The Sun.
London, England, 1840-07-17 00:00:00

TRIAL OF MADAME LAFFARGE

TRIBUNAL CORRECTIONNEL OF BRIYES,
JULY 9.
ROBBERY OF THE DIAMONDS.
M. Laviale de Masmorel, President.
At three o'clock in the morning, a crowd of persons
had already congregated at the doors of the prison in
which Madame Laffarge had been incarcerated for the
last seven months.
Although the sitting was only announced for eleven
o'clock, the elite of Brives were at the private door by
eight, as for a fete day, and were eager to occupy the
places which had been reserved for them in the hemi-
cycle in front of the bench of magistrates.
At nine o'clock all the places that could be disposed
of were occupied, and three rows of ladies, nearly all in
the bloom of youth, handsome, and dressed in a style of
true Parisian elegance, extended circularly round the
alcove which had been assigned as a tribune for the
witnesses subpmnaed to give evidence.
The seats placed behind the tribunal were occupied
by the Magistrates, the authorities of the town, the
Prefect, and the general, who were at Brives attending
the council of revision for the young conscripts. Among
the crowd was recognised the celebrated compiler of de-
crees, M. Sirey, who has been a resident at Brives for
some length of time.

At ten o'clock Viscountess de Leotaud, who has con-
stituted herself the plaintiff by an act which was notified
yesterday to the defendant, arrived, accompanied by
her husband. This lady, who is far advanced in preg-
nancy, appeared to be suffering, and was much affected
when she passed through the crowd. Her features are
regular, and display much meekness ; her eyes are jet
black, with flowing eyelashes, which tend to increase the
paleness of her countenance. Viscount de Leotauti is
a young man about 25 or 30 years of age, possessing a
figure distinguee.
At this moment shouts from the outside announced
the arrival of the prisoner, and at ten minutes :past
eleven Madame Laffarge was brought into Court. The
prisoner took her station on an elevated bench, having
her counsel, M. Bach, on the right, and M. Lachaud
on the left.

Madame Laffarge was dressed entirely in black. A
crape bonnet of a low shape which she wore would have
admitted of a full view being obtained of her features,
if a long gauze veil
had not partly impeded public cu-
riosity from satisfying its impetuosity. Every motion,
every anxious look, with which her frame might be agi-
tated was sedulously watched by the indiscreet eye of
the spectator, and rudeness was even resorted to by the
ladies, in order to obtain a glance at the prisoner.
Madame Laffarge is pale, her hair is jet black, and
her complexion somewhat wan. Her dejected counte-
nance, her long eye!ashes, her eyebrows elegantly dis-
played on a smooth forehead, the regularity of her fea-
tures, the precise unison of a mouth somewhat large,
but allowing some pretty white teeth to shine forth, the
lips slightly curved at the extreme points, added to her
skin, which is naturally white, seemed to constitute in
its several parts a perfect assemblage, a remarkable
whole. Madame Laffarge is neither beautiful nor
pretty. When she took her station on the bench ele-
vated above that of her counsel, she assumed a dejected
look and remained motionless. _

The tribunal remained a short time in the council
chamber before coming into Court, when an aged lady
was seen to wend her was across through the crowd
without casting a glance at the bench of the accused.
That lady was the mother.in-law of the accused, the
mother of the unfortunate Laffarge. She had a seat
reserved for her near that of the advocates.
The tribunal opened its sitting, and was presided
over by M. Laviale de Masmorel. M. Dumont de St.
Priest took his seat on the Judges' bench, and M.
Rivet, the King's Procurcur, seated himself at his side.
The President called upon the substitute of the Pro-
cureur du Roi, to open the case.

M. Bach, Counsel for Mme. Laffarge, here rose,
and moved the Court for a postponement of the hearing
till the trial of his client before the Court of Assizes,
for the imputed murder of her husband. After a very
long but impressive exordium the Learned Counsel
proceeded to the point, stating that, at the commence-
ment of the previous investigations on the accusation
laid against his client of the crime of poisoning,
traces of a minor offence were discovered, and a
new process was commenced against Madame Laffarge,
and from that moment the inquiries as to the
greater crime were relaxed, and she found the period at
which she was to be cleared of the first horrible impu-
tation cast upon her postponed to an indefinite period.
At last, only a few days before she was to appear before a
jury to answer an accusation affecting her life, sho was
dragged before the Correctional Tribunal to defend her-
self against a charge which, if found well grounded,
would be visited with a sentence of imprisonment for
five years at the most. '•-Is not this mode of proceeding,"
exclaimed M. Bach, " contrary to the law, to equity,
to justice, to humanity, to common sense ?" When
several crimes or offences amenable to the same
jurisdiction were in question, they were, he affirmed, in-
cluded in one and the same charge or indictment ; and
if the prisoner was found guilty upon several of the
counts, there were not as many punishments awarded,
but only that one which was applied by the law to the
greatest crime or offence, it being thus expressly laid
down by Art. 365 of the Code of Criminal Instruc-
tion.

---
M. Lachaud, the other advocate for Mme. Laffarge,
followed M. Bach in a very impressive speech addressed
principally to the feelings of the Court, but, at the same
time, supporting the arguments of M. Bach.
M. Coralli, the advocate of M. and Mme. Leotaud,
ep Iprisoner'seonof this process was indispensable
counsel. He urged that an
demt, ttheirhdeeis children, and family relations, who had
immediaterer
ti eh
been suffering the utmost grief-and pain from the inipu-
tations
which had been cast upon them, but to which
they had nut replied, in order net to aggravate the
lamentable situation in which Madame Laffarge, who '
had been their intimate and friend, was placed. He
begged that the cause might be allowed to go on ; his
clients called for the disclosure of the truth, and re-
monstrated against any further delay.
M. Dumont de St. Priest, Substitute of the Procu-
reur du Roi, rose and observed that be considered the
law-officers of the Crown would have been wanting in
their duty if they had not called for immediate proseen-
tion In this present affair of the imputed robbery.
This ptoseetitioti had not been unfairly hastened on ;
the other more grave accusation had not been unduly
postponed ; it only happened that the preliminary pro-
ceedings in the fernier case had. been terminated sooner
than in the latter. He thought, therefore, that there
was no reason for any postponement of it.
M. Mach replied that if the genie civile had suffered
from delay, the agony of his client, duping SeVen
iani mg se
dor for her ;
months of solitude and the tortures of a prison, Were
also to be considered. She, too, was anxious for the
exemplified in the
the.
jmuesst ti
Justice,
n :it edeemnenedl mental a
was
. aenste d
strikeb whatodial bodily
Ihetseeueffa
entertainednec sufferings
soon,
oe
d a y , the
rnAiiigoya.s:ist
yi.etce
the King's
rrocuteur,
entered,
hour of Justice; end with her delay was accompanied
pcalineinetd.
with odium, for it was assiithed that Mid Wet enreilling
to see the hour of justice arrive. How great, then,
for
animated
case
ou
at
ft
hs
ee ita
odrfdmi
justice.goruhe
Ox-
ford, rights
be jtistiee acecimpatiied With the forms
fid cuatAyt
ifotinteshr.
ite,:nfuhrnoinst
rhgh opportunityidi
nte whichiftoi:lf
Aiettriidhmta.etafeiecoljai:ilidlitt,mheitraetewatbsihs
hardly
o,Mrdt.ieleßr ajtcouhdegn‘e‘atbhle
le means of ' .
boMyf M.
alludinge Bachfenc econcluded
ntEo
n thegiae
drae:avpseercyt
1 snv t
r theTwi
hNJeGnu d
ogtrhe se
JULY retired,c o u r
1t 1 . and
himefaoen rudd
e,
mercifults aoe nl
prepare
calledefpoa rxeefxo
the
hudmep
pao
ldpne
defence
rieitheensd: tribunalefvhen,eorfti
hiseie, ,
ye
said
re-
plied, ' God forbid that we should withhold from a pri-
sonervarlesapt the Court, ex-
g Himself. Our first
nithdPeinosCiblurt was adjourned.
announced that they would give their decision on ohnerSjbauetsuintr'-
paneroietnjeeecdt
ofa r r
with Madame Laffarget onpheieorn a
who had been in attendance
SECONDsci
The Court presented the same appearance as on the
was entirely filled with ladies,
oraddy In the same manner its oh
preceding sit
packed that
her presence attracting the like
raonodimtsofwocarlsothsaeelgy quarter
usherar werete r 0
ftphateshyte
d business. 'the judges. took their seats on the
the Courts dressed
bench,waitingainndt
hthe c h
am accused,bterriaol,f
t:
the preceding day's
degree of curiosity: , 4 4
The President preeeedeo to uellvet the decision of
the Judges on the application for a postponement of the
hearing till after the trial for poisoning before the
Court of Assizes, cleciarieg that, as the robbery of the
diamonds of Madame Leotaud, imputed to Madame
...i
Laffarge, took place long previou
Y to the poisoning
of Monsieur Laffarge, and was subject to a jurisdiction
perfectly distinct from that to which the crime of mur-
der was amenable, it was the duty of the Correctional
Tribunal to proceed to a hearing and decision of the ac-
cusation for the offence of robbery, without waiting for
the trial of the greater indictment befor'e the Court of 1
Assizes.
M. Bach announced that Mete. Laffarge intended to
appeal against this decision, and M. Perdieu, her avoue,
tendered the appeal to the registrar in the Court.
The Procurcur du Roi objected against this as in-
formal, the rule being that the appeal should be lodged
at the office of the registrar.
1 After some discussion the Court granted time for
this purpq,se, auktovezlifig he. hearing_for a quarter

of an hour, the Judges retiring, as did Mme. Laffrage
and her Counsel.
When thp business was resumed, M. Pcrdieu moved
the Court that the trial should be postponed until after
the hearing of the appeal. This gave rise to a long
argument, in which the advocates for Mme. Laffarge
and the prosecutors and Procureur du Roi took part.
The Court, after retiring for three quarters of an hour
to deliberate, refused this application, and ordered the
trial to proceed.
M. Bach then declared the intention of Mme. Laf-
farge to suffer judgment to go by default, and demanded
permission for her and her advocates to retire.
The President granted this request, and the prisoner
and her Counsel withdrew.
The indictment was then read.
M. Coralli rose to open the case of the prosecutors.
He commenced by declaring that. as Mmc. Laffarge was
absent, he should confine himself to a plain and simple
statement of facts. The intimacy of Mdlle. Marie
Capelle, Madame Laffarge, with the family of Dr. Ni-
colai, commenced in January, 1836, she having been
introduced by Madame de Montreton, the elder sister
of Mdlle. Marie de Nicolai, Madame de Leotaud,
who had resided with her since 1823, having then
been left an orphan. The two young ladies became
attached, and frequently walked out together, some-
times attended by Mdlle. Delvaux, the gouvernante of
Mdlle. de Nicolai. They after a time observed a young
man who constantly seemed to follow their steps, par-
ticularly when they went to church. These assidui-
ties became subjects of conversation between the young
ladies, and Mille. Capelle contrived to learn his name
and address to be Felix Clave, the son of the master of
a school in the Faubourg du Roule. 1 hey conceived
the idea of writing him an anonymous letter, which
was composed between them, and copied by Mdlle.
Capelle, intimating, among other pleasantries, that
walking in the Tuileries and Champs Elysees was good
for the health. Some days had passed when, on enter-
ing the Champs Elysees from the Tuileries, M. Clave
presented himself to them, believing, no doubt, that an
assignation had been intended for him. They met him
again once more. This induced Mdlle. de Nicolai
to reflect that the young man imagined there
was some serious intentions on the part of herself
or her young friend, and she resolved to en-
deavour to repair her imprudence, and made
Mdlle. Capelle write him another letter, entreating him
to cease his attentions, and by no means attempt to dis-
cover who the writer of the letter was. M. Cleve, how-
ever, persisted, and wrote two more letters to Mdlle. de
Nicolai, who became greatly disturbed with alarm
and regret. While she' expressed this in her corres-
pondence from the Chateau de Busagny, to which
she had removed with Mdlle do Capelle, the latter
was keeping up a constant intercourse by letter with
M. Cleve, who, it seems, complained of the manner
in which he had been treated.

Mdlle. de Nicolai, who had acquainted her gover-
nante with the cause of her uneasiness, repeate'lly re-
quested Mdlle. Capelle to return all the letters, but
received nothing in reply, except a volume of poems
written by M. Clave, in which there was a letter from

him, stating that he would never part with those
p-hich he had received. At last Mdlle. Delvaux went
personally to Mdile. Capelle, and succeeded in ob-
taining all the letters addressed to them jointly, and
upon which Mdlle. de Nico'ai wrote to acknowledge
their receipt, and at the same time recommending dis-
cretion. The intercourse between the young ladies
became relaxed. In October, 1837, M. Cleve went
into Africa, and remained there till December, 1839.
The two friends did not meet again till September,
1839, when Mdlle. de Nicolai observed, in the bills
of the opera of Guillaume Tell, the name of Clave
among the chorus singers, and pointed it out to Mdlle.
Capelle. From the inquiries made through the police,
it has been ascertained that this was another person,
and, in fact, the M. Cleve with whom they had been
in correspondence was at that time still in Africa. One
day, when Mdlle. Capelle was on a visit to Busagny,
a question was discussed between Madame Leotaud
and Mdlle. Capelle on the difference of false diamonds
made of paste, and the real stones. To show the dif-
ference the party went up to the chamber of Mine. de
Leotaud, and made a comparison by examining her
sets of jewels. As Mme. Leotaud opened the place in
which her jewels were deposited, Mdlle. Capelle went
to bring a clasp, set with paste diamonds, in order to
make the comparison, and when she returned, it was
discovered that thejewels had disappeared. At first no
great uneasiness was felt, as Mme. Leotaud imagined
that either her husband or her mother had taken them
away, to cure her of her habitual carelessness in leaving
the closet open. This idea was, however, soon and
painfully dissipated ; the parties suspected of having
given the lesson solemnly affirming that they had not
touched the jewel-case. M. de Leotaud immediately
laid an information before the police, but all their re-
searches were fruitless, and certain servants suspected
were fully exculpated.
The suspicions against Madame Laffarge had, said
M. Coralli, a singular origin. She had learned that a
servant had been suspected, and informed him that she
knew of his innocence, and, in the event of his being
dismissed, would provide him with a situation. How
was she acquainted with his innocence ? An old femme
de chambre, who was in her service, had related that
Madame Laffarge had said in jest that she had stolen
the diamonds and swallowed them. At the Chateau de
Corsi Madame de Monbreton, the sister of Madame de
Leotaud, being a believer in animal magnetism, had
proposed to magnetise Madame Laffarge. Madame de
Monbreton bad merely made a few passes, when 1
Madame Laffarge pretended to fall into a somnambulic
sleep, and, in answer to some questions about the
diamonds, replied that they had been taken out of the
drawer of Madame de Leotaud and sold to a Jew, who
was no longer in France. They had, she said, been dis-
mounted, and the mounting was thrown into a water-
closet. The person who had taken them, she added,
was a man, but no one of Madame de Leotaud's family.
I\l. Coralli read the letter of Madame de Mon-
breton to her mother, giving an account of this
magnetic scene, and said that the pretended reve-
lation of Madame Laffarge was evidently intended
to cast suspicion upon one of the visitors. At the
period when the marriage of Madame Laffarge was
taking place other circumstances of a suspicious nature
occurred. It was observed that she had:a considerable
quantity of jewellery, which she pretended had been
given to her by Madame de Monbreton and Madame
de Leotaud, which was untrue. The investigation,
however, was not followed up. Madame Laffarge
quitted Paris for Glandier. The diamonds did not
make their appearance for a long time, but one day
they were produced under singular circumstances. M.
Laffarge said,if he had a diamond, he would cut a square
of glass which required reducing. Madame Laffarge
immediately said she had diamonds, and, having fetched
them, laid them and some pearls before her mother-in-
law and her husband. On their expressing astonish-
ment at their beauty and value, which they supposed to
be from 20 to 25,000 francs, and asking Madame Laf-
fame how she came to have them, she replied that they
had been hers from the age of eight years, but that they
had been entrusted by her father to an old servant,
who was not to give them to her till she came to years
of discretion. At the death of M. Laffarge, said M.
Coralli, the suspicion of theft against Madame Laffarge
gained ground, and search having been made at Glan-
dier, the diamonds were discovered and identified by
the pefsnn who had sold them, and also by Madame
Leotaud.

At her first being interrogated, Madame Laffarge
pretended that these diamonds had been sent her by an
Linde from Toulouse, whose name and domicile she
could not, however, indicate. Afterwards she retracted
this statement, and gave a totally different history of
the affair. She said that, after Mdlle. de Nicolai had
been married to the Viscount de Leotaud in February,
1838, she (Mine. Laffarge) went to Paris in the May
following, and told Mine. de Leotaud that she had re-
ceived a letter from Clave, dated Algiers. Mme. Leo-
taud told her that this was impossible, since she had
seen Clave appear.only a few days before on the stage
of the Opera as one of the c'.:nrists in Guillaume Tell;
and she begged Madame Laffarge nct to reply to her
letter. This she promised, adding that e could not
believe Cleve to be at the Opera till she should actually
see him there herself. In the December fcllowing she
went, she said, to visit Madame de Leotaud, who told
her she was in despair; she wanted money to purchase
silence from Clave, and that she could not bear to live
in such a state of uncertainty. In May, 1839, Madame
Laffarge added, she had gone to visit Madame de Leo-
taud at Busagny, and that lady, she asserted, said to
her that she must absolutely have some money ; that
the anxiety she felt lest Clave's imprudence might be-
tray her to her husband had been so great that she had
been obliged to wean her child. Madtime Laffarge
further asserted that Madame Leotaud said she knew
of only one way to get money, arid that was to sell her
diamonds—adding, that she was tempted to get them,
as it were, stolen from her, and have them sold. It was
on the occasion of the marriage of Mdlle. do Beauvoir,
sister of the sister-in-law of Madame de Leotaud, who
*Was to be married at her resideuce, near Busagny, and
as there Wag to be much company assembled on that
occasion, Madame de Leotaud determined to make it
appear that her diamonds were stolen then.. In order
that the servants of the house might not be suspected,
Madame Laffirge said it was agreed between her and
Madame de Leotaud that on the Sunday the case of
the diamonds should, on some pretence or other, be
brought' down, and left on the table of the salon on the
rez-de-cliaussee. Most of the servants were gone out. The
diamonds, said Mme. Laffarge, were brought down, and
left on the table, the doors to the garden remaining open,
from 12 o'clock to 3 ; Mme. de Leotaud then replaced
the case in the drawer of a table in her bedroom, and
left the key in the lock all the time the marriage fete
lasted, in order to give a better chance for the story o
the robbery to be believed. Three or four days after, ac-
f
cording to Mme.Luffarge, Mine. de Leotaud remitted the
diamonds to her, and in order that the supposed tact of
their having been stolen might come out only indirectly,
it was agreed that there should be a comparison made
of real diamonds with some paste ones which were the
fastenings to Mine. Laffarge's prayer-book in the pre-
sence of some of the family, and it was then that M.

Leotaud perceived that his wife's diamonds were missing.
He caused such strict inquiries to be made that Mins.
Laffarge said she was frightened, and begged Mine. de
Leotaud to take back the diamonds. She,however, begged
Mine. Laffarge to keep them still, and in order to conceal
them the better determined cn taking them out of their
settings. They shut themselves up in their room,
and did so with a penknife aad scissors, afterwards put-
ting the diamonds in a satin sachet. Next day, when
the gendarmes from Pontoise came to make search in
the chateau, Mme. Laffarge, as she asserted, was so
much alarmed that sbe begged Mine. Leotaud to re-
main with her in the room all the time, for she should
never be able to avoid confessing if they asked her
about them. The same day, one of the servants being
suspected, and, being -in tears about it, Mme. Laffarge
said she told him not to be distressed, to apply to her
if he were dismissed, and she would do all she could
for him. A few days after she again begged Mme. de
Leotaud to take back the diamonds, but she desired
her to keep them some time longer, and she took them
to Paris. Mine. Laffarge added that she was married
to M. Laffarge about this time, and, with mine. de
Leotaud's consent, took the diamonds with her to
Glandier ; it being agreed that she should sell the
diamonds, when so instructed, Mme. de Leotaud hav-
ing settled to speak to Lecointe, the jeweller, about
their value, and Mme. Laffarge having agreed that
she would meanwhile tell her husband that these
diamonds had been given to her in trust. Mine. Laf-
farge bad further stated that Mme. de Leotaud, who
owed her 1801. had given her two pearls instead ; and
that she had given them to Fossin, the jeweller, to have
set. She had further asserted that she had never con-
fessed till then the trath about these diamonds, because
of her vow of secrecy to Mme. Leotaud.

Such, said M. Coralli, was Mme. Laffarge's second
and last statement ; the inconsistencies and improba-
bilities of which he would not stop to pctint out. Before,
however, she had made this arrangement, she had
taken steps with regard to an arrangement with the
family of Mme. de Leotaud, and M. Bach, her advo-
cate, had been to Paris to see that lady. He had
applied for a private interview, but this he had not ob-
tained, and he only saw her in the presence of her hus-
band and other relations. It was then that M. Bach re-
mitted to Madame de Leotaud a letter, written to her
by Madame Laffarge, the object of which, he
would contend, was to intimidate her by an attack on
her character. In this letter Madame Laffarge re-
peated nearly the same statement as she afterwards
made to the examining Magistrate, detailed above, and
appealed to Madame de Leotaud, as though it were
true, to come forward and rescue her friend from the
horrible position into which her devotedness to Madame
de Leotaud's wishes had plunged her. This letter
terminated as follows :

" But why continue? Why not address myself ex-
clusively to your heart and your conscience ? Would
you have to reproach yourself with my death ? Oh ! I
could not survive such a belief. I know how to die ;
but in dying, before the priest who shall absolve me
from my sins, before my friends, before Christ,
I will say that I die your victim, that I am inno-
cent, and that I will bequeath the task of repara-
tion for my grave and my memory to icy friends.
When I am dead, Marie, I shall be pitied and
avenged, and your weakness will be a crime and a
dishonour. Instead of this, look at your son, of whom
you are proud—at your Raoul, whom you love so dearly.
Dread that God will avenge me in his person.
Come and love me again, and save me. There is only
one thing to be done now. You must declare, in a let-
, ter, signed by you, and dated in June, that you confided
the diamonds to me, with an authority to sell them, if
I should think proper to do so. This will stop the af-
fair. You will explain your conduct in your own way
to your husband. All your letters will be sent back to
you, and the most profound secrecy will guarantee your
honour and tranquillity. Adieu ; believe me, Marie,
that to save you I have been for two months a martyr ;
you have forgotten me. I could give you my life ; but
my reputation, the love of my friends, the honour of my
sisters—never !"

This letter could only be intended to frighten Mme.
de Leotaud. It, however, produced no such effect, and
proceedings bad taken their course. This was the case
for the prosecution. M. Coralli demanded that the
trial should be adjourned for that day.
The President said the sitting would be resumed on
Monday, the 13th.