The Sun.
London, England, 1839-09-18 00:00:00

PARIS, SEPT. 15.—The extraordinary trial of the
three Baraults and Hurel, at Chartres, for the murder
of their relative, the widow Gautier, has just termi-
nated in an acquittal. These men were the nephews
and great nephews of the murdered person, and were
osupposedgettingt or
dh awvfe
ac o
lifenmi ai tut en du
ttyli ew us
hr d etrh febyr thhaed ptuor posepay
to her in exchange for some property, and to prevent
her making a new will as she had threatened to do, dis-
inheriting them of the remainder. She was strangled
in her bed and thrown into the river. In November of
the last year they were tried upon the charge of murder
at Versailles, and the evidence being thought conclu-
sive, two of them were condemned to death, and the
other two to hard labour at the Begne for life ; this
clistenction being made on the supposition that Louis
Barault, the son of one of the prisoners, and Hurel, the )
son-in-law of the other, had acted under the iiifluence of
the nephews of the widow Gautier. Very little doubt
was at the time entertained of their guilt, for it did not
appear that robbery had been added to murder—from
which it was inferred that only those who had a right
to the succession could have committed the crime ; it
was sworn that two of them, who pretended to have been
in their beds on the night of the murder, were seen
prowling about the spot, and that they had refused to
answer some persons who accosted them, holding down
their heads and concealing their faces. When the body
was found in the river,one of them pointed out the place
where the search was to be made, and was sworn to
have been actively engaged in destroying the traces of
footsteps, as if apprehensive of a discovery by com-
paring them with his shoes or those of one or
more of his accomplices ; and it was also sworn
that he had been frequently watching by the river-side,
as if in anxiety lest the body should not have sunk to the
bottom. One of the Baraults was a man of feroc'ous cha•
racter, and the terror of his neighbourhood ; but the other
was respected for his mildness and benevolence, and se-
veral witnesses were called to give evidence as to
his good nature and humanity. Their evidence, how-
ever, produced no effect, for the President of the
Court declared that nothing more was proved
than that he was a consummate hypocrite.
During the trial a distinguished phrenologist, who was
in Court, declared that the committal of a crime like
murder was totally incompatible with the organization of
tnis prisoner, and wished to give evidence to this effect;
but this wes not, of course, allowed, and the phrenoloa
gist was, perhaps of all those who heard the trial, the
only person who believed firmly in his innocence. After
their condemnation, and whilst waiting for the execution
of the sentence, they became acquainted with a man
named Prevost, who had been condemned to the Bagne
for life for murder. This man told told them that hb
could prove their innocence, and demanded a sum of
money for the performance of this act of justice. The
offer was accepted, and Prevost wrote a letter to the
Procureur du Roi, accusing himself and a man of in-
famous character, named Duchemin, of the crime.
Having, in his self-denunciation, mentioned some corro-
borating circumstances, the execution of the sentence
was arrested, and a new trial was appointed, which
took place last week. On this occasion all the
evidence against the Baraults was repeated, with;
if possible, additional force, and it was shown that
if the evidence as to an alibi was to be relied
upon, Duchemin could not have been a party to the
crime, and must have been denounced by Prevost from
a feeling of vengeance, arising probably from some var.-
ref in their previous connection. Prevost was more for-
tunate, however, in denouncing himself ; for although it
had not appeared before that a robbery had been ef-
fected, and a bag of money was even left at the head of
the bed, he was able to show that certain articles of
wearing apparel as well as money had been stolen, and
that he had given them to a mistress in whose possession
they had been found, and which were positively sworn
on the trial to have belonged to the widow Gautier. It
was urged against the Barauks and Hurel, that they had
suborned Prevost, yam was a:ready condemned for murder,
and who at the worst could only exchange imprisonment
for life at the Bagne for death, if found guilty of the
murder of the widow Gautier ; whilst Prevost, who did
not deny that he had demanded money, declared that
on the present occasion, as on a former one when he
had saved an innocent man from being condemned for
forgery, he was actuated by a desire to save innocent
persons from death or perpetual imprisonment. During
the whole of the trial, Prevost pleaded like a counsel
for the Baraults, and expressed in strong terms his de-
light when any evidence transpired inculpating himself.
The innocence of the Baraults and of Hurel, in spite
of a mass of false evidence inspired by the ha-
tred which one of them had created in his neighbour.
hood, was acknowledged, and an acquittal was pro-
nounced, whilst Prevost was found guilty of the mur-
der ; but extenuating circumstances having, with the
usual fiction of the French juries, to prevent capital
punishment when there is no consanguinity in the par-
ties, been declared in his favour, his sentence remains
just what it was previously for his other murder
—viz., condemnation to the Bagne for life. This is
perhaps one of the most extraordinary instances of
the fallibility of human judgment on 'record ; four
men, two of whom had been condemned to death, are
restored to society after an imprisonment of 12 months
or more, for a crime of which they were not gtiilty.
A stronger argument than this in support of the aboli-
tion of capital punishment could not be given. If the
accused parties had not met with Prevost in prison, a
few days would have put two of them out of existence,
and a day later would have prevented any revision of
the judgment from being of use to them. The other
two would, under such circumstances, have been restored
to society, but Cere is no repentance for erroneous
judgment in the guillotine. There is at this mumene
at Gaillon, in Normandy, a poor fellow who was con-
demned to twenty years' of hard labour at the Bagne,
for a crime for which he might have been sentenced to
death. After nineteen years' imprisonment, a woman
who was on her death-bed confessed that she committed
the crime, and had denounced the man from a feeling
of revenge at some slight which she had experienced.
Her statement was found to be correct, and the poor
fellow was set at liberty after nineteen years of misery
and association of thieves and murderers. Human re-
tribution 11 iwever stopped here, for, although the vic-
tim had become old and feeble, and was unable to work
for his bread, nothirre was done for him, and he is now
a common beggar, eating the dry crust which is
thrown to him by the hand of niggard charity,—
Evening Paper.