Trial of Louis Riel
Known as the North-West Rebellion, this resistance was suppressed by the Canadian military, which led to Riel's surrender and trial for treason.
One of the divisive events of the Red River Rebellion had been the execution of Thomas Scott, who had opposed the provisional government which Riel had been instrumental in creating.
[1][2][3] Riel was charged with six counts of high treason, by a sworn information laid before the stipendiary magistrate on July 6, 1885.
[2] The charges were laid under the English Treason Act 1351 which was in force in Canada prior to the enactment of the first Criminal Code in 1892.
There were also two younger lawyers, who went on to distinguished careers: David Lynch Scott, the local Crown prosecutor for the district of Western Assiniboia, later appointed to the Supreme Court of the North-West Territories and eventually Chief Justice of Alberta;[4] and Thomas Chase-Casgrain, who eventually became the Attorney General of Quebec.
His defence was funded by supporters in Quebec, who established the Association Nationale pour la Défense des Prisonniers Métis.
[5] The defence was led by Charles Fitzpatrick, a notable lawyer from Quebec who subsequently became Chief Justice of Canada.
[3] Fitzpatrick, Lemieux and Greenshields went on to act as defence counsel for Honoré Mercier, the former premier of Quebec, and gained acquittals on corruption charges.
[5] The trial opened in Regina, July 20, 1885, before a court composed of stipendiary magistrate Hugh Richardson, assisted by Henry Le Jeune, a justice of the peace.
Thus, despite the fact that French Canadian and Métis jurors could have been secured from among the population of the territories, Riel was tried by a jury of six composed entirely of English-speaking Protestants, all from the southern Assiniboia District.
His lawyers wanted to argue that Riel did meet the threshold of the M'Naghten rules, and thus was not guilty by reason of insanity.
[2][3] These conflicting views of the mental health issue, for the Crown, the defence, and Riel himself, coloured the entire trial.
The defence cross-examination of the medical witnesses called by the Crown attempted to prove Riel's mental instability and render a not guilty plea by reason of insanity.
The defence made enough headway on this point that the Crown prosecutors recalled some of their witnesses to testify as to their personal encounters with Riel.
[3] In all, the Crown called nine witnesses for the prosecution: General Frederick Middleton, the commander of the Canadian militia which had put down the Rebellion, Thomas McKay, George Ness, George Kerr, John W. Astley, Thomas E. Jackson, Dr. A. Jukes, Dr. John Henry Charles Willoughby, and Riel's cousin Charles Nolin.
They produced five witnesses, Dr. François Roy of the Beauport Asylum; Dr. Daniel Clark of Toronto Lunatic Asylum; Riel's secretary for a short time, Philippe Garnot; and priests Alexis André and Vital Fourmond, all who gave evidence of Riel's insanity, but were far from sympathetic or supportive.
The speech of Fitzpatrick, lead defence counsel, has been described as "...perhaps the most passionately eloquent address ever heard in a Canadian courtroom."
He rejected his lawyer's attempt to argue that he was not guilty by reason of insanity, asserting, Riel defended his use of religious themes, but insisted that all his political actions were aimed at practical results.
They cannot claim for their client what is called a niche in the temple of fame and at the same time assert that he is entitled to a place in a lunatic asylum.
[3] On August 1, after an hour and twenty minutes of deliberation, the jury found him guilty of treason, but recommended mercy.
Prime Minister Macdonald was flooded with letters and petitions from sympathetic Québécois, who saw in Riel the French Catholic minority being oppressed by English Protestants.
Macdonald refused to intervene to commute the sentence because of political pressure, and stated that Riel would hang "...though every dog in Quebec shall bark in his favour.
[15] Riel insisted that had the witnesses been properly cross-examined, it would have been established that his men had been attacked first: "Happily when they appeared and showed their teeth to devour I was ready: that is what is called my crime of high treason, and for which they hold me to-day.
"[7] In a paper written in 1975, "in an effort to discover how much weight attaches" to criticisms about the treason charges laid by the Crown against Riel, D.H. Brown starts by posing three questions: "i.
[16] George Goulet asserts that there are lingering issues about the trial in terms of:[17]"- The 534 year-old English Statute under which Riel was convicted and executed.
[20] In the spring of 2008, Tourism, Parks, Culture and Sport Minister Christine Tell proclaimed in Duck Lake, that "the 125th commemoration, in 2010, of the 1885 Northwest Rebellion is an excellent opportunity to tell the story of the prairie Métis and First Nations peoples' struggle with Government forces and how it has shaped Canada today.
