The Sun.
London, England, 1848-02-22 00:00:00

THE MURDER BY A PRIEST IN

FRANCE.
ASSIZES OF THE HAUTE GARONNE.
SITTINGS OF FED. 10 AND 11.

Dr. Ressaire deposed to the finding of a small piece of
hay or straw adhering to the mud on the shoe of Cecile
Combettes. The object of the prosecution was to show
that this bit of hay or straw was of the same kind as
that in the loft of the establishment of the Freres, and
thus prove that she had been in that place. The
witness was also examined as to the position of the body
of Cecile Combettes when it was discovered, in order to
establish more clearly the presumption that it had been
thrown over the wall from the establishment.

M. Cornbes, a professor of the School of Medicine at
Toulouse, was examined at great length as to the state
of the body of the victim._

M. Filh;l, a professor of chemistry, gave a long ac-
count of the analysis of the food in the stomach of the
deceased, and of the experiments made with the por-
tion of a geranium, the bits of hay, &c., found on
her person, in order to identify them with the ob-
jects of the same kind existing on the establishment.
The evidence of this witness showed the minute
pains which had been taken to establish these results.
He declared in the most positive way that the identity
was perfect. He also deposed to the remarkable fact
mentioned in the act of accusation. It will be remem-
bered that there were found on the body and clothes of
the deceased traces of a fcecal evacuation, and that in
them were discovered the seeds of figs, of which it was
known that she had eaten at her supper on the night
preceding the murder, and probably again at breakfast
on the following day, as it was known that she had
taken some figs with her when she left home to go to
her woik. A shirt, which it was presumed had been
worn by the murderer, was found among the foal linen
of the establishment, and on this shirt were traces of the
evacuation, in which also the seeds of figs were discovered.
The seeds collected from the body of Cecile Combettes,
and those found on the shirt, were most minutely
examined in every possible way, and they were found to
be identical. M. Filhel was also examined as to some
stains on the breeches worn by the prisoner, but his
evidence did not support the presumption that they arose
from any causes connected with the violation or murder.

Mr. liernardet, a chemist, confirmed the greater part
co!' the evidence of M. Filhol.

Coumes, a corporal of gendarmes, gave the following
evidence:—Almost immediately after the discovery of
the body of Cecile Combettes, he visited the establish-
ment of the Frees. In the garden, near the wall, he
found marks of footsteps and- a small piece of
cord. One of the frares who accompanied him stated
that the foot-marks had been caused by the frares.
Laurien, one of the frarps, a man between 50 and 60
years of age, who acted as gardener, said he had made
some of the marks whilst laying a trap for a mole, but
the corporal was convinced from the position in which
Laurien placed himself to show that ho bad made the
marks that he did not speak the truth. On the 19th
the witness Coumes again went to the garden.
Laurien then said to him that, on the occasion of
his first visit, there were marks of footsteps which
he (Laurien) could not then account for, but he
bad since recollected that they were made by him-
self. The corporal remarked that it was strange he
should not have recollected this only an hour or so
after the marks had been made, and that he should re-
collect it three days afterwards. It appeared that,
before the examining magistrate, Laurien had said that,
on the morning of the 16th, he stated to Coumes that
the marks had been made by him. On the 19th, the
corporal asked him how he could have made the marks,
which were those of shoes, whereas on the 16th he wore
sabots; to which Laurien replied—" If I had known
that 1 was to be asked so many things, I should have
reflected before I answered." The witness was asked if
he considered the marks of the feet of a ladder, which had
evidently been placed against the wall on the inner side,
were as deep as they might be supposed to have been if
a person bearing a corpse, and thus causing a double
weight, had gone up the ladder. He replied that they
were not so deep.
Laurien was then called. The witness Coumes had
stated that when be was in the garden on the 16th there
were several of the ft eres. Laurien, at first, stated
that none were there when the corporal first came, hut
afterwards admitted that there were. He asserted that
he had, on the 16th, declared to Coumes that all the
marks of footsteps were made by himself, and accounted
for their existence in certain parts by stating that
he had gone there for a necessity. When called
upon to explain how he could have made the
marks, which were those of shoes, whereas it was known
that, on the morning of the 16th, he wore sabots, he said
that he pulled off his sabots, and put on shoes to attend
the prayers of the frres in the chapel. He admitted,
however, that he was not in the habit of pulling off his
sabots, except upon particular occasions, and that, when
he went to mass he kept them on, although he was as likely
to disturb the mass by wearing them, as he was to die.
turh the community when at prayers.
M. Noulet was then called to giro evidence as to the
experiments made with the various articles found
upon the body of Cecile Combettes. A curious
incident now occurred. The objects were inclosed
in packets, bearing their names, and sealed
up. The witness stated that on °peeing the
packet marked Fragment de pail& &bane adherant
tun des souSers, he found it empty, although it
ought to have been there, for the packet was signed by
the examining magistrate. M. Filhol was called upon
to explain this circumstance. He said he could not ac-
count for it. He had sealed the parcel himself •, but i
was probable that being so small the fragment had go
into one of the other parcels. They were opened, how-
ever, and it could not be found.

Laurien was again called. Ha was asked as to his
age, and said he was 51. (Ho appears several years
older.) In answer to different questions, ho stated that
he first received information of finding the body of
Cecile Combettes on the 16th of April, at a little before
eight in the morning. The information was given to
him by the director of the novices on the establishment,
as he, Laurien, was coming from the orangery, where
he had been to fetch his sabots. He had made the foot-
marks spoken of whilst wearing his shoes.

Dr. Esstevenet was here called upon to repeat his evi-
dence as to what occurred when he visited the garden,
on the IGth, viz., that Lectada had said that he or some
of the flares had caused the marks.

The President, addressing Laurien, said—" If you had
said to the corporal, in presence of four friTes, who it is
known were there, that you had caused the footmarks,
Leotade could not have made the remark which he made
to 1)r. Estevenet some hours afterwards, for the four
Beres would have made known what you had said, and
all the community would have been apprised of it.
Laurien declared that he had stated it in the presence
of the four hares.

The witness Coumes was recalled. He declared posi-
tively that Laurien had not made to him any observa-
tion of the kind on the morning of the 16th.
Laurien was asked if he had, on the 19th, said to
Coumes that ho had forgotten on the 16th that the marks
had been made by him, and then when Coumes had ex-
pressed his astonishment at the circumstance, added that
if he had been aware that he was to be questioned so
closely he would have reflected as to his answers.
Laurien denied positively, although frequently reminded
by the President that he was on his oath, that ho had
said anything of the kind.
Couples repeated his testimony which contradicts that
of Laurien on the above, and also on some minor points.
Laurien still persisted in his assertions and denials,
and requested that the President would call as witnesses
the four freres in whose presence he had said, on the
16th, that the foot•marks were his. On being pressed
ho equivocated considerably, but would not retract what
he had sworn.

At this part of the proceedings the Court retired to
deliberate on the course to be pursued with reference to
this conflicting evidence. On the return of the Judges,
the minutes of the depositions of the two witnesses
were read over, and signed by them respectively.
The Procureur-General then applied to the Court to
order Laurien to be taken into custody for giving false
evidence.
M. Gase and M. St. Gresse, the Counsel for Leotade,
protested against such precipitation.
The Procureur•General repeated his demand.
The President now addressed Laurien in a solemn
manner, informing him that he had yet time to retract.
He urged him to weigh well the consequences of his
conduct. " Answer me once more (added the President),
do you persist in what you have stated?"
Laurien replied—Yes.
The President—ls there iyour obstinacy more igno-
rancen and want of prudence than bad intention ? At
one time I thought that you were unable to appreciate
your own conduct, but you have just given me a proof of
your intelligence. Reflect. See whether the declaration
which you have signed is true.
Lan ion—l swear it in the presence of God.

The President—The God before hon- I—Y;U have just
sworn is the s3rne before whom you kneel in your
prayers. Do you respect him?
Lauren (with a firm voice)—Yes, I do.

The President—And you swear kit fore him that you
have spoken the truth?