Liverpool's first police chief a murderer? – Part 1

Queens County stipendiary magistrate, Charles E. Morton issued a warrant for McAuliffe's arrest to answer a charge of murder. The victim was a Halifax-Southwestern Railway worker, James Alexander.

All information included in this article was obtained from Queens County Supreme Court records, 1903-1907; and was provided through the Public Archives of Nova Scotia.

Here is a copy of the Warrant: "CANADA, Province of Nova Scotia, County of Queens.

To all or any of constables and other peace officers in the said county of Queens." (Note - it is interesting that McAuliffe was the only constable but Duncan C. Mulhall, commonly known as D.C. was the sheriff.]

"Whereas Patrick McAuliffe of Liverpool in the said County of Queens, Police Officer, has this day been charged upon oath before the undersigned Charles E. Morton, a Stipendiary Magistrate in and for the County of Queens, for that he, on the ninth day April in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and four at the Town of Liverpool in the said county of Queens, murdered James Alexander"

These are therefore to command you, in his Majesty's name, forthwith to apprehend the said Patrick McAuliffe and to bring him before me (or any other justice of the peace in and for the said County of Queens), to answer unto said charge and to be further dealt with according to the law.

Given under my hand and seal this eighteenth day of April in the year 1904, at Milton in the county aforesaid.

Signed, Charles C. Morton

Stipendiary Magistrate in and for the County of Queens. The warrant to apprehend Patrick McAuliffe was predicated on information sworn before Magistrate Morton on the 18th of April, 1904, by Joseph Dilewa, construction foreman, "Who saith that Patrick McAuliffe murdered James Alexander in the Town of Liverpool on the ninth of April, 1904."

The documents show a flurry of activity by Magistrate Morton who subpoenaed witnesses and laid down $100 fines for all those who failed to appear to testify. All of this activity took place in the latter part of April and early May.

Those bound to testify were: Angelo Emmie, labourer, Liverpool; James N. Freeman, Middlefield; Fillipo Barletta, labourer, Liverpool; Stewart Nickerson, labourer, Sandy Cove; Angelo Marceill, Liverpool, labourer; Lloyd Hatt, Liverpool; Joseph Alexander, labourer, Liverpool; Leonardo Lizio, Liverpool; Thomas Grant, labourer, Sandy Cove; Joseph De Leve, Liverpool; Dr. Charles B. Trites, and Dr. Jordan W. Smith, both Liverpool physicians.

There was some suggestion by James Mack, McAuliffe's lawyer, that the charge be reduced to manslaughter, but apparently neither the prosecuting attorney, Mr. Hall, nor Magistrate Morton would countenance this charge. In any event McAuliffe appeared before the June, 1904 session of the Supreme Court in Liverpool and pled not guilty to the murder charge.

The first witness called was Angelo Emmie. He was examined by lawyer McLean. Emmie's testimony:

"I was born in Figilo, Roma. I have been one year in this country employed in the railway works since August, 1903. Saw deceased James Alexander and I remember the night of the shooting, April 9, 1904. I saw Jimmie (Alexander) that evening. I was with him between 9 and 10 o'clock. Was with him in the street. Two Englishmen were also with him, saw one Italian with him. Barletta was a little way from him. We were standing talking with the two Englishmen about work on the road. It was raining and Jimmie was holding an open umbrella. I know the accused McAuliffe by sight. The accused came along and shoved the umbrella off his shoulder. The accused struck Jimmie and turned him around. Then Jimmie turned around and struck the accused in the neck with his umbrella. The striking took place in the street and not on the sidewalk. He struck the accused on the street which was three or four feet from the sidewalk. Then the accused struck Jimmie who was forced three or four from the sidewalk. When he struck the accused, the accused struck Jimmie two or three times before Jimmie struck accused with umbrella. Jimmie and those with him were not making any noise or disturbance before the accused came along, those two was only talking. Jimmie then run away towards the bridge (Liverpool's town bridge), the accused blew his whistle, a lot of people came around and went in the same direction that Jimmie did, but I did not go. I heard no disturbance whatever before the accused came along. I walked in the street about fifteen minutes and then I went home."

Next witness was Dr. Charles B. Trites. He was examined by lawyer McLean:

"My name is Charles B. Trites. I am a qualified physician and have been practicing in Liverpool, N.S. for four years and a half. I knew the accused during that period and did not know the deceased until the night of the shooting the ninth of this month. I was called to the jail, and the deceased there lying on a bed apparently with his everyday clothes on. There were signs of blood around his neck, he was fully conscious. I remained with him about half an hour. I found a small gunshot wound on the left side of his neck about an inch and one half from the middle line and one inch and three quarters from the collar bone. I had been told this man was shot and this wound was caused by a bullet. I came to that conclusion. I probed for the bullet some, not much, and I was unable to find it. His clothes were smeared with blood. I dressed his wound that night and saw him early next morning. I attended him until his death and Dr. Smith of Liverpool was called in by me twice on consultation. He died last Sunday, I was not present. I saw him last Sunday morning between seven and eight o'clock. I saw his dead body between nine and eleven o'clock the same morning. I judge his death was caused from the effect of the bullet wound. The medicinal "(term)" is thrombosis. On last Monday afternoon Drs. Smith, McLeod and myself held an autopsy to endeavour to find the bullet, if possible. The friends of the deceased did not wish the body to be too much mutilated and were only willing to consent to a limited dissection of the body. We followed the bullet through the narrow fleshy structures of the body until we reached the side of the spinal coulman "(column)" "and there we stoped" (stopped) - "We could trace the course and direction of the bullet entering the neck at the point described with a slight inclination down and in, not more than an inch below the opening where it entered the neck. We stopped when we came to the muscle and vacia covering the bone but did not find where the bullet entered the bone. Do not know if it entered the bone or not. Did not see any point where we could say that this bullet struck any bone."

Next week: cross-examination