they had any thing to say. Father Larkin simply said that he was prepared to submit to the decision of justice ; so far as he was concerned he should make no defence at this time.

Mr Manning reserved his defence ; he had something to say, but on consultation with his counsel, he should not do so. Extract matter had been read there that afternoon as though it was original matter, which he thought unjust. Mr Bees, after consultation with Mr Gruinness, came to the conclusion that it would be wiser for the prisoners to call no witnesses at this stage of the proceedings. His Worship—Joseph Larkin and John Manning, you are hereby committed to take your trial at the next sittings of the Supreme Court. I think there is ample evidence to warrant your committal. RIOT Larkin, Melody, Barret, Manning, Clarke, Harron, and Hannan, were then brought up charged with riot. William Shaw, examined by Mr Harvey, deposed—l am the proprietor of the Wkst Coast Times newspaper. I remember Sunday the Bth of March. I saw a procession on that day. I saw Father Larkin, Melody, Manning, and Mr Clarke in the procession. I cannot say for the others. It was a procession for the purpose of planting a cross in the cemetery. I should certainly call it a party procession. I saw banners and music in that procession. I was very much alarmed, not only on that day but the day before, so much so, thatl had all my deeds, &c, removed from the office, and purchased a revolver both for myself and son, I have seen similar procesions in my own country, and far more disastrous consequences come from far less provocation. It is just like putting a barrel of gunpowder near a fire. I. believe most unquestionably that had there been any opposition to the object of the procession, there would aavo been

■disturbances. Application was made to the Council to have the gates of the Cemetery opened to enablo the procession to enter. The consideration of the question was adjourned. I had a conversation with the prisoner Barrett, and I asked him to endeavor to dissuade his friends from carrying out their proposal contained in the letter. I said I was sure the Council would not agree to it ;he replied—" I don't care a d about the Council, I am sorry we asked for permission, for we are determined to put the cross there with or without permission." Mr Shaw cross-examined by Mr Rees—l saw the procession twice that day. I should think there was a great deal in the procession to cause terror and fright. The very purpose and scope of the procession was calculated to excite the opposition of the great majority of the people in the town. I was myself terrified by it, or I should not have taken measures of defence I armed myself with a revolver and I know many others that did so. I bought it the day before the procession. My alarm commenced two or three days before the procession came through the town. There was no disturbance. It was because of my own reasoning in my own mind that the affair looked alarming and not what actually took place. I went to the Three-mile on the tramway. I saw the procession from the carriage and a man from another carriage abused me. He did not belong to the procession. I knew that the procession was coming in that way when I went out. My alarm was not so much on myown account as on that of others. (Mr Rees—Tou went out then on the principle of" Don't tread on the tail of my coat," I suppose.) I was not insulted by any one in the procession. The members of the procession could see me very well as they passed. I saw no firearms in the procession. I heard no threatening speeches made on the occasion. There were no threatening gestures made by any one in the procession. I think that, apart from any rumors what ever, the sight of the procession itself would have been sufficient to inspire terror, for the simple reasn that it came in large numbers in antagonism to the law, and in defiance of the authorities. They did not refuse to allow the procession to enter the town, but they did refuse to allow them te enter the Cemetery. No order was given to any of the prisoners present not to enter the Cemetery on that day. The Council refused to allow them to plant the cross. The one refusal embodied both subjects. (The letter was here read by Mr Rees.) That was the only correspondence, as far as I know, that took place. I informed him (Mr Barrett) that we could not allow the procession to enter the cemetery. I do not know whether the letter was given to Mr Barrett. By Mr Harvey—l should consider the display of banners, &c, calculated to inspire feelings of alarm. Mr Harvey, to his Worship —That concludes the case for the prosecution, your "Worship. His "Worship here asked the prisoners if the had any thing to say to the accusation

The prisoner Larkin said he spoke for himself, but he thought he could also speak on behalf of all the others, and that had he known that the planting of the cross, the emblem of man's redemption, had been contrary to the feelings of the people of Hokitika, or any town, he should not have done it. He had never offended against any community or any section of a community.

Prisoner Barrett ssid that all he had to say was, thetjhe wasnot guilty of riot or of any other offence against the law. His "Worship—Do any of you others wish to say anything to the charge I addressed to you ? The remainder of the prisoners pleaded simply " Not G-uilty." Mr Eees rose to address the Court, and said that as, with his "Worship's permission, he had been permitted to appear on behalf of the prisoners, he would now apply for their discharge. The learned gentleman proceeded to review the evidence and in the course of his remarks observed that the procession of which the prisoners had been accused of arranging and joining in showed no symptoms of rioting. He defined the meaning of riot quoting from Hawkin's Pleas of the Court in in support of his argument. His "Worship remarked that he had heard the authorities Mr Eees was quoting cited at least half-a-dozen times- He knew all about them, and thought that it was of no use taking up the time and attention of the Court with them at this stage of the proceedings for Mr Eees would have ample opportunity of quoting these authorities when the prisoners were brought up at the Supreme Court. (To be continued.)