326 THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 
pointed out that there were two counts, the first for ‘‘compassing the 
King’s death,” the other for ‘‘adhering to the King’s enemies” both 
under 25 Edward III, c. 2, and that the overt acts were applicable to 
both counts. The address is very luminous and full, taking up 
some sixteen pages of the report. 
Barnard, Cushing, Chandonet, Butterfield (who was admittedly 
an accomplice), Frichette (examined through an interpreter) and 
Black were called and proved the facts above set out so far as they 
were concerned. They were cross-examined but their stories seemed 
quite straightforward and they were not at all shaken. The prisoner 
called no witnesses. At the close of the Crown case, Mr. Pyke said 
the prisoner desired to be heard personally in his defence first and 
hoped the Court would hear both himself and his Counsel. The 
Chief Justice Osgoode said it was not usual for the prisoner to speak 
before his Counsel, but assented. 
The address of McLane is respectful but rambling, he attempts 
no specific denial of the evidence but says his conversation was about 
roads, canals, questions of a mercantile nature; he explains the Adet 
letter by saying that one of his wife’s relations had left some property 
in France and that he thought he would go to France and get it for 
the family, that he went to Philadelphia and was given this paper by 
the Clerk to the French Minister. But instead of going to France he 
came to Canada; afraid his creditors would follow him he assumed the 
name of his brother-in-law, Jacob Felt, with whom he had been in trade 
in Providence, R.I.; thought he would engage in the timber trade and 
also buy horses; he went to Quebec to buy horses etc., etc. “The 
witnesses may be honest men . . . but all are liable to mistakes 
and it is now evident how much they have been mistaken. They have 
grossly mistaken my views which were only views on trade and not 
at all political.” He closed with a fervent invocation to God to pour 
into the hearts of the Judges, wisdom and knowledge, to impress on 
their minds and on “‘the minds of the jury who are now to decide upon 
my cause the innocence of Thy servant’ and to touch the lips of his 
Counsel ““Thy young servants” giving them eloquence and persuasive 
arguments “‘ that I may live to serve and glorify Thee hereafter.” 
Mr. Pyke urged upon the jury that positive and indisputable 
evidence was necessary, not mere words and vague conversations only; 
but both he and Mr. Francklin wisely kept clear of the evidence. The 
Attorney General followed, pointing out the absurdity of the Prisoner’s 
statements and fairly summing up the evidence. 
The Charge of Chief Justice Osgoode contained a discussion of all 
the evidence in detail, a clear exposition of the law applicable and a 
compliment to all the counsel concerned. He thought the prisoner’s 
