83
Government, to institute any inquiry whatever into any matters which the production of those documents—if not destroyed—could, by any possibility, have elucidated.
In either hypothesis, therefore, I am prepared to adopt the language of the libel, which formed the subject-matter of prosecution, in the Queen v. Tarrant, and to say of this spoliation of evidence,— in its connection with the absurd findings of the Caldwell Commission with respect to it, that, if "the principal charge broke down"—it was solely "through a contemptible and damnable trick, on the part of the Government—a trick, which should certainly be punished in some way or other: for it is farcical to suppose, that it was not performed after deep meditation, and with reference to consequences."[1]
For these words, which, in the judgment of those spoliators of evidence, amounted to seditious libel against the Queen, Mr. Tarrant, the proprietor of the newspaper in which they appeared, was put upon his trial for that misdemeanor. It is true, that he had merited prosecution, for daring to give evidence, before the Caldwell Commission, of the early life and conversation of the Protector of Chinese and Brothels' Licenser.
I subjoin a concise, but on the whole, accurate report of the proceedings and evidence, which I find in the Daily Press.[2]
g 2
