#5-- FIRST AN ACCUSED, LATER A JUDGE
JAMES ALBERT NETTERFIELD
James was born in Wingham in 1878, one of 4 boys and two
daughters, to James and Sarah Netterfield.
Part One: Accused
James was 18 when he was involved in the Wingham riot. That’s
when a drunken mob decided to tar, feather, and horsewhip John Field, the local
butcher, to teach him a lesson for supposedly impregnating his step-daughter,
Rosie. (It seems that Rosie’s mother, disgraced, and her daughter were sent to
Canada, and after her marriage to Fields she suffered from his cruelty. After
her death and the cessation of remittances for her upkeep, Rosie was
ill-treated. The paternity of two children was attributed to John: Rosie denied
this.) The baby, born March 7, 1896, was stillborn. John was a “drinking man” with a very violent temper who “used his
family with great severity.” In 1891, he was charged with attempted assault when
he chased a Salvation Army member down the street with a knife. The Wingham
Times called Fields “an inhuman wretch” and “everything brutish and vile.”
In March 1896, a group of about 35 men, calling themselves the “White Caps” blackened their faces as disguises, marched down Wingham’s main street, stopped at the hotel demanding free whiskey and said they were going to “give Fields a turning over.” That night, armed with a least one pistol, a rope and two horsewhips, they attacked Field’s house, ransacked the house, smashed windows, broke furniture and upended the stove. Wearing nothing but a nightshirt, Fields was dragged outside. After a mock trial, Fields was forced to kneel in the deep snow in temperatures of -4 degrees F (-20 C) and plea for his life; he was horsewhipped before being released about an hour later. The next day, Fields left on a train for Michigan but was found a few days later wandering London streets in a delirious state. He was taken to hospital where he died of “inflammation of the brain and pneumonia caused by exposure” resulting from injuries sustained in the attack. This was now a murder case.
Because James Netterfield had been at the mob’s initial barn
meeting and was a party to the conspiracy to break into Fields’ house, he was
arrested. The jury at the Coroner’s Inquest debated for half an hour and
decided that James should be charged with murder. Later, however, at an arraignment, a few
witnesses testified that James was already so drunk at the hotel, was seen
passed out on the ground by Fields’ gate and then seen starting for home, (about
125 yards away) about ten minutes before Fields was brought out; in other
words, James was too drunk to have participated. Charges against him were dropped for lack of
sufficient evidence.
Eventually, five men were tried for manslaughter in the
Goderich courthouse. At trial , the Crown argued that no matter how beastly
Fields was, society could not tolerate “moral reform stimulated by whiskey.”
The defence argued that the accused were family men of good character who never
meant to kill Fields. Furthermore with dozens of men involved, why were only
five men charged? In the end the five
pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of assault causing bodily harm and were
sentenced for six months to three years.
Later that year, Oliver Mowat, the Minister of Justice, heeding the
pleas of the prisoners’ wives and children who were left without any support,
commuted all sentences to one year.[i]
The Wingham riot was a sad and disgraceful story. It also stigmatized
this small town. Toronto newspapers sensationalized
all details of the story and devoted a lot of print; Wingham newspapers, on the
other hand, were actually criticized by the public for not carrying more
details. “We would not object to the space so much if publishing it would
accomplish any good, but it is our estimation it cannot do any good and only
wound the feelings of those upon whom misfortune has fallen.” “We have neither
the time nor inclination to give an elaborate account, which would necessarily
deal with personalities and gossip, rather than a statement of facts…The story so
far is a short, but deplorable one.” Of
course, one reason was that many more Winghamites than those charged were part
of the mob, so the town wanted to forget.
And the sympathy of the town was with the prisoners and nearly everyone
in town subscribed to a fund for their defence.
There were many Wingham citizens who supported the rule of
law and admitted that that there was a small element [in the town] who “have no
respect for anything or anyone, who pride themselves on their rowdyism and
because they are craven cowards at heart, go just as far as they can in order
to escape the clutches of the law. This
class is wielding a grater influence in the town than most people are willing
to recognize, and if these acts of rowdyism are winked at, they are going to
increase in influence and power, until they sap the life blood out of society,
or in another tragedy.” [ed comment; this was written in 1896, not 2023, but has
a familiar ring]
But townspeople felt attacked by the big city newspapers. “To
one who knows Wingham only by what he
has read in the Toronto papers, it must be appear a semi-barbarous hamlet…Even
as respectable citizens travel on the train, they are taunted by a blatant
conductor as being from Lynchtown. Some of those papers would leave the
impression that nearly everyone in town was woefully warped in their ideas of
propriety and justice. This is all nonsense and only goes to show that the
country is possessed of a good proportion of ignoramuses and sensation lovers
and that the city newspapers, instead of using their influence against this
sort of thing, encourage and pander it for the sake of gaining for themselves a
doubtful reputation.” “As citizens of
Wingham, we are humiliated by six of our number being in the cells with the
awful charge of murder hanging over their heads, and the name of our town
passed from mouth to mouth as synonymous with immorality, mob-rule and lewd
indifference…we are charged with trying to cover up the crime and protect the
guilty parties. We have gained a most unenviable notoriety and anything we may
say will have but little effect to increase or diminish the opprobrium being
heaped upon us.”
Part 2: Then a Judge
With emotions so tense and memories long and uncomfortable,
it is no surprise that James decided to escape Wingham for Toronto. In 1902, he
was married and a daughter and son were born in 1903 and 1905. (Son Harold
Netterfield became a renowned Canadian speedskater.) He got a job as a piano
finisher eventually becoming a business manager in that factory. He bought a
house on Shaw Avenue.
James belonged to fraternal societies including the Masonic
Lodge and the Orange Lodge. He was an active supporter of the Orange Lodge for
Children, an orphanage for underprivileged or orphaned Protestant children. He
was a President of the Native Sons of Canada, founded 1921 and along with the
KKK and Orange Lodge, was a preeminent nativist group; all three groups were
concerned about the “social and biological threat” that non Anglo-Saxons posed to
Canadian society. In Toronto in the 1930s, there were 30,000 members of the
Native Sons; two mayors were Sons and on one city council ¾ of the controllers
and 16/18 aldermen were Sons. Even more powerful was the Orange Lodge; the
identity of Toronto and the Orange Order were indistinguishable. For one
hundred years, from 1850-1950, nearly every Toronto mayor was an Orangeman as
were the city councillors, police officers, firemen and nearly all public
servants; they used their patronage in municipal appointments, schools and
social services.
In August 1924 the Ontario Cabinet Council appointed James
Netterfield as Probation Officer of the Juvenile Court of Toronto. There is very little doubt that this was a
patronage appointment of a fellow Orangeman and Native Son.
Juvenile court had jurisdiction for legal cases involving
children under age 14. As no child could be tried in public, only court
officials, necessary witnesses, parents and the probation officer were present
at the hearing As a probation officer, James’s
role was to ascertain and submit to the court the full particulars of the child
brought to trial and to act in the child’s interests. James had the powers of a
constable, and would take charge of the child before or after trial as directed.
He was to frequently visit the home, insist on school attendance and proper
moral instruction and by having a constant supervision of the child would hopefully
prevent his getting into trouble again.
In 1929, James was appointed as a deputy judge of the Court
of Domestic Relations and in 1933 was promoted to Toronto’s Chief Probation
Officer in charge of a department of 10. The Domestic Relations court heard cases
like divorce, desertion or unpaid support payments to wives, children or
parents. The probation officers were skilled investigators and called “gentlemen
of the skilled eye, silent mouth, aces in psychology, not susceptible to high pressure”.
James retired in 1950. He passed in May 1955 at his home on
Poplar Plains Road, Toronto.
JAMES ALBERT NETTERFIELD
b. Aug 25, 1872 in Wingham, Ont
m. May G. McDonald on May 14, 1902 in York
d. May 11, 1955 in Toronto
my 1st cousin 3x removed (Homuth-Netterfield
line)
Just goes to show that no one is beyond redemption.
ReplyDeleteAnd all small towns have their secrets.