[RIDDELL] : CANADIAN STATE TRIALS 335 
For example, Barnard said ‘‘He mentioned some circumstances that happened 
to me before I came into this Province to reside, by which I knew that he had taken 
some pains to find me out.” Cushing does not seem to have repulsed him decidedly; 
he concealed his name, and when they parted it was expected that McLane would 
send to see him in the spring a man who would be known by Cushing to be McLane’s 
agent by his saying that he had come to talk over family matters. Chandonet had 
left Canada in 1776 with the American troops and become an American citizen, and 
had since been compelled to leave Lower Canada as an alien. Butterfield was an 
American citizen and did become an accomplice, as the Attorney General had to 
admit. Frichette was a French Canadian who did assist McLane in such a way as 
that he might have been himself found guilty of treason; and Black had been impris- 
oned two years before and might therefore be considered disaffected toward the 
Government. 
These facts seem to show that the plan was carefully concocted by someone 
and that the persons to be approached had been selected. Moreover, it was proved 
to a demonstration that he enquired for Chandonet, sent for Frichette, and went to 
Quebec purposely to meet Black. 
This, as well as his address to the jury, prevents us from coming to the conclusion 
that the talk of revolution, etc., was only talk, the bluster of a weak man who wished 
to make himself out a man of mystery and power. There have been instances of 
men in drink, or even sober, boasting of crimes they never committed. For example, 
in early Upper Canada a Member of Parliament, Issac Swayzie, was wont when in 
liquor to boast of having taken part in the kidnapping and murder of Morgan the 
recreant Freemason; but when arrested on the charge he repudiated all his former 
statements, and it is as certain as anything can be that he had nothing to do with the 
crime. 
But McLane denied, in a half-hearted way indeed, ever making the statements 
attributed to him; he did not admit them and say they were mere talk and brag. 
The letter alleged to be signed by Adet depends upon McLane’s statements 
alone, but his account at the trial is wholly incredible. It seems likely that Adet 
did give him such a letter; and the form it took is not unusual in conspiracies. 
What to my mind is the strongest evidence against any conclusion but real 
guilt is the money found on McLane. On his story he was bankrupt and afraid 
of his creditors. He does not seem to have had any private means; and yet, when 
arrested in Quebec, he had one hundred and forty dollars, mostly in American 
quarter dollars. He was travelling around nearly half a year in Lower Canada and 
in Vermont near the line, occasionally at least paying out money, and the source of the 
necessary money is not disclosed. It is fair to conclude that he was supplied with 
money by someone interested in the work upon which he was engaged; and no other 
is so likely as the enthusiast Adet, to whom nothing was of value compared with the 
glory of France. 
It seems probable that Adet did employ the foolish McLane to make enquiries 
as to the temper of the French Canadian people and to tamper with their loyalty 
to the British Crown. He never denied the charge, so far as is known, and he was 
a man who would not hesitate to employ and glory in any means to attain what he 
thought was a laudable end. That McLane was not of strong mind was no objection; 
he would be the more bold; and boldness might win the day. 
_ There is no reason to fear that in this case there was any miscarriage of justice; 
ana a perusal of the shorthand notes of the trial will prove to the lawyer that the 
proceedings were conducted with the utmost fairness and decorum, and that no 
oth-r verdict was possible. 
Sec. I & II. Sig. 7 
