PROS AND CONS OF PUBLIC OPINION.
As may be supposed this assault case became the subject of a great
deal of discussion and controversy, not only in the vicinity of its
occurrence, but also in places far distant, and among people who had
no personal knowledge of any of the parties especially concerned in
it. If the assault upon Mr. Smith had been committed for almost any
other reason than the one which really led to it, it would probably
have caused less intense feeling than it did. But an assault of such a
serious nature, made on account of a man's temperance principles and
practices, appealed to the public sense of right, and seemed the
signal for a war of pens and tongues between the opposing parties of
temperance and inebriety. Very few of the latter party proved brave
enough to have their opinions submitted to the press (or else the
press would not accept them), but doubtless those opinions were freely
expressed in private.
We purpose devoting this chapter to a few of the views of societies
and individuals respecting this affair, as they were published in the
columns of certain newspapers. The following from _The Templar_ shows
the feeling of the Alliance in a border county to that in which the
deed was committed, as expressed just before the opening of court:
"The Missisquoi County Alliance, at a meeting held August 28th,
passed the following resolution, which was unanimously adopted
amid applause: '_Resolved_, That this County Alliance now
assembled desires to record its deepest sympathy with Mr. W. W.
Smith, President of the Brome County Alliance, in the recent
outrage perpetrated upon him by the emissaries of the liquor
traffic. We rejoice to know that there is a prospect of the
speedy bringing to justice of the perpetrators of that assault.
We also desire to record our high appreciation of the valued
services to the cause of prohibition in this section by Mr.
Smith, and trust that he may long be spared to continue his
heroic efforts to free our country from the ravages of strong
drink.'"
The following resolution was adopted by the executive of the Quebec
provincial branch of the Dominion Alliance, at a meeting held in the
parlors of the Y. M. C. A., in Montreal:
"That this Alliance records its profound sympathy with Mr. W. W.
Smith, President of the Brome County Alliance, in the recent
murderous assault made upon him, resulting from his earnest and
successful efforts in the cause of law and order in the County of
Brome, and this Alliance trusts that full justice will be meted
out to the perpetrators of this atrocious crime."
The letter given below appeared in _The Knowlton News_ of Oct. 12th,
1894, under the heading "A Few Words on the Other Side:"
"To the Editor of _The News_:
"SIR,--In the discussion of a case which has and is now agitating
this good County of Brome, that spirit of British fair play which
has attained to the dignity of a proverb has been lost sight of
to a marked degree. I refer to the alleged assault on Mr. W. W.
Smith, at Sutton Junction, in July last. The Dominion Temperance
Alliance and its friends are doing their best, by means of the
press and otherwise, to poison the public mind in advance of the
trial against the party who is charged with procuring the assault
on Mr. Smith, and also against divers other persons in the county
who are said to be his accessories, charging them with the
commission of a grave crime without a scintilla of reputable
evidence on which to base such a charge. This, I say, is not fair
play, and those guilty of the unfairness need not find fault if
lovers of justice refuse to follow them in their raid on men and
characters, or by silence lend strength to the unwarranted
assumption that each and every one of those so flippantly
accused are guilty from the word 'go,' and must be pilloried in
public and private, and subjected to the shame and embarrassment
arising from these attacks on their character, as law-abiding
citizens and legal subjects of Her Majesty.
"There is a limit beyond which self-constituted conservers of
public morals must not go; and good men should not be brutally
attacked in public by agents of the Alliance on the strength of
the admissions of a fellow, who, if he tells the truth, is one of
the meanest rascals that ever cumbered the earth. I refer to the
fellow Kelly, Mr. Smith's self-confessed assailant.
"I offer nothing in defence of lawbreakers, nor would I, if I
could, do aught to mitigate in the least degree the punishment
that may be meted out to the person who wantonly assaults a
peaceable citizen, but candor and strict impartiality force me to
refuse to accept as truth all the rubbish of tergiversation with
which this agitated Smith case has been surrounded by the
intemperate zeal of professed temperance men. I believe in
temperance, and if those who knowingly violate the law against
the sale of intoxicants are brought to judgment and punishment,
they get but what they deserve, and all good men will applaud the
vindication of the majesty of the law. But we are scripturally
enjoined to be 'temperate in all things.' This applies as well to
words as to the use of stimulants, and the grossly unfair attacks
on men's characters by certain of the Alliance emphasize the
necessity for a strong curb on that unruly member, the tongue,
which has brought many a good man and worthy cause into grave
disrepute, and made them enemies where otherwise they might have
had friends.
"This whole Smith business has a 'cheap John' flavor, which makes
careful men view it askance. Who witnessed the assault on Smith?
Nobody. He tells of being struck three times on the head with a
piece of lead pipe, weighing some four pounds, and has in
evidence the terrible weapon. Did his person bear evidence of the
murderous assault? No. All who saw him in the early morning
following the alleged assault were surprised that he bore no
marks of the terrible struggle for life through which he claimed
to have passed. Why, one blow from such a weapon as he exhibits
would have crushed his head as if it were an egg shell, yet he
claims to have sustained three blows, and is alive to tell of it!
Shades of Ananias and of Munchausen!
"But it were useless to pursue the subject further.
"It is to that spirit of fair play so characteristically British,
and to which we are proud heirs, that I would appeal. Everything
is being said and done to prejudice the public against those who
are accused of instigating Kelly to the assault on Smith; but,
singular as it may seem, Kelly is patted on the back and called a
good fellow. Why? Admitting the truth of Kelly's story, is he
less guilty because he had confederates? A strange feature of the
case is that Kelly willingly came back to Canada, when
extradition would have been about impossible.
"He was taken to Montreal instead of to Sweetsburg, and was there
royally entertained instead of being put in close jail. While in
Montreal he was interviewed,--and by whom?--the Crown prosecutor?
No; but by Smith and his counsel, Mr. Duffy. Meantime, several
so-called 'detectives' were scouring the country for evidence. Of
what? They had Smith's assailant, and he had told his story.
Those whom he charged as being instigators of his crime were
attending to their business, and might have been apprehended
within twenty-four hours after Kelly's arrest in the States. Then
what were the detectives seeking?--what were they after? That
$1000 reward was in sight, and this may have been the inducing
cause of this prowling.
"It would seem to 'A man up a tree' that there are certain
revenges to be completed--sundry old grudges to be satisfied, and
the Crown is asked to assist in this questionable work. Those
familiar with the matter say that in our broad Dominion there are
no better conducted hotels than those to be found in the Eastern
townships. They are well kept, and the travelling public is most
hospitably entertained, well fed and comfortably lodged. A
well-conducted hotel adds to the strength and business character
of a village, and a faithful landlord is expected to furnish
guests certain necessities, one of which may be liquor.
"And because he does this should he be reviled, and persecuted,
and driven out of business? That liquor is a great evil, no one
can honestly deny, and being such, and being beyond the power of
man to destroy, let us do the next best thing--curb and control
the evil in the best manner possible.
"A dozen wrongs will never make a single right, and the wrongs
that are being committed in this Smith case have appealed to one
who believes in
"_Brome, Oct. 8th, '94._ FAIR PLAY."
The following comments appeared in an editorial in the same paper:
"It is impossible to shut one's eyes to the ill-feeling that is
growing throughout the County of Brome, and spreading itself over
the district, as a result of what is known as the Smith assault
case. Hitherto, only one side of the case has found an echo in
the public press, but to-day we open our columns to a
correspondent who expresses in moderate language the sentiments
of those who think there is something to be said on the other
side. We commend his letter to the attention of our readers
without in any sense committing ourselves to the writer's
conclusions. Everybody must feel sorry for the misfortunes of Mr.
Smith, and if, as it is alleged by some, he has allowed his zeal
to get the better of his discretion, he is not the first man who
has been carried away by a superabundance of enthusiasm, or who
has suffered therefor. Mr. Smith's friends will try to make a
martyr of him. We doubt that they will succeed."
If, as the Editor of _The News_ seems to consider, "the sentiments of
those who think there is something to be said on the other side" are
expressed in the above letter in "moderate language," how must those
views sound when expressed in the most forcible terms of angry barroom
parlance? Let us thank God that we are not compelled to hear these
opinions when thus declared, nor even to see them made known through
the press.
It is said in the above note that Mr. Smith's _friends_ would try to
make a martyr of him, but it was doubtful if they would succeed. We
think the Editor of _The News_ is mistaken in this, it was Mr. Smith's
_enemies_ who appeared desirous of making a martyr of him, and they
very nearly succeeded; but, through the providence of God, he is still
in the ranks of temperance workers. We are told that "one with God, is
a majority," and more than one in Brome County are true to the right,
therefore, the liquor party with all their efforts are still in the
minority there. In the next issue of _The News_, dated Oct. 19th,
appeared the following replies to the above epistle from "the other
side:"
"To the Editor of _The Knowlton News_:
"SIR,--In regard to the communication in your issue of October
12th, over the signature of Fair Play, your correspondent says:
"'This whole Smith business has a "cheap John" flavor, which
makes careful men view it askance. Who witnessed the assault on
Smith? Nobody. Did his person bear evidence of murderous assault?
No. All who saw him in the early morning following the alleged
assault were surprised that he bore no marks of the terrible
struggle for life through which he claims to have passed. Shades
of Ananias and Munchausen!'
"Mr. Editor, here we have the substance calling upon the shadows.
As one who visited Mr. Smith on the morning following the
assault, I assert that Fair Play makes a direct departure from
the truth. I challenge Fair Play to give the name of a single
reputable individual who now will corroborate his assertion. Such
a statement is in direct contradiction to the sworn testimony of
our respected fellow-citizen, R. T. Macdonald, M. D. Mr. Smith
was visited on the following morning by scores of people, and
they saw upon his person the evidence of a violent and brutal
assault. Many of the visitors expressed their determination to
see fair play, and their willingness to subscribe, which they
subsequently did, to a fund to bring the guilty party or parties
to justice. Fair Play need not worry about the slandered
characters of the hotel keepers of this county. Their characters
are in their own keeping, just as the characters of merchants,
mechanics and ministers are in theirs. If the parties who are
accused of complicity in this affair are innocent, they will have
the opportunity of proving themselves so.
"And why should not your correspondent exercise that spirit of
fair play, the lack of which he so much deplores in others, and
not make the useless attempt to impeach Mr. Smith's veracity in
the case of this assault. Such an attempt is both useless and
senseless, for within an hour or two of the assault he was under
the professional care of one of the most eminent and reputable
physicians of the Province, who surely would at once have exposed
any imposture.
"Even Fair Play would be willing to see an assaulter punished,
but seems to have made a discovery which, singular to say, in
nearly three months of intervening time no one has yet thought
of, namely, that no assault was committed.
"The cheap John part of this affair is in Fair Play's letter, in
which in one breath he professes to be a temperance man, and says
a hotel keeper who violates the law and gets punished gets just
what he deserves, and in the next breath tells us that liquor is
a necessity, and asks why trouble the man who furnishes it.
Surely, we see the hem of the cloak of hypocrisy. Fair Play
should also give the public his name, so that people may judge
for themselves the value of his peculiar and disinterested view
of fair play; farther, some folks are already conjecturing who
the author was, and it is not fair to let any one be under the
imputation of a thing he did not do, and surely no man need be
afraid or ashamed to have his own views appear over his own name.
He asks, Who saw the assault? and answers, Nobody. Who saw Hooper
try to drown his wife? Nobody. And yet one of these so-called
detectives was instrumental in landing him in prison, and people
seem to think that he did get fair play.
"Fair Play says careful men view this askance. In this town,
where naturally the keenest interest is taken in this affair,
nearly or quite all of the representative men have condemned the
assault in the most decisive manner.
"Now, Mr. Editor, let me say that among the great mass of the
people of this vicinity, there is no desire to make out that Mr.
Smith is either a hero or a martyr. It is a question of law and
order on the one hand, and crime and violence on the other. The
assault is admitted, and a conspiracy is alleged. No doubt there
are landlords in this country who would not implicate themselves
in any illegal proceedings against Mr. Smith nor sympathize with
the same. Such men are suffering nothing, but it is doubtful if
there is a person of ordinary capacity in this vicinity who does
not believe that the assault was the outcome of a conspiracy, and
men are not slow in expressing the wish that if we have such
people living among us that they may be exposed in their true
character and punished, whether they profess to be saints or
sinners, and the people of this town would extend the same
sympathy and offer the same assistance to the accused parties, if
they had been the victims of an assault and suspicion pointed to
Smith and the Alliance as its instigators.
"MERIT LONGEWAY.
"_Sutton, October 15th, 1894._"
[Illustration: Lead Pipe, Rope and Hat.]
"To the Editor of _The News_:
"SIR,--Permit me to reply to some of the statements of 'Fair
Play' in your paper of October 12th. First, I should like to ask
what is meant by poisoning the public mind?
"If Fair Play means enlisting the sympathies of the public on the
side of the temperance party, all that is needed is a clear
statement of the plain, unvarnished facts. There need be no
'unwarranted assumption,' or charges without evidence, for
members of the liquor party before that assault at Sutton
Junction, and more especially since that time, have themselves
acted in a way that has estranged some who have been their warm
supporters, as they have procured the discharge of Mr. Smith from
the employ of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, whom he had
served faithfully for fifteen years, and have also threatened the
lives of other peaceable citizens, because they chanced to frown
upon violence and lawbreaking.
"Furthermore, Fair Play declares that the Temperance Alliance and
its friends, of which he plainly is not one, are charging divers
persons in this county with the commission of a grave crime of
which they have no reputable evidence. Thus does this very brave
apostle of 'the other side' fearlessly assert, with no proof for
his statement, that all the various persons who have given
evidence in this case in Mr. Smith's favor are disreputable, and
their testimony of no value. Truly this is a bold statement, and
it would seem that sometimes pens as well as tongues need
'curbing.' Although Fair Play declares that he 'offers nothing in
the defence of lawbreakers,' yet his entire epistle is plainly in
defence of just that class of people, for it is written in behalf
of the hotel keepers who have repeatedly broken the law, and were
convicted of liquor selling in court, not long since.
"Again, this 'believer in fair play,' in speaking of Mr. Smith,
says:
"'Did his person bear evidence of murderous assault? No, etc.'
Either the writer of these words has very little regard for
truth, or else he knows very little of the subject he is talking
about. What is he going to do with the evidence of the skillful
physician who attended Mr. Smith, and who upon his first visit
dared not promise that he would ever recover? What is the opinion
of those people who were awakened at dead of night by cries of
murder, and who found Mr. Smith with the marks of the combat
freshly upon him? Why is it that he has not yet fully recovered
from the effects of this assault? And what reason has Fair Play
for doubting the testimony of Mr. Smith himself, even if there
were no other proof? He says, 'One blow from such a weapon as he
exhibits would have crushed his head, as if it were an egg
shell.' Perhaps he has forgotten that circumstances alter cases,
and the position of the victim, the courage of the assailant, and
the direction of the blow might alter this case very much. It is
little wonder that at this point he invokes the aid of the shades
of Ananias and of Munchausen! He next states that while the
public are being prejudiced against the liquor sellers of this
county, 'Kelly is patted on the back, and called a good fellow.'
Would Fair Play wish to be patted in the same way, being retained
in a prison cell, knowing not what punishment may await him?
"We would repeat the question asked, 'What were the detectives
seeking?' But we do not conclude, like Fair Play, that it was the
$1000 reward they were working for, as no such reward was ever
offered. The objects for which these detectives were really
seeking were those men whom Kelly had accused, who, according to
Fair Play, 'were attending to their business,' and perhaps they
were, but if so, they must have had much business abroad. He next
enlarges upon the merits of Eastern township hotels, and among
other things says 'A faithful landlord is expected to furnish
guests certain necessities, one of which may be liquor. And
because he does this, should he be reviled, and prosecuted, and
driven out of his business?' How does this compare with his
former statement that he 'offers nothing in defence of
lawbreakers,' and that 'all good men will applaud the vindication
of the majesty of the law?'
"TRUTH."
In the following number of _The News_ appeared this note:
"We are in receipt of another letter from 'Fair Play,' but as
personalities are indulged in, and as we are averse to entering
upon a prolonged and bitter controversy, we are constrained to
decline the publication of this communication."
In this we seem to see a hint of that spirit of harshness and
unfairness which so often characterizes the actions of the liquor
party, and which sometimes leads to just such deeds as this brutal
assault, which "Fair Play" would persuade the public had never
occurred.