[...] From the information published in another column, copied from the London Free Press of Saturday last, it appears that one James Feheely, a participator in the murder of the Donnellys, has made a confession which, taken along with the other information and evidence in possession of the Crown, will probably secure the conviction of some at least of the ringleaders in the transaction. [...] The failure of the authorities to bring home their crime to the murderers of the Donnelly family was a reproach to the administration of justice in the Dominion. We trust the reproach will now be washed out. [...]

So far as the Free Press is concerned, the position it occupies in connection with this whole affair is not, it seems to us, an enviable one. It has throughout constituted itself the counsel in the press for the accused Biddulphers. When the question of change of venue was mooted, the Free Press opposed the proposal tooth and nail. It may possibly have done so because the Globe took the other side, and as becomes a good Tory organ may have considered itself bound to oppose the Globe right or wrong, as it evidently does on all occasions. But its evident desire throughout to screen the prisoners makes it probable that it opposed the change of venue simply because it knew that in Middlesex there was less chance than elsewhere of obtaining a conviction against them. Again, when Judge Armour charged so decisively against the prisoner, James Carroll, the Free Press constituted itself the counsel for Carroll after the event, and did its utmost to break the force of the judge's charge - to show that he had taken a wrong view of the case. It now appears that Judge Armour took the true view, and that the Free Press in trying to weaken the force of the evidence as presented by him was laboring with all its might to screen Carroll. It is impossible to acquit the Free Press of the suspicion that is did so knowingly and of set purpose, regardless altogether of the claims of justice; for its course throughout the affair from the first has been calculated to bring aid and comfort to the accused, and ruining the evidence against them. [...] The news of the arrest of the Feheelys, and of the confession of James, ought not to have been published in Canada till after the re-arrest of the other parties implicated in the murders of the Donnellys. [...]

Source: Unknown, "The Biddulph Tragedy," London Advertiser, May 26, 1881.

Return to parent page