Showing 56 results

Archival description
University of Toronto Archives and Records Management Services Martin Lawrence Friedland fonds Subseries
Print preview View:

Law School: Student, Professor, and Dean

The four boxes in this sub-series contain documents relating to my experience as a student, my four years at Osgoode Hall Law School, and my time as a law teacher and dean at the University of Toronto Law School.

There are very few documents relating to my student days at law school (files 2 and 3), apart from my moot factum (file 2) and notes and a small paper prepared for Abe Weston’s jurisprudence course and a set of notes taken in Bob McKay’s criminal law course (files 4 and 5). I have included several marked-up texts used as a student, including my international law casebook, the subject that was to be the subject of my graduate studies (file 7). (For a description of why I chose criminal law for my graduate work, see my speech to the Cambridge Boat-Race dinner in box 04, file 42). As I apparently tossed out most of my notes when we went to England in 1960, there is also very little from my articling year and the bar admission course. What has survived is one incorporation I did and a number of cases I argued for the firm of Kimber and Dubin and some legal aid criminal cases that I took on my own (files 8-10). Some of these cases were sensational enough to be covered in the yellow journals of the day, in Hush, Justice Weekly, and Tab.

Similarly, there are very few documents relating to my four years teaching at Osgoode Hall Law School from 1961-1965 (file 11). Research notes and documents relating to the Osgoode years can, however, be found in a number of other boxes, such as those relating to Detention before Trial, Securities Regulation, and Double Jeopardy.

I was appointed to the University of Toronto Faculty of Law commencing on July 1, 1965 (file 12). From that period on there is more material. The files, for example, contain some material on the Law School’s Research Committee and its Long Range Planning Committee, as well as various other memos (files 13-15).

In 1972 I was appointed as the dean and returned from my year as a Law Reform of Canada Commissioner in Ottawa (files 16-20). The files contain a fair amount of correspondence while still in Ottawa relating to the deanship (file 21). There are also various law school plans and speeches made while dean (file 22).

The many files connected with my seven years as dean between 1972 and 1979 will be found in the normal law school files. I did not go through the files to keep any law school records when my term of office was over. There is, however, a fairly lengthy interview done for the student Advocate (file 23). There are also a number of files dealing with student mooting while I was dean which were not part of the law school records but were given to me by some students a number of years later (possibly in the early 1980s) because they didn’t know what to do with them (files 41-44).

In 1975 I started making brief notes of my plans for the coming year (file 24) and kept this up until the present. I usually did these around Labour Day. From about 1980 on I also prepared, as we were required to do, annual reports to the dean on my moonlighting and other activities for the past year (file 27).

Correspondence from 1980 on not found in other boxes is contained in files 28-36. The files also contain material on other aspects of law school life, such as my chairmanship of the Directed Research Committee (files 37 and 38), my involvement as faculty advisor to the Faculty of Law Review (file 40), my membership in the graduate committee (file 48), and my involvement in seeking special salary increases for the faculty (file 39). None of these files is very complete, however. There are also files on my involvement in the law school annual squash tournament, various alumni events, and various talks I gave at the law school (files 45,47, and 51). Other files deal with various sabbatical plans, various media appearances, and ways in which I coped with the changing technology, including the use of the computer (files 46, 49, and 53). A number of law school pictures are contained in file 50.

Teaching

The two boxes of teaching material in this sub-series contain a small portion of my teaching materials. Before each class I would normally prepare a new outline for use in that class and would eventually throw out the earlier teaching materials. There are some examples of the type of notes used for my criminal law small group for 1993-94 in file 16. I have not included my recent teaching materials because I hope to use them in the future to prepare current teaching materials, assuming that I continue teaching one or more courses.

There are files in another part of the collection dealing with the criminal law casebook, which I have used in various editions since 1967.

   My usual teaching load at U of T was two courses and a seminar or a course and two seminars.  The course was almost always criminal law, sometimes a large section, sometimes a small section (files 14-18), and sometimes both in the same year. For several years after I came to U of T I gave a course on securities regulation and one on personal property.  At Osgoode Hall Law School I taught evidence, personal property, and gave a seminar on criminology.

For many years one of the seminars offered was on Law Reform ((file 7). Since about 1990, I have offered an Advanced Criminal Law Seminar (files 19-27), sometimes with Kent Roach. In recent years, the Advanced Criminal Law Seminar looked at comparisons between criminal justice in the United States and Canada, concentrating on Niagara Falls, New York and Niagara Falls, Ontario as well as comparing Buffalo and Toronto. This area is the subject of research Kent and I did on the Two Niagaras, which is found elsewhere in the collection. The Advanced Criminal Law seminar in 1991 was devoted to an examination of the General Part of the Criminal Law that had been the subject of a report by the Law Reform Commission of Canada (file 21). The work in the seminar formed the basis of a presentation to a Parliamentary Committee by two students and myself (file 22).

  Other seminars conducted over the years included an empirically-based criminology seminar in 1967 (file 6), and seminars on Crime and Literature for two years in the late 1980 which are found elsewhere in the collection.  In 1983, I ran the Law Review Seminar which that year dealt with criminal law reform (file 10) and in 1984 along with Bob Sharpe I ran the Law Review Seminar dealing with the Charter (file 11).  Both resulted in excellent papers by the students published in the Faculty of Law Review.  For a couple of years in the early 1980s I gave a seminar on International criminal law (file 9).

Appointment books

The four boxes in this sub-series contain the appointment books that I used for the years 1961 to 1994 (boxes 1-4). They contain appointment for each day and various other matters that I wanted to record, such as certain financial transactions. While I was dean from 1972 to 1979, my secretary, Patricia Dawson, also kept a daily appointment book for many of my activities (box 5).

Double Jeopardy

During articling in 1959-60, I applied to do graduate work in England and the United States. Although accepted (with funding) at Harvard and Yale (file 4), I accepted the Carswell/ Sweet and Maxwell Scholarship for study at Cambridge University that was being offered for the first time that year (file 2). I also obtained a substantial scholarship that was offered by Osgoode Hall Law School if I promised to teach there for one year after I returned (file 3). My wife and I were therefore comparatively wealthy--she worked at a mental hospital just outside Cambridge-- and we bought a red Sunbeam Alpine that we brought back to Canada with us (file 39).

I was to spend one year getting a Diploma in Comparative Legal Studies. My topic was double jeopardy, although I had at first naively thought that I would cover in that one year several ‘bars to prosecution’. Glanville Williams was my supervisor. The circumstances of choosing my college and my supervisor are set out in an after-dinner talk that I gave several years ago at the annual Cambridge dinner (file 40).

We returned to Canada in the summer of 1961 and I started teaching at Osgoode Hall Law School. I taught there during 1961-62 and then applied for a leave of absence to be able to return to Cambridge to convert my work into a doctorate (files 8 and 9). This time, funding came from the Canada Council (file 5), with some travel funds from the Law Society. I had applied for a Viscount Bennett Scholarship from the Canadian Bar Association, which, as in 1959-60, I did not get. The file includes all the letters of reference relating to the 1959-60 application which the CBA mistakenly returned to me (file 6)!

There is extensive correspondence throughout the 1960s with my supervisor, Glanville Williams, and with Cambridge University (files 8-10). I required dispensation with respect to shortening the number of terms that I had to spend in Cambridge and various extensions that I required. During this same period, I was researching and writing Detention Before Trial (published in 1965) and was involved in the Legal Aid study and the Kimber Committee on Securities Regulation, all of which made it difficult to complete my thesis.

I had thrown out all my research notes many years ago. They were kept in spiral binders and I recall having well over 50 of them. The only hand-written documents that survived are various versions of the preface (files 18 and 20). Four of the chapters of the manuscript were published as articles before the book was published and in some cases before the thesis was completed (files 16 and 17). The thesis was approved in early 1966. I did not have to go back to England to defend it. Sir Rupert Cross was the external examiner. Gooderson and Odgers were the internal examiners (file 19).

The thesis (Box 2) was published by Oxford University Press, having first been turned down by Sweet and Maxwell, whose scholarship had started my association with Cambridge (file 21). There are the usual files connected with publication (files 22-27).

The book came out at the beginning of 1969. It was widely reviewed in legal journals (file 29) and has been frequently cited by various courts (files 33-36). There are files on the citation of the book by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Supreme Court of the United States, and the House of Lords. I have also included a sampling of citation by other courts.

Detention Before Trial

In the fall of 1961, under the auspices of the Programme in Criminal Studies of the Osgoode Hall Law School (consisting of Desmond Morton and myself), I started to explore the possibility of doing an empirical study of the bail system in Canada. Hans Mohr of the Clarke Institute had been sitting in on my criminology seminar and had been encouraging me to do empirical work. Caleb Foote, then at the University of Pennsylvania, had conducted such studies in the United States and I invited him to give us advice on how best to conduct such a study (file 2). The files contain extensive correspondence with others who had knowledge of the area (files 2 to 9), including the Vera Foundation in New York (file 4) and statisticians with the then Dominion Bureau of Statistics (file 9), now Statistics Canada.

I hadn’t realised how difficult and time-consuming it was to do empirical work. The bail project had, however, captivated my interest and, when I decided to return to Cambridge to complete my doctorate in January 1963 (see the Double Jeopardy files), I took all my bail files with me and tried to switch my thesis topic from double jeopardy to bail. Glanville Williams discouraged me from doing so, and I therefore had two major projects hanging over my head for several years.

The planning for the project took place in the second term of 1962 (file 8) and over the summer of 1962 I had a horde of summer research assistants helping me collect data from the courts, the police, and other sources. We took all the criminal cases that arose in the Toronto Magistrates’ Courts over a six month period--about 6,000 cases (see the preface to the book). An even larger group of law students helped me code the data, which was eventually transferred to punched cards, which produced quantitative data which we could then analyse (files 11 and 12). When I returned to Canada from England in the summer of 1963, I put double jeopardy on hold and started writing up the material on bail. I completed the writing of a draft of the manuscript in the fall of 1964 and submitted it to the University of Toronto Press.

The manuscript was submitted to the Press in December 1964 and the book appeared in June 1965 (file 16). Osgoode Hall Law School had supported the work and it seemed fair to have it appear before I moved to the U of T Law School in July 1965. The speed of publication was particularly impressive because the manuscript needed a lot of editorial work (files 17 and 18, and 20 to 24).

The book was excerpted in three weekly full-page articles in the Globe and Mail in June 1965 (file 36) and was the subject of two programmes of the CBC’s Toronto File (file 35). There were a great number of editorials and news stories about the book (files 37 to 42) and there were reviews in Canada, England, and the United States (files 26 to 28).

In July, 1965 I made a presentation to Department of Justice officials in Ottawa (file 29), gave a number of talks on the book (files 31 and 32), and appeared before the Standing Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs in Ottawa in 1967 (file 34). I also supported the Toronto Rotary Club’s Bail Project that started in 1965 and which developed into the Provincial Bail Program (file 33).

John Turner, the Minister of Justice, took an interest in the subject. I took part in the drafting of the Bail Reform Act, along with the principal draftsman John Scollin and others, including Turner’s executive assistant, Irwin Cotler. The files contain four drafts of the legislation, showing the various changes from draft to draft (files 43 to 47). The files also contain the various Bills that were introduced into Parliament and the Act that was eventually passed in March 1971 (files 48 to 51). There was a reaction to the Act and less liberal amendments were introduced in 1975 (files 52 and 53).

Law Reform

In 1968, I received a Canada Council grant to undertake a project on the machinery of law reform (file 2). My plan was to write a comprehensive book on the various techniques for changing the law, from parliament and judicial lawmaking to the new Law Commissions that were emerging in the English-speaking world. In 1969, I gave a lecture sponsored by the Centre of Criminology on the machinery of criminal law reform, which was excerpted and commented upon in the Globe (files 5-8).

In 1969, for nine months, I explored the subject abroad: a few weeks in New Zealand, a month in Australia, and the rest of the time in England (files 9-13). I spent considerable time in London with the Law Commission (file 12) and other bodies. For most of that time, I was in the law library in Cambridge collecting materials and working out ideas for the book. Over the years, I wrote innumerable draft outlines for the book (file 15-19).

When I returned to Canada I was invited to present some of my ideas to the Department of Justice, which, as set out in the boxes on my work for the federal government, helped to influence the setting up of the federal Law Reform Commission.

I continued to work on the book, but in 1971 I was appointed to the Law Reform Commission of Canada, which made it difficult to devote much time to the project. When I returned to Toronto as dean in 1972 I continued to do work in the area, but concentrated on publishing specific papers on areas that interested me, that I thought would later form the foundation for the book. I did a paper, published in the University of Toronto Law Journal in 1974, on prospective and retrospective judicial lawmaking (file 35). Another paper was published in a festschrift edited by Peter Glazebrook for Glanville Williams in 1978 on pressure groups (files 36-40). As set out in the boxes on access to the law, I also published a book on the form of the law.

Throughout the 1970s, I did rough drafts of many areas of law (files 22-34) which I shared with my students in the seminar that I gave on law reform (see the boxes on teaching). Boxes of law reform materials were set out for their and my use (file 14). I also did considerable work on a paper, which was never completed, involving the House of Lords case of DPP v. Smith, which was the first subject dealt with by the English Law Commission (file 41).

When I concluded my term as dean in June, 1979, I went to Israel for the fall and to England for the spring. I was determined to come to grips with the great amount of material that I had collected and to publish a book on law reform. While in Israel I taught a course on law reform at the Hebrew University while working at Tel Aviv University (we lived in Netanya) (file 42). I commenced worked on the subject of codification (file 42)
which was to form a chapter of the book, but as described in the box of materials on R. S. Wright’s code, I spent most of my time in England researching and writing the article on Wright’s code.

When I returned to Toronto I wanted to find some way of completing the project. I decided to do a book of essays on law reform (files 46-49) and submitted a manuscript to the U of T Press (file 48). The book didn’t hang together, however, and eventually I withdrew it from the Press and published it with Carswells (files 51-60) in a different format under the title, A Century of Criminal Justice: Perspectives on the Development of Canadian Law, basing the main title on the paper that I did for the Royal Society for its Centenary celebration in 1982 (see boxes on other professional activities). I added articles that I had published in the last few years, plus an additional unpublished paper on the constitution and the criminal law. The book was published in 1984 and received good reviews. It did not, however, purport to be a book on law reform, although many of the essays dealt with aspects of the subject. It was simply a book on various essays on criminal justice. That ended my long involvement in attempting to publish a book on law reform. Still, I have never left my interest in the area. Indeed, today (January 20, 1998) I gave a talk at a workshop at the law school on commissions and committees, discussing the Somalia and Krever inquiries, and in preparation reread my very rough draft on the subject from the mid 1970s.

Criminal Law Casebook

The first edition of my casebook, Cases and Materials on Criminal Law and Procedure, appeared for use in September 1967. That edition was published in a typed version by the University of Toronto Press. The following year they put out a typeset edition, which Francess Halpenny copy-edited over one weekend. The U of T Press put out five editions and decided that they would not produce a sixth, in part because the casebook was loosing the market and in part because they were getting out of the casebook business. A number of versions were prepared by me in house at the Law School and eventually Emond Montgomery put out the sixth edition in 1991, a seventh in 1994, and an eighth in 1997. Kent Roach joined with me as the co-editor of the Emond Montgomery editions. In general, Kent was responsible for the criminal procedure chapters and the sentencing material. I was responsible for the rest. In the sixth edition, we switched from the Truscott case as a case study to the Marshall case. The extensive correspondence relating to the various editions is included in files 18-21. Three of the editions which I had marked up while teaching, the fifth, sixth, and the seventh editions, are also included in the materials (files 10, 14, and 16).

Courts and Trials

After I was appointed dean in early 1972, I started to organise an interdisciplinary series of lectures on courts and trials (file 2). This was designed to make a statement that we were not just a professional school but were part of the University. The series was widely advertised and was given every few weeks throughout the academic year 1972-73 (files 3-4). The contributors were from a wide array of disciplines--Reg Allen in philosophy, Don Dewees in economics, Tony Doob in psychology, Jim Giffen in sociology, Charles Hanly in psychoanalysis, Ken McNaught in history, Anatol Rapoport in mathematics, and Peter Russell and Don Smiley in political science (files 5-15). Northrop Frye backed out (file 8), but later contributed to the Crime in Literature series. The series was published by the U of T Press in 1975 (files 17-22) and the book was dedicated to Bora Laskin (file 11).

Access to the Law

In the summer of 1972, about the time I returned to the University of Toronto as Dean, I developed some ideas on access to the law which I had been thinking about when I was with the Law Reform Commission of Canada during the year 1971-72 .

The idea was to make the law accessible to non-lawyers who could not--then or now--penetrate the complex legal system, whether it was statutes, regulations, or cases. The scheme was to provide written material that could be digested by reasonably intelligent lay persons. It would combine federal and provincial laws. At the time the idea was to provide this information through encyclopaedias that would be available in public libraries and through intermediaries. It would also assist lawyers and legal aid clinics to find answers to problems and to be able to give material to interested clients. If the proposal were to be developed today, it would use the Internet. (See file 1).

A strong advisory committee was established, consisting of Francess Halpenny, the dean of the Faculty of Library Science, Ian Montagnes, the General Editor of the University of Toronto Press, Peter Russell, the Principal of Innis College, John Swan of the Faculty of Law, and Lyle Fairbairn, the counsel to the Ontario Law Reform Commission. (See file 2).

The Faculty of Law was heavily involved in the project because I thought it was desirable to try to get more interdisciplinary and group projects in the Faculty. (See file 3). Simcoe Hall was very supportive of the project. (File 4).

There was widespread consultation with librarians, lawyers and judges, and academics. (Files 5 to 7). Various governmental and non-governmental organisations were also consulted. (Files 8 to 13).

Various funding sources were explored. In the end, the funding was supplied by the Law Reform Commission of Canada, which took an active interest in the project. (Files 14 and 15).

Peter Jewett, a lawyer with Tory, Tory, and who had been my research assistant when he was at Law School, got a leave of absence from his firm to work on the project. He worked with his then wife, Linda Jewett, who was a librarian (she later became a lawyer). They travelled across the country discussing the concept with interested parties. (File 16).

We engaged a number of consultants to examine the present access to the law. Tony Doob of the Centre of Criminology helped us with experiments to see whether lay persons could, in fact, find their way around the present statute book. (They couldn’t.). A psychologist, Professor Paul Kolers, and an expert on linguistics, Harold Gleason, as well as experts in library science, Brian Land, Anne Schabas, Katherine Packer, and Alice Janisch, prepared papers for us. Various individuals assisted us in the preparation of models that could be examined. (File 17).

On February 8, 1974 I gave a speech on the concept to the Toronto Region Group of the Institute of Public Administration, which was excerpted in the Globe, and was widely reported in the Press. The paper was published in the Law Society of Upper Canada Gazette and Canadian Welfare. (Files 20 to 22).

In 1975, the book, Access to the Law, was published by Carswell/Methuen. Again, there was considerable interest in the concept by the press. See, in particular, the editorial by the Globe. (Files 23 and 24).

Although some progress has been made in developing the idea, the project remains unfulfilled. I had the chance of doing more on it when invited by the SSHRC in 1980 to submit a proposal on the project, but was unfortunately too involved at the time in other matters to take up their invitation. (Files 25 and 26).

The concept still makes excellent sense, particularly because of the Internet. It could be attempted by one province and the federal government to demonstrate that it could be done. In my study for the 1997 McCamus Legal Aid Review, I urged them to recommend such a scheme as part of the jurisdiction of the new Legal Services Commission. They did not do so. I also have urged people in South Africa, where there are very few lawyers, to study the scheme. The scheme remains to be tried in Canada or, indeed, in any other common-law jurisdiction.

R.S. Wright Articles

My sabbatical in 1979-80 was to be devoted to the process of law reform. While in Israel in the fall working on codification of the criminal law, I became interested in R.S. Wright and his Jamaica Code. I couldn’t discover very much about it. I wanted to add it as a footnote to what I was writing. Professor Yoram Schachar, then at the Hebrew University, urged me to go to the Public Record Office in London, where he had done work (file 4) and where I had never been. When I got to England at the end of December 1979 I went to the PRO at Kew Gardens. I spent most of the remaining part of the sabbatical working on the RS Wright story comparing his code with that of James Fitzjames Stephen (files 2-12). In the end, rather than one footnote, it had 324 footnotes (file 12). It was the first time that I told a story and I enjoyed the archival work so much that it led naturally to my later murder books.

The article, “R.S. Wright’s Model Criminal Code--a Forgotten Chapter in the History of the Criminal Law,” was published in the new Oxford Journal of Legal Studies (file 12). It is my favourite article by far. I gave a talk on it--‘Old and New Criminal Codes’--at the University of Windsor and at other law Schools (files 14 and 16). The Windsor talk was published in the Law Society of Upper Canada Gazette (file 15). In 1990, I gave a talk at the Washington meeting of the Society for the Reform of the Criminal Law on Codification in the Commonwealth, based on the Wright story, which was published in the Criminal Law Forum (files 17-19).

Lipski

In the Spring of 1981, I started looking for a project that would build on my interest in Mr. Justice James Fitzjames Stephen, who had played a prominent role in the article on criminal codes that I had completed on my sabbatical in 1979-80. I knew that Stephen had been involved in a number of interesting murder cases, such as the Maybrick case. I started to play around with a plot, perhaps a fictional one, that would involve Stephen, the Maybrick murder case, and Stephen’s son, J.K. Stephen, who may have been Jack the Ripper. In the course of this speculative investigation I came across the Lipski case. (See file 10.)

I had earlier seen brief references to the Lipski case that Stephen had tried in 1887, but did not know much about it except for the fact that Lipski was a Polish Jew and was hanged for murder. I looked through the London Times microfilm of the case that took place over the summer of 1887. The case was a fascinating one and I wrote to England to see if there were records on the case. They had records and even though they were closed for 100 years they would make them available for me. I was going over to England that summer to give a paper at the Cambridge Lectures and made arrangements to view the documents at the Home Office (file 2). The papers were very extensive (files 88-93) and there was also a transcript of the two-day trial (files 94 & 95). I arranged to have the documents copied and sent to me in Canada.

I quickly concluded that the case was an excellent one to explore the frailty of the criminal process and various other issues that interested me, such as Jewish immigration to England. It would also enable me to show the danger of capital punishment. One of the files I have included in this collection contains notes that I made in the 1960s on the issue of capital punishment (file 3).

There were, of course, many documents in other libraries and archives (file 4). The Cambridge Library, for example, contained the Stephen papers -- papers that I had used in the R. S. Wright article -- which included letters that Stephen had sent to his wife in the country during the trial and which showed what was going through his mind during the trial and in the later fight for a reprieve.

John Atkinson, a law student, was my research assistant that summer and did excellent work in helping me find material putting the case in the social and economic context of the times. He also helped me the following summer in Canada as well as in London where he spent a month in various libraries (See file 8.). (John died from cancer shortly after graduating from Law School. I gave the eulogy at his funeral. It has not been easy sorting through the file containing his notes.) Another excellent research assistant was Stephen Perry, who had just graduated from the Law School and had returned to Oxford to complete his doctorate in jurisprudence. (He is now
teaching at the University of Pennsylvania Law School.)He visited various archives for me in England in the fall of 1981 (file 9).

There was extensive correspondence with a large number of persons who had expertise in the various subjects covered in the manuscript (files 5 to 7). Some were experts on immigration to England, some on life in the East End of London, some on W. T. Stead, the journalist, who played a prominent role in the case, some on locked-door murder mysteries, and many others topics.

I have kept only a small part--perhaps about 10%--of my research files dealing with the case. Most had been culled earlier. Those kept include a number of spiral binders which show, to some extent, the chronological development of my ideas (files 10-13) and various specific files that may be of particular interest to future researchers. These include research on Jack the Ripper, locked-door mysteries, Rabbi Simeon Singer, W. T. Stead, and immigration matters (files 14-24).

There is no complete hand-written draft of the manuscript. It seems that I had my secretary type short hand-written sections after I had completed them. Some of these early drafts that I did keep are contained in various files in the collection (files 1, 25, 26, and 30).

In early drafts I gave away in the opening the fact that Lipski was hanged (see file 1). In later drafts, however, I decided that because virtually no one knew the Lipski case, I would keep back from the reader the fact that he was hanged, although I would state at the outset that he was convicted. The drama in the case would therefore turn on the issue of whether there would be a reprieve.

The book went through various typed and word-processed drafts (files 27-29, 53-56). The endnotes were done after the text was completed (files 30-38). There is considerable correspondence relating to pictures that were used in the book and for the slides that I later used in the various talks that I gave (files 57-60).

Macmillan London agreed to publish the book in December 1982 and a contract was concluded in 1983 (files 39-46). A number of other publishers had turned it down (file 50). Box 3 contains the various matters pertaining to publication such as author’s publicity sheets and catalogues. I was particularly pleased to have Macmillan London publish the book because they were Stephen’s publishers a hundred years earlier. Subsequently arrangements were made to have Macmillan Canada distribute the book in Canada at a reasonable price (file 48). The American rights were finally sold to Beaufort Books (file 49). No paperback edition was brought out (file 47). In 1995 copyright in the book reverted to the author (file 46).

A selection from the book appeared in the Canadian lawyer and in 1995 it was given the Crime Writers of Canada Award for Non-fiction for 1984 and was short-listed for the English Crime Writer’s Dagger Award for Non-fiction (files 51 and 52). I gave many talks with slides on the book, and did a number of radio interviews (Peter Gzowski and Vikki Gabereau, etc.) (See files 72 & 73.)

The book was widely reviewed in England, Canada, and the United States (files 65-69). The files contain extensive correspondence after publication (files 62-64), including correspondence with some of the reviewers (file 70) and correspondence with respect to the W. T. Stead Society.

There are a large number of files in box 45 dealing with possible movies. An Australian company, the principal of which was the murdered women’s granddaughter, took an option on the book and came fairly close to getting the financing for a movie (files 75-84). It had some of the leading character actors in England, such as John Mills and Leo McKern, lined up to play roles in the movie (file 83). A number of Canadian directors and producers, such as Pat Ferns and Beryl Fox, took an interest in the project, but nothing concrete developed. An American company also took an interest in the book, but again, nothing came of it (file 85). As I state later with respect to my other murder books, I’m still hoping!

Results 1 to 50 of 56