Charles Hutchinson Private Letter-Book, May 11 1878 to January 21 1880
p. 982

Dec 31 79

James Grant Esq. J.P.; Granton

Dear Sir -

re Donelly

It matters now who brought the charge of perjury - whether Carroll or somebody else - The fact is that Donelly has been subjected twice to prosecution before a magistrate on the same charge - I do not say this is illegal - but I do say it is inadmissible unless there are very particular circumstances to justify it, which I do not think exist in this case - I think you had no right to accept oral evidence or copies of examinations in lieu of the original documents - The only legal evidence of Donelly's oath & testimony where the alleged perjury was committed, is the original deposition signed by him, & attested by the Justice of the peace - You had no right to convict in the absence of the original deposition - I am not aware of the examinations being filed in my office -- They have no occasion to be so - as it is not necessary nor is it the practice for magistrates to return examinations when cases are dismissed - There will be no possibility of proceeding with this case vs Donelly, without the original sworn deposition on which the prosecution is based -- & it is your duty to see that it is returned to me, & filed with the other papers in the case -

Truly yours,
Charles Hutchinson, County Atty

Source: J.J. Talman Regional Collection, University of Western Ontario Archives, Donnelly Family Papers, B4878, File 11, Charles Hutchinson, "Charles Hutchinson Letter Book," December 31, 1879.

Return to parent page