He was then taken from the Court-room, and a few minutes after was driven back, under strong escort, to the guard-room,

AN APPEAL.

After sentence had been passed upon Riel, Mr. Fitzgerald, one of prisoner’s counsel, gave notice of appeal for a new trial to the Court of Queen’s Bench, Manitoba.  The appeal case was heard at Winnipeg on the 3rd and 4th days of September before Chief Justice Wallbridge and Mr. Justice T. W. Taylor.

M. LEMIEUX, chief counsel for Riel, raised the old issue as to informality of the trial before the Stipendiary Magistrate at Regina, and contended that the magistrate was incompetent to try the case.

Mr. FITZPATRICK followed.  He held that the Treason-Felony Act was one of Imperial jurisdiction, and he questioned if it had delegated any power to the colonial authorities to legislate away any rights enjoyed by the subjects of the British Empire.  He dwelt strongly upon the insanity question, and said the jury were convinced of the prisoner’s lunacy, hence their recommendation to mercy.

Mr. EWART also strongly questioned the jurisdiction of the Court at Regina and cited several authorities in support of his argument.

Mr. ROBINSON, on behalf of the Crown, in an able address, strongly combated the idea that the Court at Regina was not legally constituted, and cited cases in support of his contention.  He also dwelt at length on the insanity plea, showing the absurdity of the contention that Riel was insane.

Mr. Osler and Mr. Aikens followed on the same side, supplementing the arguments of the previous speaker as to the constitutionality of the Court, and cited a number of authorities adverse to the insanity plea.

NEW TRIAL REFUSED.

At Winnipeg, on the 9th September, at a sitting of the full Court of the Queen’s Bench of the Province of Manitoba, judgment was delivered in the appeal for a new trial for the prisoner Riel.

His Lordship Chief Justice Wallbridge first delivered judgment.  He referred briefly to the facts brought before the Court and the statutes by which the stipendiary magistrates are appointed in the North-West and to the powers given them for the trial of the cases before them alone, and to the cases, including treason, which have to be tried before a magistrate with a justice of the peace and a jury of six.  His Lordship held that the constitutionality of the Court is established by the statutes passed, which he cited.  If the Act passed by the Dominion Parliament was, as claimed by the defence, ultra vires, it was clearly confirmed by the Imperial Act subsequently passed, which made the Dominion Act equal to an Imperial Act.  The objections were to his mind purely technical and therefore not valid.  His opinion therefore was that a new trial should be refused, and the conviction of the Superior Court was therefore confirmed.