He only went as far as was constitutional.  He had heard prisoner say he considered himself a prophet, and said he had inspiration in his liver and in every other part of his body.  He wrote upon a piece of paper that he was inspired.  He showed witness a book written with buffalo blood, which was a plan that after Riel had taken England and Canada, Quebec was to be given to the Prussians, Ontario to the Irish, and the North-West to be divided among the various nationalities of Europe, the Jews, Hungarians, and Bavarians included.  The rebel council had first condemned witness to death, and afterwards liberated him, and he accepted a position in the council in order to save his life.  Witness said that whenever the word police was mentioned Riel became very excited, having heard that the Government had answered their petitions for redress by sending 500 extra police.

At this part of the cross-examination of Nolin, the proceedings were interrupted by an excited clamour of Riel, to be allowed to interrogate the prisoner, and to assist personally in the conduct of his case.  This the Court could only allow with the consent of prisoner’s counsel.  His counsel objected, and urged that such a proceeding would prejudice their client’s case; but Riel persisted, and the rest of the day was wasted in fruitless altercation, which neither the Court nor the counsel for the Crown could allay.  The chief cause of Riel’s excitement seemed to be the determination of his counsel to press the plea of insanity, a plea which, throughout the trial, Riel strongly objected to be urged on his behalf.  The Court in the midst of the altercation, adjourned.

THIRD DAY OF THE TRIAL.

[Footnote:  In preparing this abstract of the day’s proceedings, the writer acknowledges to have drawn from the reports published in the Toronto Globe and Mail, and the Montreal Gazette And Star.]

The Riel trial was resumed at Regina, on the morning of July 30th, by MR. GREEN SHIELDS’ addressing the jury for the defence.  The Court-room was again filled to its utmost capacity.  After referring to the difficulty counsel had met, in the prisoner’s endeavour to obstruct their conduct of the case, Mr. Greenshields dwelt upon the history of the Indians and half-breeds in the North-West Territories, pointing out their rights to the soil.  In this Court they had a different procedure from that in other parts of the Dominion, and while not desiring to be understood that the prisoner would not receive as fair a trial as the machinery provided made possible, he questioned whether a jury of six men, nominated by the presiding magistrate, was sufficient to satisfy the demands of Magna Charta,—­the great bulwark of the rights and liberties of all British subjects.  He believed any of the older Provinces would rebel against such an encroachment on their rights, and he did not see why such a condition of things should