389 



Mr. Low, under Mr. Davies' cross-examination, entirely broke down, and was 

 compelled to admit that his figures proved the exact reverse of that which he had 

 previously said and undertaken to prove ; and the exact reverse of the pretended state of 

 facts which his clients or his principals sent him here to prove. I am not mis-stating this 

 matter at all. I will show you when these statistics come to he considered, and from the 

 figures themselves, and from the very admission of Mr. Low himself, that this was the 

 result. If there ever was a man who was utterly destroyed on cross-examination, it was 

 Mr. David Low, the great statistician from Gloucester, who came up here intending to 

 defeat us by cooked statistics and manipulated figures. 



My learned friend, Mr. Trescot, in the course of his observations, made a very 

 humorous allusion to a time during the Revolution, when a schooner came down to Prince 

 Edward Island, captured the Governor and Council, and took them off and presented them 

 to General Washington, who looked at tliem as curiosities, and then, as Mr. Trescot says, 

 " Treated them as young codfish are treated, threw them back into the water and told 

 them to swim home again." Well, time brings its revenges, and the Premier of Prince 

 Edward Island, I think, revenged that insult to his island and his Government, for the 

 great Low from Gloucester came down here, prepared to destroy, and bent upon destroying. 

 Her Majesty's case ; but when he fell into the hands of my learned friend, Mr. Davies, 

 he captured Mr. Low, turned him inside out, and utterly destroyed his testimony ; -and 

 taking him to the water — if I may use Mr. Trescot 's figure of speech, said, " Now, Mr. 

 Low, I drop you down, and you had better swim back to Gloucester ;" and he swam 

 back to Gloucester as fast as he possibly could. But I will show that after he got 

 there, he endeavoured to retrieve his fallen reputation by sending here affidavits, which 

 were probably thought to be beneficial to the American case, but which, I will have the 

 honour to show, conclusively prove a precisely opposite state of facts to that set forth in 

 the affidavits which were filed by the American Government in the earlier part of the 

 case. If that be supporting the American case in any respect, I am quite ready to give 

 my learned friends on the opposite side all the advantage that can accrue to them from 

 this last set of affidavits. 



The Conference met. 



Tuesday, November 20, 1877. 



The closing argument delivered on behalf of Her Majesty's Government, was resumed 

 by Mr. Thomson as follows : — 



When I left off last evening, may your Excellency and your Honours please, I had 

 not the book in which the decision of the Queen v. Kcyn is reported. I have that book 

 now, and, as I supposed, I find that my learned friend, Mr. Dana, was in error in intimating 

 that the Common Law lawyers in that case were entirely afloat. I thought, from my 

 recollection of the case, that the Judges who decided it were all Common Law lawyers, 

 as I said yesterday, except Sir Robert Phillimore, a Judge of the High Court of 

 Admiralty. I hold in my hand a report of the case, and I find that my recollection of it 

 was accurate. 



Mr. Dana, also, in his remarks, referred to the decision of the Judicial Committee of 

 the Privy Council, given in the case of the Direct United States' Cable Company v. the 

 Anglo-American Telegraph Company. It is reported in Law Reports, Second Appeal 

 Cases, 391. It was an appeal from the Supreme (Jourt of Newfoundland to the highest 

 Appellate Court in the roahn on matters either connected with the Admiralty jurisdiction 

 of England, or with Colonial matters. This Court is composed of the Lord Chancellor 

 for the time being, and of all ex-Cliancellors, and there may be a number of them — and of 

 several paid Judges, and quite a number of other eminent men besides — all or nearly all of 

 them great lawyers. The judgment in this case was delivered by one of the ablest men on 

 the Enghsh Bench. 1 mean Lord Blackburn, who was transferred from the Common 

 Law Bench to the House of Lords, under a new Act which authorizes Peers to be created 

 for life. 



Mr. Dana appeared to think that Lord Blackburn, in delivering this judgment, merely 

 spoke for himseli'; but this was not simply his own judgment, it wus r.iso tiie judgment of 

 the other Judges who were associated with liiai. He simply pronounced it, that is all ; 

 and he undoubtedly wrote it, but all the Judges agreed with him. lie said — I cite from 

 page 421 : — 



[880] 3 F 



