The Sun.
London, England, 1839-01-07 00:00:00

LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, JANUARY 7. 1839.

EXTRAORDINARY DISCLOSURE.

M. GISQUET versus THE iVIESSAGER.

On Friday last a trial commenced at the Paris Court of
Assize, the circumstances of which have for some months past
attracted the attention of all classes in the French capital.
Few legal occurrences were indeed calculated to excite more
curiosity than the action brought against the evening p=int
Le Meesager des Chambres by Monsieur Gisquet. If the
late Court-Martial at Perpignan upon General Brossard, exhi-
Lited a corruption in the higher ranks of the army which had
extended to one of the Generals most influential at Court—in

the case we are adverting to the foulest public and private
transactions are imputed to an eminent civil officer who has en-
joyed in the palace of the Citizen King a favour at least equal
to that of Lieut.-General Bugeaud. M. Gisquct, whom we
have just now to deal with, obtained his first unenviable noto-
riety in the latter part of the year 1830, when the arsenals of
France proving, or rather being represented as, inadequate to
furnish the army and revived National Guards with arms
enough to defend the independence of the country, or menace
that of neighbouring States, M. Casimer Perier determined
upon procuring a supply of muskets of English manufacture.
To make this purchase the commercial premier employed the
medium of his private agent, M. Gisquet. The negociater
was accused of having laboured much more for his own inde-
pendence than that of "La Belle France." In spite of these
imputations, M. Gisquet was soon after promoted by his pa-
tron to the eminent station of Prefect of Police, his exertions in
which department were subsequently rewarded with a seat in
the Council of State. We need not aild that be had also his
due share of the ribbons and crosses so copiously lavished to his
equality-loving people by the Fourth Grand Master of the " Le-
gion of Honour." Rapid and lasting was the favour obtained by
M. Gisquet in the supreme management of the Paris police.
Although the assassination of the Duke de Berry overthrew
the favourite Minister of Louis the ;Eighteenth. Gisquet
had the good luck to resist the tremendous effects of a plot
which he might much more easily have detected—the memor-
able plot of Fieschi, Pepin, and Morey. In the Prefecture
de Police, which be retained until the accession of the present
Ministry transferred irto M. Gabriel Delessert, his fame greatly
increased. If the fire-arms, imported by him from England,
are known in the French army under the denomination of
Gisguets, every political arrestiand domiciliary visit that takes
place in Paris, tends to immortalize his name, for those effected
under his administration were nearly as numerous as the costly
muskets he conferred upon his country. Nevertheless, and
whatever more substantial advantage the ex- Prefect may have
derived from his Birmingham mission and subsequent eleva-
tion, a considerable portion of public esteem must still cling to
him, for he is now one of the representatives of the capital, or
rather of St. Denis, in the Chamber of Deputies.
In France, in all ewes of libel upon a public functionary,
the defendant is allowed to prove his allegations, and he must
within a certain period notify to the prosecutor the documents
and list of witnesses he intends to produce in Com t. Among
the Messager's witnesses we observe the names of MM. I and
S. Rothschild.

The following is the letter addressed by M. Cisquet to a
Madame Foucaud, who seems likely to enact a conspicuous
part in these proceedings, and whose husband appears to be
the principal witness on the Messager's side. Its contents are
the more worthy of notice as the eminent writer superintended
at the time an important branch of the Administr,tion, one of
whose departments is entitled "Bureau des Iticeurs :
" Madame—The request which I am about to address to
you will, no doubt, appear to you at the first blush strange,
but when you shall have read my letter to the end, and heard
the explanations which M. Arago will give you verbally, and
which are'too long to be set forth in a letter, you will, perhaps,
feel disposed to render me the kindness which I must solicit
from your friendship—an immense service rather, and one on
which depends the happiness of my family.
" You have, no doubt, heard of the intimate connection I
formed four year.; since with Mademoiselle Pradel.

" Young, handsome, witty, and ercluvted with an apparent
mildness, this young lady, who has since assumed the st 3 le and
title of Madame de Nieul, appeared to unite all the fine quali-
ties of her sex, and I hoped to find in her society, with the cau-
tion which her position and mine required, a grateful diversion
from the fatigues, the cares of all kinds, incidental to my poli-
tical position.
_

" The interior of my own household was very triste for me.
My wife, being older than I am, did not offer me nor make me
feel any of those sweet emotions which are the charm of exis-
tence ; my wife, who is in every respect a model of resignation,
of devotedness and of virtue, had no sympathy in my tastes,
nor in my social habits. There consequently subsisted between
her and me only relations of amity and mutual, regard. I
wanted something more. I required fuod for the sensations
of the heart. I felt the need of intellectual rather than of
sensual intercourse.

" I consequently formed, and without any scruple, a con-
nection which would, I trusted, fill up the vacuum existing in
my heart.
" I give you these particulars, Madam, in order to excuse in
your eyes a marital error which wives are little disposed to
pardon.
" Mademoiselle Pradel, in a situation bordering on misery,
appeared taken with the most lively passion for me. She af-
fected the utmost self-denial and disinterestedness, and to feel
bat one desire, and to experience only one want, that of pleas-
ing and being agreeable to me. I soon, however, acquired the
conviction that there were in her demonstrations and profes-
sions_more of dissimulation than of real sentiment.

" In a short time this young lady, so devoted, so mild,
inured hitherto to privations of all kinds, became;sordid, exact-
ing, imperions, a coquette, and scattered gold with profusion,
" This woman, who was to live ' in obscurity, in resigna-
tion,' and shut up alone in her apartment during whole
weeks,' who did not wish to be a burden on me,' who was
to be simple and saving,' became in the course of a month a
domestic tyrant—attaching herself to my steps like my sha-
dow, causing me to be watched and observed by all those
around me, bribing with money my servants, in order that
they might render to her an account of even my most private
and minute proceedings, and of the persons by whom I was
visited, coming to look for me everywhere, to every place
where my affairs called me, even into the very saloons of the
Ministers, nay, into the Royal Palace; confiding her secret
and mine to all the hackney-coachmen by whom she was
driven while thus running after me day and night—publishing
everywhere her dishonour, in order to boast of the empire she
exercised over me; showing herself arrogant and impertinent
towards the ladies, whoever they were, whom she met at the
Prefecture (of poiice); coming to my lodgings morning and
evening, in spite of my strict order to the contrary, and not de-
terred by the presence of crowds from faisant des scenes
(kicking up a row).
" Vain, proud, her amour propre, her ambition, prompted
her to pass herself off in the quarter she inhabited as a great
lady, very rich, purchasing right and left every thing she laid
her eyes on, contracting debts in every direction. Too weak,
from her vanity, to resist the engaging and seductive words of
a merchant, she would have stripped every shop in Paris.
" These facts were every day the occasion of violent scenes
between us; and, in spite of my remonstrances, my advice, my
supplications, my•reproaches—in spite of a threat a hundred
times made of an immediate rupture, I learned on the morrow
new facts more culpable still, and more extravagant than the
preceding.
" Finally, Madame, you will perhaps believe me when I tell
you that Madame Nieul spent nearly Ioo,ooof, within these
four years. I had procured for her, thanks to your husband,
,25 shares in the omnibus, which brought her in 4,000 f. per
annum. Well, she sold nearly all these shares. She has de-
voured the proceeds. Nevertheless, I think that she has debts,
and yet—l am ashamed to confess it—l have spent on her and
on her family upwards of 20,000 f. per annum.
" A hundred times did I resolve on breaking off this fatal
connexion—a source of sorrow and ruin. A hundred times I
quitted her with a firm determination not to see her again,
but that wily and hypocritical being came back to me with
such demonstrations of love, with such expressions of regret,
that it aas not possible to withstand them.
" Many of cry friends know her, and all can assure you,
that, to judge from her language, she carries love to delirium,
and this I must believe; for, notwithstanding all my efforts to
get rid of her, and although I have said to her a thousand
times the harshest things, and in spite of the slaps in the
face (soufflets) I have given her; and, finally, in spite of the
gross insults I offered her, in repeatedly turning her out of
my house, she comes back, as if hurried along by an irresistible
power.
" Fallings out every day, violent quarrels at all hours, ficti-
tious reconciliations—such have been my pastime during the
last four years with Madame Nieul.

But,' you will ask, why did you not quit her, when
you discovered all her defects ?' Why ? because she is as
cunning as she is wicked ; because she atones for her errors
by affectation of jealousy; because it is difficult to resist a
handsome woman, who begs your pardon, and who embraces
you for hours together, although you repel her with rudeness;
in fine, Madame, because I have for her an inclination which
is not yet, perhaps, extinct.
" But, if she did not love me, would she submit to so many
sacrifices of amour-propre to avoid a rupture ? I know not ,•
and if it be true that she is insensible to insults and blows, and
being turned out of doors, it is true also that I never had suf-
ficient empire over her to prevent her doing whatever came
into her head ; and experience warrants me in stating, that if
my very life depended on one of her caprices, she would have
sooner seen me cut up in pieces than forego the pleasure of
gratifying that caprice, however trifling it might have been.
Thus the question—am I loved—adored?—is still problemati-
cal for me. For my own part, I am inclined to believe that I
have had to do with an artful actress—that I was to her not a
friend, but a prey—that if she bad hung upon me, it was not
through tenderness, but from calculation ; and that what proves
this to have been the case is, that notwithstanding my denials,
she often maintained to my face that I was very rich, which,
unfortunately, is not the case.
" Such is my companion, such are my ennuis and the
chagrins which I had to endure every day of the last four years.
" They have had an immense influence over my fortune,
over my social
to resign the prefecture; for the continual presence? the bare-
Positidn, and partly contributed to induce me

faced language of this woman, compromisei me in the eyes of
everybody. It was, in short, a public immorality.
" I was obliged to quarrel with all the friends to whom she
took a dislike, and now 1 am nearly isolated in the centre of a
city in which I know everybody—a city in which everybody i,
disposed to believe me, but in which I meet everybody inclined
to censure my weakness.
" Would you believe that I would not have dared to give
my arm to Madame Thiers, to Madame de Montalivet, or tc
any other lady of the same rank, for fear of exposing them to
the risk of being insulted by the jealous fury who followed me
day and night ?
" I have suffered much, Madame; I have experienced a
thousand humiliations ; my heart still bleeds in being sepa•
rated-from so many ladies of my acquaintance, whose society
unstituted my happiness. No one knows better than myself
in what a false position I stand, or is more fully aware of the
wrong I have done myself and my &roily. A hundred times I
have thought of expatriating myself fora certain number of
years; but wherever I might have fled—had it been to the
end of the world—l should never have been able to have
got rid of that miserable Roman, for she would still have pur-
sued me.

" But the source of my greatest affliction is the situation
of my poor and excellent wife, of my beloved children, of my
daughter, whom I adore, who have been made wretched by
seeing me, as it were, dissevered from them, and who have at
last come to that state that they regard me as a stranger, for
whom but little interest is to be Mt.

" Ah ! this thought breaks my heart.
" My rife weeps incessantly, fancying me weak enough to
sacrifice all we possess to gratify the caprices of a courtezan
I must, then, burst this chain, too weighty for me to bear; I
must regain my freedom, and it is on you, Madam, that I de-
pend to supply me with the means.
Lsten while le,,xplain in what way I require your assist-
ance. ._

" Madame de Nieul having for some time past exhausted
every mode of rendering me despicable in the eyes of my
friends, and of provoking an alienation between them and me,
has hit upon a new project, which consists in not only com-
promising me, but hi compromising every lady of my acquaint•
ante.

" Can you imagine that she has the audacity to send per
sons to houses whare I am known, who present themselves
n ith some pretext or other, as coming from me, and require an
answer in writing? These answers arc immediately carried to
Madame de Nicul, who opens without scruple letters addressed
tome.

" By these means she endeavours to learn what may be my
relations or courtesy with the people I know, and I tremble
lest she has committed similar impertitiences towards Madame
Thiers, Madame Pericr, and other ladies, who have the right
to feel offence. . . . Imagine how great would be my
confusion, if ie families where I am received with kindness I
should be asked for explanation about acts done in my name !
If I should hear pointed out the impropriety of demanding a
written answer to a message delivered orally by a porter, I
should be almost tempted to dash my brains out.
Well, since tills miserable woman desires to dishonour me
by the most infamous means, let her, then, be caught in the
seam which she is herself setting.
" She has already put in practice, with regard to M. Fou-
caud, the manoeuvre of which I have been speaking, for she
has despatched to him one of her messengers, and obtained
from him a r.o!e addressed to use. It is very probable that she
a ill take the liberty of sending to you, and it is here that I
wish to stop the course of her impertinent proceedings.
" As I should never have the boldness of sending a servant
to you without a written message, if any one comes to you not
having a letter from me, you may be certain it is an emissary
of Madame de Nieul, and in such case, Madame, I entreat you
to appear the dupe—to give her a letter for me, and to writ(
that letter in such affectionate terms as may induce Madamr.
da Nieul to see in it a semi-proof of culpable intimacy between
1.13 ; put into it some equivocal expression, and a few of those
words, cleric in their interpretation, which flow so readily
from a female pen.

" Then the -furious jealousy of Madame de Nieul will bring
about a scene which shall be the last, for after such infamous
conduct towards you I. would never forgive her in my whole
life. Besides, I believe that even she would not wish to con-
' tinne our liaison, if she thought that her jealousy had any se-
rious foundation. By Os means I shall be freed from *verit-
able fury. What happiness for me, and fur my poor family,
upon whom I would impress all the gratitude that they owe
your w
We should all return you our heartfelt thanks for con-
' duct which on your part e ould be real charity.
" I am fully aware of all your goodness, and of all your in-
dulgence fur me, or I should not dare'to request such a ser-
vice. But what inconvenience can you fear in rendering me
this service? For it is of little importance far Madame de
Nieul to possess a letter of yours, apparently expressing a too
tender feeling for myself, since the fact itself is not true, and
the present letter—the intervention—and, in case of need, the
testimony of M. Aragon, constitute a sufficient protection
against any bad use which Madame de Nieul might be dis-
posed to make of your letter? Besides, Madame, you might
very well speak of it to M. Foucaud, and follow in this parti-
cular the course that he might point out, for I wish, above all
things, to avoid causing you any vexation, and I do not wish
that any one of my best friends should have the slightest ground
for thinking that I had brought trouble to his house.
" I 'night still give you a thousand reasons why I ask this
first service_from you, Madame, rather than from any other per-
son, and why this method is the only one which can release
me from my embarrassment. lam sure of success if you will
only have the kindness to assist me ; but it is so late, and my
letter is already so long, that I can now do no more hen refer
to the details which M. Aragon will give you on this head, for
lie is acquainted with all my sufferings and all the reasons
which render me anxious to make use of the method I have
specified. M. Aragon, however, has not expressed concurrence
in my opinion as to the efficaciousness of the proposed re-
medy, and saw great inconvenience in making such a demand
upon your kindness ; but I declare that I cannot, for a thou-
sand reasons, which I will explain to you verbally, ask the
same favour of any other lady ; and I declare upon my honour
that I believe in the successful result of the proposed proceeding.
" Finally, Madame, if your opinion or M. Foucaud's—in a
word, if a very natural repugnance should induce you to reject
my proposition, I beg of you to say so to M. Aragon, who will
have the honour to deliver this letter, and be assured that I
will not the less retain towards you all the sentiments of friend-
ship and devoted respect with which you have inspired me.
" Accept, Madame, with my apologies, the earnest homage
of your humble and devoted, " GISQUET.
" This letter will be delivered to you open by M. Aragon."
The proceedings in this case came on for its ultimate decision
before the Court, the defendant having previously suffered
judgment to go by default, not having been prepared with the
requisite documents for his case, through the absence of his
advocate, M. Mauguin.
M. Plougoulm, Advocate-General attended. The plain-.
tiff sat under the Judges, by the side of his advocate, M. Par-
quin ; and the editor of the Messager, M. Brindeau, was at
the bar, attended by his counsel, M. Ma:aguin, Member of the
Chamber of Deputies, and M. Cappin, late Procureur- Gene-
ral Nisrnes.
The Registrar read the documents relating to the first pro-
ceedings by which the defendant was charged-Ist. With
having been guilty of defamation against a pubtic functionary
in the exercise of his office, by reproaching M. Gisquet with
acts of underhand dealing and corruption (concussion et cor-
ruption), both as Prefect of Police and as Counsellor of State.
2. Of defamation against a private individual, by reproaching
M Gisquet with actions of a nature to injure his character and
his honour.

The usual questions as to their names, ages, professions,
&c., were then addressed to the parties. M. Gisquet declared
his age to be forty-six. The articles of the Massager con-
taining the alleged libels were then read. The principal
article was contained in the number of that journal which ap-
peared on the 11th of September. The defendant, in reply
to the President, declared that be was not the author of the
articles, yet he assumed all the responsibility of them. He
was proceeding, in compliance with another question from the
Court, to give an explanation of these articles, when
M. Parquin rose to demand that the defendant should cot
be allowed the benefit of proving his allegations by documents,
on the ground that he had not specified the facts of names,
places, &c., that he intended to adduce in these proofs.
M. Cappin, in reply, complained that M. Gisquet had come
forward as a public funtionary, and had commenced the prose-
cution, but the moment he found M. Brindeau really able to
cross swords with him, and to bring forward evidence, he tried
to decline the combat. The lives of public functionaries, he
contended, belonged altogether to public opinion.
The Advocate-General cited the provisions of the law, ac.
cording to which, a person accused of defaming a public func-
tionary was bound to enunciate beforehand all the facts that he
alleged, under pain of not being admitted to the right of
proving
them. As far as the articles of the Messager was
concerned, the defendant had not done this. He had not spe-
cifled the facts ; and the plaintiff's counsel was, therefore,
justified in his demand.
M. Mauguin thought the Advocate-General had in this in-
stance mistaken the intention of the law. The plaintiff in
the present case could not pretend to be ignorant of the facts
hiFmourecaad over again the letter he had
ud. it he had mentioned
producinga
4,000 francs a. year, which
hcaa rdetiglaaciesdnds ;podrmolict: )fui bir'auecsdMds ad'
throughralemeste a certain husband for a lady whose
name should be pronounced by-and-jay. They came from the
omnibus undertaking called Parisiennes. As for the other 22
written documents involved in this affair, from whom did they
come ? Were they not from respectable people ? And did
they not prove that the Government privilege for these very
omnibuses had been granted in M. Gisquet's own cabinet, and
had been conceded for 200,000 e. ? The omnibuses called the
Josephines had been licensed on the same conditions; and
M. Gisquet knew well that his intermediate agent, M. Ara-
gon, had received 28,0001. in this latter business. He must
be conscious of the affair of the washing-b-irges, and be must
know perfectly well how the Hirondelles had been managed.
There were seven facts to which he would call the attention of
the Court; the affairs of the Parisiennes, the Josephines, the
Washing-barges, the Dame; Franaises, the Spphides, the

PRICE sd.

!lironelles, and the Muskets. Out of these seven points he
was sure to prove five; about two he was not quite so sure.
The President declared that the cause should be proceeded
with.

The witnesses were then called over by name ; those for the
defendant acre eighteen in number.
M. Parquin then proceeded to argue at some length against
the investigations of the Court being directed to any other
:Joints than the allegation of underhand dealings advanced
igainst M. Gisquet.
M. Mauguin wished that M. Gisquet had made these reflec-
ions before he made the attack. Agents of public authority,
he would contend, were, above all others, bound to set good
examples of morality. M. Gisquet himself, in a passage of
(.he letter to Madame Foucaud, spoke of the troubles and an-
noyances caused him by the lady to whom he had given the
amnibus shares, and declared that her continual applications to
and her bold language, compromised him in the eyes of
.11 the world, and "became a positive subject of public im.
morality."
The Advocate-General maintained that. by a law of 1819,
aroofs of facts occurring in the private lives of public func-
tionaries could not be admitted ; and, as for the letcr alluded
he appealed to the wisdom of the Court as to how far it
would allow of its being produced.
The Court retired to deliberate on this point, and returned
with a decision that the letter in question should not be com-
municated, except i❑ so far as regarded those passages that
tffected the public actions of M. Gisquet.
M. Foucaud was called. He described himself as a mer-
ahant, residing at No. 18, Rue du Faubourg Montmartre.
The President recommended the witness to speak with mo-
deration, and informed him that he was not to mention any
facts relating to the private life of M. Gisquet.
M. Foucaud stated that, having formed an intimate friend-
ship with M. Gisquet, he, through him, became acquainted
ith his son-in-law, M. Nay, and M. Malian. The latter,
being a man of business, one day applied to him to think of
ome concern in which they might both be engaged together.
Upon this, M. Foucaud resumed an idea he had formerly en-
tertained of applying for a line of omnibus. He and M. He-
Cart decided that they should run their omnibuses between
the Bairiere Blanche and the Odeon. Upon this, M. Gis- •
pet said he would take an interest in the concern, which
should be divided into four shares, between M. Nay, M. He-
diart, the witness, and a fourth person, whom he did not
lame. M. Gisquet •had demanded from him the fourth part
,f the profits, and this part went to Madame de Nicul.
M. Cappin called upon M. Gisquet for some further expla-
nation relative to the giving these omnibus shares to the lady
in question ; and M. Gisquet admitted that her admission to a
participation in the concern had been owing to his exertions.
M. Foucaud maintained that no receipt of Madame de
Nieul's fur a single sous could be produced.
A discussion then followed upon the affair of the supplying
if 200,000 sabres, guns, &c., to the army, in which contract
41. Gisquet had become concerned a; a partner, on condition
it obtaining the privilege of the contract from Marshal Soult
and M. Casirrir Perier.

M. Gisquet stated that M. C. Perier was dead at the time
of the letters upon which this fact could be made to dernd
,vere written. Ile denied that any actual business had been
indertalten by him with M. Foucaud of this nature ; they
only conversed about it. In reply to some questions ad.
tressed to him, M. Gisquet admitted that he had got two lines
,f omnibuses granted to M. Foucaud, one of which was that
f the Americaines, and M. Foucaud sold this latter line for
30 000 f.

At five o'clock the sitting was suspended for a few minutes.
M. J. Palmaert, Colonel of the Staff in the Belgian army,
1-posed that he had been the bearer of a challenge from M.
Foucaud to M. Gisquet, which the latter refused to accept,
stating that he had long known M. Foucaud, and had great
?steem for him. M. Gisquet also said on that occasion that
M. Foucaud was distressed for money, and wanted 50,000 f.
or 60,000 f. he would lend him that sum. M. Foucaud had
plied to M. Gisquet, that since he had refused to fight, be
.'could be made to give him satisfaction in some other manner.
M. Gisquet denied having offered to lend M. Foucaud
50,000 f. or 60.000 f. He had no motive for fighting him, and
therefore had refused the challenge.
M. Palmaert repeated his statement on this point.
M. Blanc, director of the [Bromiclles omnibuses, deposed
hat the sum of 400,000 f., at which the grant of license for the
”Idortalcing was valued, was represented by 400 shares, partly
ivided between M. Charles Gisquet, brother of M. Gisquct,
he plaintiff, and M. Grassal, the private secretary of M. Gis-
'lief, as well as with M. P. Nabon, a gentleman employed at
the Prefecture of Police. He bad aftcrisards bought up their
;hares, and had allowed them each a twelfth part of the profits
,f the undertaking. Neither M. Grassal nor M. C. Gisquct
had ever advanced any sum of money towards the concern.
He could not say whether the plaintiff derived any advantage
from this affair or not.

M. Gisquet admitted that he had granted the license to M.
Blanc, principally on the recommendation of M Nabon, bui
denied that he had any way benefitted by the affair in ques.
tion.

The Court then adjourned at a quarter to six.
SECOND DAY.
At the sitting of the Court this day the examination of wit-
nesses, in the case of M. Gisquet v. the Editor of the Messa-
yer,wa, resumed.

M. Foucaud having been recalled by the President, deposed
'bat he had written a letter to Madame de Nicul, at M. Gis-
p.iet's suggestion, to inform her that she was to be interested
(or one-fourth in the proceeds of the association he had formed.
M. Anthony Blanc, who had already been examined on
Friday, was cross-examined to-day by M. Mauguin, who
asked him what share M. Charles Gisquet and M. Grassal had
had in the Society of the Hirondelle Omnibus undertaking.
M. Blanc replied, that those gentlemen had advanced no
money, but were to be entitled 'to 1-12th of the profits. They
were at first owners of 2-12ths, and M. Blanc declared that he
had applied to them to join him in the undertaking, because he
knew he could obtain through them, from the Prefect of Po-
lice, a license to run those carriages on the Boulevards.
M. Edmond Blanc (not the gentleman of the name who is
a Deputy and Secretary of the Minister of the Interior),
brother of the proceding witness, deposed that it was he who
had applied, in the name of his brother Anthony, for leave to
establish the Hirondelle omnibuses, and that it was through
Messrs. Nabon and Grassal's influence with the Prefect, in
whose Cabinet they were employed, that his brother bad ob-
tained the license. M. Charles Gisquet vested no money
therein ; his credit with his brother was the only thing he was
to bring to the company.
M. Gisquet here rose and declared that his brother had
never opened his lips to him on the subject, and that he would
have granted the license had it been asked only by M. Blanc.
M. Blanc added that M. Gisquet had had no share in the
profits, and that his sole object in the transaction had been to
serve his brother, M. Nabon, and M. Grassal. The under-
taking, if sold at the time, would have fetched 300,000 f., or
perhaps 400,000 f,
M. Jules Nabon, a chief of bureau (superior clerk) in the
Prefecture of Police, the next witness examined, admitted that
he was interested in the omnibuses, having been employed by
M. Blanc to obtain the Prefect's consent to their establish..
meat. M. Gisquet being then on the point of retiring from
,ffice, had told him that he would be glad to provide-for some
dale employes of his cabinet, who had served the country with
him, and that, with that view, he had conceded the license in
question, on condition that his brother Charles Gisquet, M.
Grassal, and witness should be admitted into the company and
to the possession of 7-12ths of the shares. However, when
M. Blanc called on them to fulfil a part of the engagement
they had thus contracted, they could not command the neces-
sary funds, and a new arrangement was entered into between
them and M. Blanc.

M. Gisquet here declared, that if he had known that the
licence was to be converted into a money matter, he would
have withdrawn it. Subsequently the confined intimacy of
M. Gisquet with M. Foucaud, after the alleged quarrel in
18?5, was again made the subject of a warm altercation.
M. Mauguin impressing on the Court the fact, that after
M. Gisquet had, according to his own tale, expelled M. Fan-
caud- from the prefecture, he had, in July 1838, in a private
letter, called him one of his best friends. M. Foucaud swore
that the quarrel was only a " comedy." M. Gisquet swore
that it was real, and that their intimacy had only been re.
newed on the occasion of his election, in which Foucaud took
for him an active part.
M. Dcsmoulins proved that he had purchased of MM. Leon
Pillet arid Aragon, the Parissiennes, for 140,000 f. M. Ara-
gon, the friend of M. Gisquet, received for his one-sixth
Share 22,500 f. M. Leon Pillet received the rest. The wit-
ness did not know M. Gisquet in the transaction ; but being
pressed by M. Mauguin, hesitated to affirm that his name had
not been mentioned to him as interested in the affair.
M. Aragon (the person who brought to Madame Foucaud
the letter of M. Gisquet) was next called. He deposed that
M. Leon Pillet had given to him the share he had sold to M.
Desmoulins, and that M. Gisquet knew of his having been
possessed of it. M. Gisquet had given him a place worth
4,000 f. a-year. He was in consequence grateful to that gen-
tleman.
M. Hediard, a clerk in M Gisquet's office, proved that
four were interested in the undertaking of M. Foucaud, that
he and Madame Nicul, late Mdile. Pradcl, had each re-
ceived 25 shares in it, and that she furnished no part of the
capital. Her introduction into it had not been at the request
of At Gisquet, but had been done voluntarily, with the im-
pression that it would be agreeable to him.
The Advocate-General then read a series of letters, written
by Hediard to Foucaud.
The first read was dated January, 1836, and begged Fou-
caud to come to the Prefecture, in order to regulate the sale
of the Parisiennes.

The second, dated the 19th, stated that Mn. Moreau and
Feuillaut had purchased his, Hediard's, and Madame de
Nieu.l's shares, and that Foucaud was accordingly to de-
liver up thirty shares to them.
The next read was of earlier date, in May, 1835, when ma-
nwuvres were going on to get the permission. Hediard avows
that he consulted the Prefect on each point, on the necessity
of getting Rieublanc, who dr,w up reports on such demands,
to be favourable.
In another lctter Hediard says, that the Prefect could ask

11
nothing of Rieublanc, for a very good reaso ALir •
that he could say nothing positive of interr: *
lt
promises, that as soon as any decision 5h0..4 "f 7,
Council of Ministers, he would acquaint •• • ••
J.
•
The President and Advocate-General tr. • • . . ,
the Secretary of the Prefect was in conn i• -
who played at the Bourse. ttootsr
The Advocate-General then proceeded to tilikitiegrOginu
of the letters of M. Hediard. The first, dated April
13:pgged o fM. Foucaud to repair to the Prefecture of Police, as
the writer had something important, and which could not be
written, to communicate. The next dated the 21st of the same
month also pressed him to come to the Prefecture, as the Pre-
fect wished particularly to speak to him, and thought well of
the proposed line. It also threw out hints against M. Body's;
character, and insinuated that that person was dealing in an un-
derhand manner with M. Foucaud. This letter concludes with
the following words, " For certain reasons this letter had
better be destroyed." The next letter, dated May 2d of the
same year, informs M. Foucaud cf the impossibility of making
money of the line of omnibuses between the Champs Elysees
rnd the Place d'Angouleme ; also that be (M. Hediard) had
proposed an exchange to the Prefect, and bad by dexterous
management, succeeded in gaining his point. It invited M.
Foucaud to come again to the Prefecture, in order to urge the
same exchange, which, the writer adds, " will be granted im-
mediately." A letter of the 19th of April, from Hediard to
Foucaud, says, " The Prefect has just been to inquire about
the affair, and left word that he expected Foucaud the following
day. The Prefect hoped that Foucaud would have something
satisfactory to say."
M. Siguier, Director of other omnibuses, called the Denies
Francaises, was examined. He said he had given 18 shares to
Perlin, a Clerk of the Prefecture, for introducing him to the
Prefect and getting him the grant. He had also bought ano-
ther line of omnibuses from Madame Pradel, Madame Nieul's
mother, for 100,000 francs. M. Gisquet confessed having
given this line to Madame Pradel.
The Court adjourned till Sunday.
THIRD DAY.

The Court sat this morning at half-past ten, and the same
influx of visitors, anxious to hear the proceedings, crowded
all the benches as on the preceding days.
M. Leon Pillet was examined. He had obtained the grant
of the Josephines from M. Gisquet, and had afterwards ad-
mitted M. Aragon as a partner in it; had been responsible
editor of the Journal de Paris in 1831, and, on retiring, two
responsible editors were chosen among the shareholders : one
of these was M. Gisquet, before he became Prefect of Police,
and he appointed M. Aragon, who held the office for two
years. M. Aragon then retired on condition of sharing part
of the emoluments of his successor. Instead of this, witness
admitted him to a right of having a sixth part of the profits of
the Josephines, although the line was not actually established.
M. Foucaud was again called, and was interrogated by one
of the jury, whether, in order to obtain the grant made to
Messrs. Feuillant and himself, a third person had not given
rouleaux of gold to M. Gisquet behind the curtain, in an un-
derhand manner.

M. Foucaud replied, he neither knew nor believed that any
such thing was done.

In answer to a question from the President, M. Foucaud
stated that there was a serious quarrel between him and M.
Gisquet, in December, 1835, but their previous supposed dif-
ference was only feigned, and did not last more than twenty-
four hours.

M. Hediard was recalled, and, in reply to a question of the
President, persisted in declaring that the 40,000 f. to be re-
ceived from the sale of four numbers of the omnibus were to be
divided in four parts.
A juror asked why he always put " tear this letter up," at
the bottom of his letters to M. Foucaud? Was it not that he
was afraid of compromising M. Gisquet ? Witness replied in
the negative.

The-Advocate-General observed that since M. Gisquet, ac-
cording to witness, took so much interest in him, these letters
could not compromise him with M. Gisquet.
M. Hediard repeated statement, and appeared much
embarrassed.

The President demanded positively whether he did not ap-
pend the words in question for fear of compromising M.
Gisquet?
Witness replied, No.
The Advocate- General was surprised how anybody of com-
mon sense could make such a reply. M. Gisquct's interven-
tion was net any longer a subject of discussion ; it was a
proved fact. How did witness explain the expression that
" the Prefect would take the rest of the business upcn himself?"
Witness—lt meant the Prefect would send for M. Rieu-
blane.

h o Advocate-General—Arid that ho would overcome his
oppocition ?

Witness—Yes. (Movement in Court.)
M. Gisquet declared that he was the victim of party hatred.
The journals had given had reports of the proceedings, and
the Courrier Francais, in particular, had said that the indig-
nation of the President of the Court was evident in all his
wcrds. He urged that his honour was at stake, and that he
was interested in destroying allegations which might mislead
the public.
The President said that this was irrelevant. M. Gisquet
should, however, be allowed to speak when he asked him.
M. Nay, lon-in-law of M. Gisquet, and Receiver-General
of the Aube, deposed that his fiend, M. Fenillant, proposed
to him to take some omnibus shares at par. He accepted
the proposal, which he considered advantageous. M. Feuil-
lant did not specially urge him to solicit anything from M.
Gisquet, but gave him to understand that his so doing would
he an acceptable service. Witness applied to M. Rieublanc
to obtain through his good offices an augmentation of the con-
cession demanded by the company. Witness gained about
30,000 f. by the services which he rendered to the company,
and which consisted in going to the bureaux of the police, to
all of which he had access.

M. Mauguin asked the witness, M. Nay, if he did not share
with his father-in-law, M. Gisquet, the salary received by
him (witness), as Receiver-General of Taxes for the Depart-
ment of the Aube? He regarded the answer to the question
as extremely important to his client, inasmuch as if a commu-
nity of interest could be established between M. Gisquet and
his son-in-law with regard to the Receiver_ Generalship of
the Aube, it could be fairly interpreted as proving a commu-
nity of interest in other cases.
M. Nay replied that he would make no answer to the
Learned Counsel's question.
The President also objected to the question.
M. Mauguin—lt is of little consequence, as the fact is no-
torious.

M. Gisquet--The assertion is false, M. Mauguin, and I
consider what is now passing as a personality between you and
myself.
M. Mauguin—Between you and me, M. Gisquet, there
can be no personality. Ido not know you.
M. Gisquet here resumed his seat.
M. Rieublanc, chief of a division in the Prefecture of Po-
lice, had been consulted on the subject of the grant of the
Parisiennes to M. Foucaud, but made a report against it, not-
withstanding which the privilege was granted. (Movement.)
M. Viel, Chief of the Agence de Commerce, stated that
having made an application to M. Gisquet, as Prefect, for a
license to establish a bath, M. Foucaud came to him, and in-
formed him that another application had been made, but that
if the witness would join with him, M. Foucaud, they would
be able to overcome the opponent. M. Viel consented, and
rave M. Foucaud a third share in the proposed bath, which
share was afterwards transferred to M. Coffinn, who was em-
ployed in the Cabinet of the Prefect. He granted this share
to M. Foucaud because he believed he had great influence
with M Gisquet.
M. Coffinn, who is now employed at the Bains du Louvre,
on being asked how he came to have this share lathe bath, re-
plied that M. Foucaud informed him he was about to establish
a bath, and offered witness a share. On his hesitating to ac-
cept it, he was told by M. Foucaud that it was tendered with
the consent and approbation of the Prefect. He did not ad.
vancc any money, but took the chances of profit or loss. He
did not retain the share, but sold it for 20,000 f.
M. Billiard, formerly Secretary-General to the Minister of
the Interior, being called,
M. Mauguin intimated to the Court his desire to examine
him on the subject of the contract for muskets.
The President informed him that the Court could not per-
mit that subject to be entered upon, as M. Gisquet was, at the
time of its being made, no more than a private individual.
M. Mauguin replied that M. Gisquet had declared to the
electors of St. Denis that, in that transaction, instead of gain-
ing:, he sustained a loss of 37,000 f., besides the sacrifice of all
his time and trouble. But the illessager, amongst its other
accusations, asserted that M. Gisquet thereby made a profit of
440,000 f., and consequently that he had not spoken the truth
to his electors.

The President repeated that this was a matter the Court
could not entertain.
M. Mauguin submitted to the judgment of the Court, but,
at the same time, declared his conviction that M. Gisquet would
not deny the truth of what bad been stated. M. Gisquet smiled.
The Advocate- General said—Let M. Gisquet tell us yes or
no—did he or did he not make a profit of 400,000 f. by the
muskets?

M. Gisquet rose and said--No.
The President asked M. Billiard if he had anything to
state respecting the public conduct of M. Gisquet.
M. Billiard replied that he had not; but believed that if he
had been allowed to declare all he knew respecting the affair
of the muskets, lie had every reason to believe that the de-
fendant would have been benefited by his deposition.
M. Cappin then stated that, as the remaining witnesses
(who, we understand, were Messrs. Rothschild, Brunet, and
Desmoulins) could speak only as to the affair of the muskets,
it was useless to call them.
The President then asked M. Parquin if he was prepared
to plead in behalf of his client, as, according to the rules of
the Court, it wag for him to speak first?
M. Parquin having replied that he was unable to com-
mence immediately, the bearing was, at three o'clock, ad-
journed till to-morrow.

FOURTH DAY.
The business of the day commenced at half-past ten, the
audience being as dense as on any of the preceding sittings.
M. Seguier was called, and stated that when he purchased
the Sylphides of
him.
111. Pradel, she had no document of title
to haul over to him.
Gisquet stated that he granted this line to M. Pradel,
who was the first to suggest it. M. Pradel was a man of sense
and understanding, with a numerous family, whom he wished
to serve. The grant, however, was made in the name of
Madame Pradel. Had he wished to confer valuable favours on
M. Pradel, he would not have confined them to this trifling
concession. He did not issue a formal decree for this girt,.
but gave his word, which was equivalent. It was possible,
there might have been a decree.—( Murmurs.)
M. Seguier deposed that M. Persin, who was employed in
the office of M. Rieublanc, at a salary of 600 f., introduced
him into the abitiot of the Prefect, and that, for this service,

„~ .1

the witness presented M. Persin with eighteen of
I,ooof. each,
M. Gisqnet affirmed that M. Persin did no more .11;il s'avv;
him tte door of his cabinet. .

M, Sevier, in answer to a question from M. Mauguin,
stated that it was M. Persin who introduced him to Madame

Pradel.

-
M. Ghsquet denied that he bad had any acquaintance with
M. Persin. He begged leave again to explain his conduct
in the affair of Messrs. Mnreau and Feuillant. An omnibus

line (the Algeriennes) bad been established between Bercy
and Neuilly for six sous. This was against the law, and it
st as his duty to suppress the line, which step was ultimately
taken by the Court of Cassation. Upon this the Mayor, the
Municipal Council, and the Officers of the Municipal Guard
of Neuilly, strongly represented to him the necessity of a
rapid communication between Neuilly and Paris. A similar
representation was made from Bercy. The plaintiffhere made
a pause, and then observedthat he was endeavouring to refresh
bis memory on the case—" The entire of which," he added,
"is deplorable ; and, had my adversaries acted with good
faith, I should not have been obliged to reply to all these unex-
pected questions. Had my adversaries any feeling of shame,
this trial would never have taken place."
The President here recommended moderation to the plaintiff
especially as the defendant was compelled to comply with a si-
milar recommendation.

The Advocate-General here dwelt upon the 25 shares ac-
cepted at par by M. Nay.
M. Gisquet repeated that he knew nothing on that paint,
and that his son-in-law was the best judge of the step which
he ought to take with regard to the 25 shares and the profit he
bad made on them without his knowledge.
The sitting was here suspended for about half an hour, at
the expiration of which
M. Parquin rose to address the Court on behalf of the
plaintiff, and stated that, instead of having been guilty of
fraud and corruption—instead of having parried the conse-
quences of a dissolute career by infamous expedients, his
client, daring his administration of the police for the space of
five years, could be taxed with no other crime than that of
having established baths on the river, and conceded or mo-
dified some omnibus lines in favour of young and enterprising
speculators. He censured with great indignation the avidity
with which the Press had prejudged thecase now pending, and
had heaped outrage and insult on the public functionary, who,
at all events, had made no attempt to hush up the proceed-
ings. He (the Learned Counsel) would now re-establish the
facts of the case as they really existed, and for that purpose he
would explain the origin of the connection which had been
formed between his client and M. Foucaud. His client was
in London in 1831, and, being at the same hotel as M. and
Madame Foucaud, an intimacy soon commenced between them.
M. Gisquet bad come about a contract for muskets, and M.
Foucaud about a contract for sword-blades. M. Foucaud,
knowing that M. Gisquet enjoyed the confidence of M. Casimir
Perier, applied to him to present a demand to the Minister of
War for an army contract in his (M. Foucaud's) favour, and
M. Gisquet complied with his request, and subsequently receivel
a letter of thanks from M. Foucaud on the subject. M. Gisquet,
soon after his return to Paris, was named Prefect of Police
through the influence of M. Casimir Perier. The Learned

Counsel here entered into some particulars relative to the grant
of the omnibus line in which Nlme. de Nirul had an interest.
He maintained that the application for the grant had been
carefully examined by the Prefect, and that Mme. de Nieul
had nothing to do with its success. That lady, he said, had
been exposed to all the chances of the undertaking, and in the
event of its failure, her share of the funds would have been
furnished. With regard to the omnibus line, of which M.
Feuillant was the manager, it was that gentleman who had
proposed shares to M. Nay, who, being an utter stranger to
their value on the Stock Exchange, was not aware that in
taking them at par, and paying 25,000 f. for them, he was in
reality making a profit of 32,000 f. The Learned Counsel
then took a summary view of all the operations which his
client was accused of having unfairly turned to account in
favour of himself or of his friends and relatives. He ad-
mitted that the warm bath on the Seine bad been a present
made to Foucaud, Cofiinn, and Viel ; but a Prefect of Police
had surely the right of so doing. He defended his client for
the grant of the Hirondelles in favour of Nabon, Grasse], and
C. Gisquet, and contended that it was a person unknown to
the plaintiff, M. A. Blanc, who had the largest part of the
profits resulting from it. It was a point to be remarked
that his administration as Prefect of Police had lasted five
years, whereas the facts laid to his charge took place all
within the space of four or five months. If the Messager had
contented itself with saying that the plaintiff had misplaced his
patronage, that would have been within the limits of fair
controversy, but to accuse him of underhand dealing, of cor-
ruption, and exaction, was what could not be permitted. In
conclusion, he dwelt strongly upon the necessity of punishing
the libellous allegations of the press, and restraining it within
the limits which a sense of decency and a respect for the laws
should invariably suggest.
M. Mauguin having risen to present some observations on
behalf of the defendant,
The President said that it was now for the Advocate-Gene-
ral to address the Court. M. Plougoulm, however, resigned
his right in favour of the defendant's Counsel, and the sitting
was adjourned till ten o'clock to-morrow morning.