Charles Hutchinson Letter Book, 1875-8
p. 269

Apr 20 1876

JG Scott Esq, Attorney General's office, Toronto
Dear sir, Queen vs Thomas Donelly, robbery, larceny, attempt at arson, & arson In the robbery case, there was only 1 witness examnd before the grand jury, via James Churchill. James Curry the person said to have been robbed, lodged an information & was examined before the Police Magistrate soon after the alleged robbery. The accused was then discharged, as it was then considered there was not sufficient evidence to corroborate Curry's testimony, the evidence of McConnell Warburton & Henry being looked upon as favorable to the accused. Churchill was subsequently a witness in the arson case, & he then mentioned his having been present when Curry was robbed, & his evidence was taken to that effect. The Police Magistrate then decided to commit Thomas Donnelly on the charge of robbery, which he had previously dismissed. [...] The reason given by Esdale for not prosecuting sooner is consistent with the state of affairs in the time. There was a reign of terror in Lucan in those days, no one dare go against the Donnellys. Attempt at arson: An indictment was found vs Thomas Donnelly on the testimony of James Churchill & Rhody Kennedy, which if believed would seem sufficient to support it.

Arson: There is no direct evidence except the admission to R Kennedy. [...] The bad feeling existing towards Flanagan on the part of the Donnellys, especially Thomas, was proved clearly, & threats such as would indicate an intention of doing mischief. R Kennedy is brother in Law of Wm Donnelly, & had been intimae with the brothers, but had quarreled with them, & a very bad feeling existed. [...] I question whether a jury would convict upon the evidence. Thos Donnelly was seen in the neighbourhood previous to the fire, but there was nothing remarkable in that circumstance, as the brothers had their stable in the village, & one of them, if not more, lived there.

Queen vs John Donnelly, arson: bill thrown out; assault upon a constable: he was convicted on his own confession & sentenced to 3 mos imprisonment, & is now in the central prison; common assault [illegible]] forward, not yet tried. He will be entitled to be admitted to bail on termination of present term of imprisonment.

Queen vs James Donnelly, arson: indicted with Thomas & true bill found. The evidence is even weaker than against Thomas, but application for bail needless as he was convicted of an aggravated assault upon one Berryhhill, & sentenced to be imprisoned for 9 mos. He is now in central prison. [...]

Yours truly,
Charles Hutchinson, County Atty