USA > Louisiana > Louisiana : its history as a French colony. Third series of lectures > Part 23
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27
Now comes the day of trial. Look at that vast room, where stands the seat of judgment. All the doors are open, and within and without the palace of justice are to be seen the serried ranks of an eager crowd. From far and wide, perhaps from the most distant parts of the great American confederacy, men and women have come to share in the emotions of the famous trial which occu- . pies the attention of all, and the preliminaries of which
314
A STATE TRIAL.
have, for months past, with our modern means of con- veying intelligence, been made as familiar to the dweller in the remotest village of Maine, as to the immediate neighbors of the accused. The sheriff has proclaimed the court to be in session ; the judge, a man sprung from the loins of the people, and appointed by the peo- ple to expound and apply the laws which they them- selves have framed, is on the bench; the accused have made their appearance at the bar, and are ready to meet the award of their country. Near them, for their pro- tection and defence, stand some of the most learned and eloquent advocates that ever adorned their profession,- some who, for their national reputation, have been in- vited from north and south, from east and west, to assist the talent and genius of the State,-some, whose will rules senates, and directs the destinies of one of the most powerful nations of the carth-whose thunders of eloquence rise not only over the boundless plains, over the huge range of mountains, and along the innumerable rivers and lakes of the whole continent of America, but also ride the Atlantic wave, and reach, with undiminished power and majesty, the old European shore. By the side of those whom the law threatens with her uplifted sword. are such champions, interposing their shields, and ready to do battle for presumed innocence; and what is per- haps more cheering and more gladdening to the hearts of the accused, is the presence of their fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, and other relations, with numerous friends, who throng the hall, and whose eyes speak the sympathies of their souls, and whose sorrow-stricken countenances are calculated to make such an impression on the theoretically immoveable judges !
It is beautiful to see the fortifications and outposts which the law has thrown around the life of the meanest citizen of our country, and which must be carried before
----
315
A STATE TRIAL.
it can be forfeited. First, a Grand Jury of his fellow- citizens is to determine whether there are sufficient grounds to put him on his trial ; then it is his sacred privilege to be tried by his peers, by a petty jury of the vicinage, drawn by lot. He is furnished in time, to be duly examined and considered by him, with a list of the jury, and with a copy of tlie indictment found against him ; he has the right of peremptory challenge, and of challenge for cause. These are some of the advantages secured to him, and of which a more minute enumera- tion would be out of place. In such a case as the one I have mentioned, it would probably take many a day to empanel a jury, on account of the difficulty of finding men, who, from the public or private reports, and from the very nature of our institutions, would not, in spite of themselves as it were, have formed an opinion on the guilt or innocence of the accused. Yet the jury is sworn at last! The Attorney General has stated the grounds on which rests the prosecution, and the wit- nesses for the State are brought to the stand to substan- tiate them, and are put face to face with the accused. Then come the skirmishes and partial actions between the belligerents, on incidental matters of debate. The examination and cross-examination of witnesses is con- ducted with the most exquisite skill ; the questions of evidence are minutely sifted and elaborately argued ; every inch of ground is disputed with unwavering energy. When the witnesses for the defence are presented in their turn, the same keen encounter of wits, of science, of dialectics and of elocution is reacted. During all the while, faithful reports of the proceedings have been conveyed to the expecting millions, through the daily columns of the press. After many days of manœu- vrings and counter manœuvrings, and a display of judicial tactics, infinite in variety, the evidence on both sides is
316
A STATE TRIAL.
closed, and the field of argument is open. Now comes the sublimest of all spectacles-the struggle of intellect against intellect, clad in the gorgeous armor of elo- quence. It sheds no blood, but only the divine effulgence of mind, brought into sparkling collision with mind, in the sacred discharge of duty. It is the battle of spirits of the air, of archangels fighting, as the bard saw them, with heavenly weapons. But the storm is over, and all the artillery of argument, of logic, of passion and of art has exhausted its missiles. Now is heard the clear and unimpassioned voice of the judge addressing the jury ; he analyses the evidence, he sums up the argu- ments, he confutes sophistry, he expounds the law, and recommends its impartial application. The verdict of the jury closes the solemn scene.
In 1769, far different proceedings took place, the judges descended into the cells of the accused, and forced them to answer minutely all the questions they deemed proper to propound. The prisoners never saw the wit- nesses who were brought against them, and never knew who they were. These witnesses were examined in secret ; and, with the same secrecy, the rest of the evi- dence was taken and weighed. It must be said, how- ever, that, with regard to the facts on which the trial was to turn, they were abundantly and clearly proved. Indeed they had been of so public a nature that they could not be denied. Therefore, the accused, them- selves, admitted most of them to be true, and confessed the respective parts they had acted in the last insurrec- tion. But they rested their defence on the following grounds : The King of Spain, they said, had never taken possession of Louisiana, and Ulloa, who alleged that he was commissioned to that effect, having never shown his powers and credentials, the colonists were not bound to receive him as the representative of his Catholic
3
317
A STATE TRIAL.
Majesty, but had the right to consider him as an intruder and an, impostor, and to dismiss him from the Province as they did. Not only had the Spaniards never been in possession of Louisiana, but also the colonists had never taken the oath of allegiance to the King of Spain. Therefore, the Province not having become Spanish, it followed that it remained French. Aubry had never ceased to be its governor, and the colonists had not been released from their oath of fealty to the King of France. If the Province had become Spanish, how could Aubry still continue to govern it in the name of the French King ? How could justice be administered by the same royal authority ? On the other side, if it had remained French, what right had Ulloa, on his introducing him- self to French subjects, to be believed, on his word, to be the representative of the Majesty of Spain ? What right had he, without exhibiting any credentials, either from Louis XV., or from Charles III., to assume any powers in the colony ? And when he did so, was it not the duty of the colonists for their protection, in vindication of their dignity, and in conformity with what was due to their legitimate sovereign of France, to eject the foreign trespasser ? But, admitting that the taking possession of the colony by the Spaniards, or that some- thing tantamount to it, had been effected, or that said formal ceremony of taking possession was not absolutely necessary to establish in Louisiana the Spanish domina- tion, yet it could not be pretended that the French laws had ever been repealed, and therefore, they, the accused, were to be tried and judged according to the principles, forms and usages of French jurisprudence, and by those French tribunals and authorities that were competent to take cognizance of their pretended offences, at the time they were alleged to have been committed. Thus, they protested against the application of the Spanish laws to
318
PRESENTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
their case, when these laws had never been extended over the colony.
The Licenciate Don Felix del Rey, a practitioner be- fore the Royal Courts of St. Domingo and Mexico, who had been appointed the prosecuting Attorney-General on behalf of the King, against the authors of the insur- rection of the 28th of October, 1768, presented to the Court, on the 20th of October, 1769, (all Spanish judi- cial proceedings being in writing,) a long document, in which he reviewed, with great ability, all the evidence that had been introduced, together with the laws appli- cable to the case ; and he came to the conclusion that the accused had committed the crime of rebellion, wherefore he begged that they be condemned, each and severally, according to their respective degree of guilt, to undergo the penalty they had deserved. He com- mented with severity on the acts of the prisoners, and particularly on those of Lafreniere and Villere. The latter being dead, was represented before the court by what was called " An Attorney to his memory," un aro- cat à sa mémoire.
" Lafrenière," said Don Felix del Rey, "who was clothed with the character of the King's attorney general, did not only advise the presentation to the Superior Council of the petition of the planters, merchants, and other colonists of Louisiana, but also maintained with obstinacy that the Council was competent to act upon it, whilst he knew that its real object was, to resist the orders of their most Christian and Catholic Majesties, in relation to the cession and possession of the colony and to many other points which it enumerated, when they could be decided only by the two kings, and were entirely beyond the contracted sphere of the Council. This conduct, on the part of Lafrenière, is that of an unfaithful officer, and makes him guilty of a crime of the
319
PRESENTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
gravest and most inexcusable nature, when, at the same time, it proves facts which he has denied. Thus, al- though being the King's attorney general, and therefore the person who is supposed to be the organ of the throne, who ought to vindicate the royal authority and juris- diction, who, by the very tenure of his office, is in duty bound, and more so than any body else, to labor effica- ciously to carry into execution the decrees of the King his master, and who ought to have been the most zeal- ous of all in maintaining public tranquillity, yet he, La- frenière, far from having been the real interpreter of the King's sentiments in the Council, far from having de- fended the authority and jurisdiction of his master, caused this same authority and jurisdiction to be usurped by the Council, by his attributing to said Council the power of taking cognizance of a matter far beyond its competency, and enabling that body to counteract the will of the King, and the reasons of State which had in- duced his most Christian Majesty to make the cession of Louisiana. On the contrary, his plain duty was, in- stead of supporting this usurpation of the rights of his Majesty, to maintain, with firmness, that the subject submitted to the Council did not come within its juris- diction, and ought to be referred to the two kings.
" Such proceedings leave no room to doubt, that the accused did all he could, to secure the success of the conspiracy ; and, in order to be convinced of it, it is only necessary to cast a glance at the conclusions of his address to the Council, which breathe hatred and in- dignation, and in which he is not satisfied with approving and affirming all the allegations of the petition of the colonists, but also permits himself to indulge in the most violent expressions, in order to influence the members of the Council, and to insure the success of the rebel- lion.
320
PRESENTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
"Such was the deportment of Lafrenière, who thus abused his office of attorney general, and showed him- self the chief instigator of the conspiracy, whilst, in con- formity with the obligations of his official character, far from being on the side of sedition, he ought to have been more careful than ever, to discharge the duties of a faithful and obedient subject, as did Aubry on that occasion, who sought, with the greatest zeal and activity, to check the conspiracy, to tranquillize the inhabitants, and to keep them in due submission. Had Lafrenière followed such an example of loyalty, I have no doubt but that it would have been possible, to recall the public mind to its usual calm, because he was the most con- siderable personage in the Council, the one who, on ac- count of his office, exercised the most powerful influence over the people, and because he was the head of a numerous family. Had he joined Aubry, and had he, like this officer, protested, as he ought to have done, against the pretensions of the Council and its decree, the rebels would have been obliged to change their senti- ments, and the members of the Council would have been constrained to do the like. What, above all, gives a darker hue to Lafrenière's guilt, is that, at the very mo- ment when he was driving his fellow citizens into rebel- lion, he, in his capacity of attorney general, was receiv- ing his salary from the King of Spain's treasury.
" With regard to Villere, who was a man of atrocious dispositions, and remarkable for his pride and violence, he was, undoubtedly, one of the most conspicuous movers in the conspiracy, and signalized himself by deeds of the most striking character. He it was who stirred up to rebellion the Germans, of whom he was the commander ; he it was who made them sign the petition requesting the expulsion of Ulloa and of all the other Spaniards. He it was who led them to New Orleans,
PRESENTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL. 321
to incorporate them with the other rebels, and to strengthen the insurrection, as every body must be aware, since, on that day, he was at their head and com- manded them. These facts are proved, in every parti- cular, by the depositions of witnesses, which are on record. It is he who had the temerity to order the arrest of Maxent at the German Coast, and to take pos- session of the money which was destined to the Germans by Ulloa, for the payment of the grains which had been bought from them."
In relation to Petit, who was of a very diminutive size, Don Felix del Rey indulged in a vein of caustic humor, and said, in the sneering language of contempt : " It has been proved that he participated in all that was done by the conspirators, and that, several days before the insurrection, he had declared, with great parade of his importance, that : ere long, the people would be rid of that devil, Ulloa, because he, Petit, had taken all the necessary measures to drive him off. On the day of the insurrec- tion, he appeared among the rebels, giving orders, and assuming to be one of the leaders and chief actors, so much so, that he had the insolence to cast off, with his own hands, when Ulloa was expelled, the line which made fast to the shore the vessel in which that officer had embarked, because he felt impatient at the tardiness of the sailors in executing that operation. It was also proved that, on his being informed of the arrival of his Excellency, General O'Reilly, at the Balize, he said : that there ought to be a general turn out against the Span- iards, and that he would blow out the brains of the coward who should act differently. These are the most atrocious offences which could be committed by a personage of so much insignificance. Notwithstanding his fury and the gigantic proportions of his pretensions, it was not pos- sible for him to do more. Thus, considering only what
21
322
PRESENTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
he did, there is no reason to doubt, however, that he was one of the most obstinately violent actors among the rebels, and that he would have taken his share in offences still more serious, if his intellectual capacity and the contexture of his physical organization had furnished him with better means of conception and execution."
Don Felix del Rey thus reviewed all that had been proved against every one of the accused, and presented it to the court under its most striking colors. After having related all the events of the revolution, and ana- lysed all the evidence on record, he proceeded to an examination of the laws which he thought applicable to the case. " Although," said he, "according to the strict letter of the law, the crime of high treason or re- bellion embraces equally all those who have any share in its enormities, yet our sovereign, the most clement of kings, willing, in order to preserve the people against greater misfortunes, that punishment be inflicted only on a few, with the view of making it an example to others, has ordered by his royal schedule (H.) annexed to the record, that only the chief authors of the revolu- tion and their principal accomplices be brought to trial, and punished in accordance with the degree of their guilt. There is no doubt but that the fact of conspiring, in a seditious manner, against the State, renders the chief authors of this crime and their accomplices equally guilty, although it may not have had for its main object the royal Majesty itself, because, if it be not directed against the person of the prince, it is nevertheless, by its nature, and in its very essence, an act of high treason, and, consequently, it must be followed, on conviction, by the application of the pain of death and by the con- fiscation of property.
" I do not intend to descend into the abyss of that
323°
PRESENTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
multitude of laws, which I might summon to the support of the conclusions to which I have come. I shall con- tent myself with establishing my position on the un- shakable foundation of a few laws which bear directly on this case, and which are decisive against the accused. The first law which I shall quote, is that which declares : that any seditious or factious individual who shall cause an insurrection, and, under the pretext or semblance of defend- ing his liberty or rights, shall take up arms, and excite others to do the same, shall be punished with death, as being guilty of high treason. This law is clear in itself, and its exact application to this case is equally evident, con- sidering that the accused induced the inhabitants of this province to take up arms, in order to support against Don Antonio de Ulloa the rights which they had set forth in their petition to the Council. It is said in an- . other law that : if any one produces disturbances or revolts in the kingdom, by causing cities to confederate, or people to assemble in arms, against the peace and dignity of the King or kingdom, he shall be punished with death, and be deprived of all that he may possess. Another law comes in support of this one, and declares : that those who shall cause such disturbances shall be traitors, and be punished with death and the loss of their property. The same de- claration is repeated in another law of the Recopilacion. In a word, there is no lack of laws, defining with pre- cision, and punishing with uniform severity, the offence to which our attention is called.
"In the present case, it is evident that the accused are seditious men, who conspired against the kingdom, by endeavoring to wrest this colony from the Spanish domination. They also outraged the Spanish legisla- tion, government and nation by the most insulting and opprobrious language, and by their demonstrations of hatred against his Majesty; and this last law which I
.324
PRESENTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
have quoted, speaks also of this crime. Through their hatred of the king and kingdom, they took up arms un- der the pretext of defending their liberty and their rights, as they unanimously confess, and finally, they caused a prejudice to the kingdom, in destroying by their rebel- lion, what the government and treasure of Spain had done, for several years past, in order to increase. and improve the resources of this colony. Besides, their conspiracy was the cause of the expenses of fitting out the considerable expedition, which became necessary to reduce them to submission and confirm the possession of his Catholic Majesty ; so that, by applying the letter and spirit of the aforesaid laws, it is apparent that the accused are guilty, and deserve to lose their lives and
their property. There is also another law, which sub- jects them to the same penalties, by declaring : That he who labors by deed or word to induce any people, or any provinces, under the domination of the King, to rise against his Majesty, is a traitor. The application of this law is so striking that it requires no comment, as it is proved that the accused caused the insurrection of the Germans and Acadians, who were living in quiet sub- mission to his Majesty."
"Such are the laws according to which his Majesty ordered, in his royal Schedule, that those found guilty in this affair be punished; and these laws are consistent with the laws of nations, and particularly with the juris- prudence of every monarchy. The fact is, that there is not perhaps a nation, by which laws of the same nature have not been enacted, and are not put in force against those, who, seditiously and tumultuously, conspire against the State, since the only means of securing the preservation and tranquillity of a kingdom, is to make use of this kind of punishment against those who have the audacity to raise disturbances ; and it is impossible
1
PRESENTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL. 325
to question the legitimate application of these same laws to the crime committed in Louisiana against his Majesty of Spain, when it is taken into consideration, that, on the breaking out of the insurrection of the 28th of Oc- tober, the sovereignty of the King over Louisiana was established, as much by the possession taken by Don Antonio de Ulloa in the name of his Catholic Majesty, as by the right which the King had acquired over that colony, by virtue of the act of cession made by his most Christian Majesty, which was published in the colony by the order of said Majesty."
"It is idle, on the part of the accused, to say that, Ulloa having never shown his credentials, and having never taken possession of Louisiana, they never were under the domination of Spain, and, therefore, cannot be guilty of the crime of rebellion against her. It is true that the vain pageantry of pulling down the French flag and of raising the standard of Spain, was not exhi- bited on the public square at New Orleans. But did not Aubry, the representative of the King of France, receive Ulloa as the representative of the King of Spain? Was he not acknowledged as such by the militia, by all the ecclesiastical, military and political corps of the colony ? Was not immediate and complete possession of the colony tendered to Ulloa, and even pressed upon him with persevering earnestness ? Was it not declined by him on account of an unforeseen circumstance-the refusal of the French troops to serve the King of Spain according to the promise and engagement of their sove- reign, and because Ulloa found himself without sufficient forces to occupy all the posts ? But did he not take possession of the Balize and of all the posts which are the keys of the province ? It is true that the flag of France continued to wave alongside of that of Spain, but it was as the flag of an ally, whose assistance was
326 PRESENTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
necessary, and not because the province remained French. Aubry himself retained his authority, only at the request of Ulloa, and, therefore, was only the Span- ish governor's delegate-and a mere agent and trustee for the crown of Spain-exercising powers ad interim, on the invitation, with the consent, and for the benefit of his Catholic Majesty."
"Ulloa never was in possession of Louisiana ! Then, by what right was the Spanish flag floating from the Balize to the Illinois ? How came all the expenses of the colony to be paid out of the Spanish treasury from March 1766 to October 1768, when the insurrection broke loose ? How came Aubry to promulgate decrees issued by Ulloa ? How came the Superior Council to register them ? Was not the financial, commercial and military administration of the colony entirely under the direction of Ulloa ? Who granted passports to the merchants? Was it not Ulloa? To whom did the commanders at the several posts apply to be continued in'office ? Was it not to Ulloa ? Was it not with his consent and approbation that Noyan was at the head of the Acadians, and Villere in the command of the Ger- mans ? Whence did the chief conspirator, Lafrenière, derive his salary as Attorney General ? Was it not from the Spanish treasury ? Was he not in the pay of Spain when he turned upon her ? Was it not treason ? Who supplied the needy Acadians and Germans with their necessities? Who drove away famine by furnish- ing the colonists with the provisions they required ? Who paid the Clergy ? Who repaired the churches ? Who gave permission to the planters to export their crops, and to purchase the negroes whom their agricul- tural pursuits demanded ? Was it not Ulloa ? And the members of the Council themselves, did they not fre- quently submit to his approbation the judgments which
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.