[Raymond] THE FIRST GOVERNOR OF NEW BRUNSWICK 431 



repeated to him to stop, and said, You have got my hogs. Me then pushed 

 away across the river, which confirmed us in the opinion that he had got the hogs 

 in the canoe. William Harbord then said, Let us fire over his head, may be 

 he will hear the balls and come to, on which both William Harbord and myself 

 fired in order to make them come to, but without any design or intention of 

 killing or wounding the persons in the canoe. I then loaded and fired a second 

 shot for the same purpose. We then went again in search of the hogs and found 

 all but one, which we still supposed was in the canoe." 



The statement made by Harbord was substantially the same. 

 The unfortunate occurrence caused great excitement not only among 

 the Indians but amongst the white settlers. 



Winslow wrote to Chipman, the solicitor general: 



"The Indi; ; s on the one hand are clamorous for an instant decision. The 

 people of the country, however, cannot reconcile themselves to the idea that 

 two men of fair character, should be sacrificed to satisfy the barbarous claim 

 of a set of savages. They are almost persuaded to a man that the prisoners 

 had no ill intention. In this situation you will naturally suppose that we have 

 an arduous task to keep them quiet. We lune assured both parties that the 

 men shall be tried fairly and if guilty that they will be punished." 



On the 13th of June, 1786, the court opened at Fredericton for 

 the trial. Chief Justice Ludlow and Judge Allen being on the bench. 

 The prisoners on being indicted for killing the Indian pleaded "not 

 guilty." Ward Chipman conducted the prosecution. The prisoners 

 were not defended by counsel, it not being the practice at that time 

 to allow counsel to prisoners on trial for capital offences except to 

 argue questions of law. No Indian was called as a witness, although 

 the squaw of Benoit was with him in the canoe when he was shot. 



The administration of justice in those days was swift. The 

 prisoners were both found guilty of murder and sentenced to be hanged, 

 on the 23rd of the month, just ten days after the opening of the court 

 and only a month after the commission of the offence. Nelson was 

 executed but Harbord was pardoned. A petition was presented 

 in his behalf by the grand jury. It was shown at the trial, or such 

 was the reasonable inference, that it was the second shot fired by Nelson 

 that killed the Indian. Harbord having only fired once was innocent 

 of the actual killing. The impression prevailed that if Nelson had 

 not been executed the Indians would have had revenge upon the settlers ; 

 but seeing that justice was done they were satisfied, and were after- 

 wards for the most part peaceable and well behaved. 



There can be no reasonable doubt that this is the true story 

 out of which the lurid tale in Casgrain's book has been evolved. 

 Had it actually happened that an English settler, in retaliation for 

 shooting a squaw, had been seized by the Indians, dragged to their 

 village and there, stripped of his clothes and fastened to a post, had 



