Consists primarily of a typescript (with a few handwritten annotations or corrections) entitled "The Munsinger Diary" (83 pages), documenting J. Richard Houston's role as junior counsel representing the Rt. Hon. John G. Diefenbaker and the Hon. E. Davie Fulton before the Hon. Mr. Justice W.F. Spence in the Commission of Inquiry into Matters Relating to One Gerda Munsinger. Also includes a one-page note on the composition of the diary and a letter (one page) from Fulton to Houston, 7 June 1966.
The diary, which covers the period from April 9 to May 18, 1966, was drafted by Houston in May and June 1966, very shortly after the events it records, drawing upon a variety of sources, including docket entries by senior counsel C. F.H. Carson, Q.C., other files belonging to Houston's firm, the transcripts of evidence given at the Commission, and Houston's own docket entries and original handwritten notes (which apparently are no longer extant).
The diary details Houston and Carson's meeting with their clients Fulton and Diefenbaker, as well as encounters with Lowell Murray, Pierre Sévigny, Wallace McCutcheon, and others involved in preparations for, and/or proceedings before, the inquiry. The document discusses the development of the defence strategy for Diefenbaker and Fulton, as well as tensions between the two politicians and between members of their defence team, particularly Carson and Charles Dubin. It also documents the political and personal factors that culminated in Diefenbaker and Fulton's eventual decision to withdraw from the inquiry and to dismiss their counsel.
Houston provides a unique, behind-the-scenes glimpse of former Prime Minister Diefenbaker's response to the Spence inquiry and his relations with key Conservative Cabinet ministers such as E. Davie Fulton, George Hees, and Pierre Sévigny. Houston candidly records events with a sometimes scathing wit and a discerning, critical eye, often focusing, like a novelist, on small, revealing details.
The document also sheds light on the careers of several prominent Canadian lawyers and captures Fulton's response, in 1966, to Isabel LeBourdais's critique of the conviction of Stephen Truscott.
