The Sun.
London, England, 1857-04-06 00:00:00

dame Wyse will certainly be able to corroborate your de-
claration.
" I have the honour to be, sir, your very obedient ser-
vant in J. C.

ASSIZE INTELLIGLNCE.

another sum of 200 f. for his expenses in going to London '
for the Princess.
The deposition of Jeannette Chevalier, femme de
eliambre to Madame Wyse, was also read, to show that
OXFORD CIRCUIT.—GeOUCESTER, APRIL 4.
"N. CARDINAL WISEMAN.
the Abbe paid her 300 f. as wages, or she would have
CIVIL COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Crowder and a Special Jury.) "To the Abbe Roux." left her mistress ; that he also paid a great many of
Madame Wyse's debts, and that the latter said she could
ROUX V. WISEMAN. After receiving that letter I came a third time to Lon-
never forget his kindness.
Pigott, •
r Huddleston, and Mr. don and saw his Eminence. He said he would still con-
Mr. Sergeant
Edward Lawrence Levi, examined by Mr. Sergeant
Griffiths appeared for the Mr,
; and Mr. Keating,
der, Mr. Wyse's attorney. He showed me a register
tinue to look for the document. I went to Mr. Hel-
Pieott, said—l am the attorney for the plaintiff in this
Q.C., and Mr. Phipson for the defendant.
The p
Cardinal and
plaintiff in this action, the Abbe Roux, was
. a showing that bills for B,ooof. had been given to him, and
action.P I wrote to the defendant on the subject of this
acknowledgment in November, 1856. I had been .defendant, Cardinal Wise- a title to 25,0001. I afterwards saw the
French priest, who sued the
suited two or three months before. I went to Paris to
con-
man, to recover a document which had been entrusted told him what I had seen. His Eminence was astonished,
ifind all the witnesses. I searched for Madame Blanchon,
to him, but which it was alleged he detained. There and referred me to Mr. Harting. Upon that Mr,
and all I could hear was that she had gone to Germany.
was alsol
had originally subpoenaed Prince Lucien for the Kin
to him on the terms alleged. a count in troyer. The defendant pleaded the Harting and I went to Mr. Helder's office. The same.
general issue and that the document was not entrusted entry was shown to Mr. Harting. I afterwards saw
his Eminence, and he told me Mr. Harting bad told -
ston assizes, but we were obliged to change the venueg.
I was going to subpeena him again, but I was told by
The trial occupied the whole day till past 9nG' clock at him all about it. I begged the Cardinal to write to Mr.
the document, because I had given it to .
to leave the subpoena. I have since re-
his secretary
d
night, and excited considerable interest. His race the Wyse to return
better not to write to Mr.
Duke of Norfolk, Lord Petre, and other gentlemen were him (the Cardinal)
.and. he had given it to Mr. Wyse.
ceive a letter to say that the Prince is unwell, and not
His Eminence replied it was
on the bench with the Cardinal.
able to bear railway travelling. At Paris I applied to
M. Blot for the amount of this debt, 25,0001., with in-
Mr. Sergeant Pigott, in opening the case, stated the Wyse, but he (the Cardinal) would write to the Empe-
terest. He refused payment, and assigned a reason.
action was brought to recover a document which COD- ror. I had told his
hisEannance that the Emperor was
Cross-examined by Mr. Keating. That was after the
tamed an acknowledgment of a debt due to the plaintiff, paying the debts of family. I had asked him, if the
action was commenced, and after I saw Prince Lucien.
and which had been entrusted to the defendant under document was not found,. to write theo Eldmwperritoer
t 0
00
these circumstances :—The plaintiff, the Abbe Roux, attest it. When his Eminence said he wu
After
It was on the 7th or Bth of last month.
was a priest of the Roman Catholic Church. In the year the Emperor that terminated the conversation.
as
Re-examined by Mr. Sergeant Pigott.--I went to M.
in
London. He
1845 he became acquainted with Madame Wyse, the that I learnt that Prince Lucien
Blot partly in consequence of something Prince Lucien
had said.
to
sal .
I received this letter
wife of the English Minister at Athens, and first cousin was brother to Madame Wyse. asked his Eminence
This was the plaintiff's case.
of the Emperor of the French, and who was now entitled for a letter
E to Prince Lucien.
to be called Lady Wyse ; and the document in ques- from his minence,alatedthe 19th of July.
"College of St. Cuthbert, Durham, July 19,4854. Mr. Keating, in addressing the jury for the defen-
tion was given by her to the Abbe in the year
Monsieur L'Abbe,—l send you the letter for Prince dant, said he should call Cardinal Wiseman, who would
g. deny in the most positive manner that he had ever re-
-1847 as an acknowledgment of a debt of 25,000 f. which
she then owed him. It appeared that Madame Wyse Lucien Bonaparte. lam here, at the extremity of En
land, in a college of which I am the Apostolical Visitor, ceived the document on the terms stated by the plain-
had been separated from her husband, and when the Abbe
udiadont.an official visit. I shall return to London Monday tiff. At the time the plaintiff was an entire stranger to
became acquainted with her she was living in a state of
him. Having in vain attempted to reconcile Mr. and
great poverty, her allowance from her husband being "ca " Your devoted servant in J. C., Mrs. Wyse, the matter escaped his memory for several
" N. CARDINAL WISEMAN."
only 2001. a-year. The Abbe had received kindness from
years, until the year 1854, when the plaintiff applied to
Cardinal Fesch, Madame Wyse's uncle, and was thus in It enclosed a letter which was sealed. I had an inter- him on the subject. The Cardinal then recollected that
duced to sympathise with her misfortunes, and to lend
view with Prince Lucien, and presented the letter. The he had seen the document, that it was a security for
her money amounting to the sum of 25,000 f. In the
Prince consented to present a letter to the Emperor if money, and contained the expression that it was a
year 1847, however, he found that Madame Wyse hade
the Cardinal would write one. The Prince advised that "sacred debt," and said it should be looked for ; but he
fallen back into her former habits of extravagance, and h
as the only means of getting the money. I told the Car- never told the plaintiff that he had the document. The
made up his mind to render her no further assistance. He
dinal what the Prince had told me—that he would de- Cardinal was requested by the plaintiff to write a letter
then closed his account with her, and took thenadcekanvow-
liver a letter to the Emperor. I learnt from them both to the Emperor on the subject of the document, but, on
ledgment in question, and came to London tode
A t theour
that they had had an interview with one another. I consideration, he thought it would be indecent to do e
re
same get payment from Mr. Wyse, her husband, At . , asked the Cardinal to write such a letter. He said he He, however, consented to sign a certificate of the nature
same time he had in his hand bills for B,oooa which
was not accustomed to write to the Emperor, but if I of the document he had seen, as far as he could recollect
Madame Wyse had obtained from her son. When he
came over to England he gave the bills in question to would write one he would copy it, that I might give it it, and he gave it to the Abbe. Whether or not the
to the Prince. I wrote such a letter the same day, and certificate had been used and had failed he (Mr. Keating)
Cardinal Wiseman, who was a friend of Mr. Wyse, in
took it to his Eminence. He said he would copy the had no means of informing the jury • but it was yer
order that the Cardinal might give them up to Mr. Wyk*,
letter the sane evening, and I might call for it the next likely that the Emperor,ot with that sagacity which beY
and at the same time he gave the Cardinal the acknow-
day. When I called his Eminence could not receive me. longed to him,hwoulfdhine lbe
t. willing to payahnerfclebt-
ledgment in question, in order that he might see if he
I learnt that his Eminence had gone to Yorkshire. I
slawinstththee :Nis wishes
whato Madamerea Presvir. Hewould,
etaiereore,
could not get Mr. Wyse to acknowledge his liability and
received this letter about a month afterwards. I had
pay the amount. Mr. Wyse received the bills, but said
yse herself d.. about
great difficulty in discovering his address, which was the plaintifil'surcylaim. He would read her deposition, in
he would have nothing to do with paying his wife's debts.
concealed from everybody,
which she denied that she owed him anything. She
The document, however, remained in the Cardinal's
The Cardinal's letter was read as follows : admitted that he had undertaken as a friend to manage i
hands tilt the year 1354, when Madame Wyse's cousin,
" Filen Yorkshire, August 27, 1854. her affairs, and had occasionally made partial advances,
Sir,—Before my departure from London it was by the
Louis Napoleon, had become Emperor of the French. a
It teal then found that the Emperor recognised the debts advice of medical men that you were refused admissio to but upon the whole she considered that he was indebted
of the different members of his family, and the Abbe was my presence. Four eminent professors had been called in to her. No doubt it would be more convenient to the
naturally anxious ito obtain possession of the document to consult upon the serious state of my health, and their plaintiff to get the 1,000/. from the Cardinal by the ver-
which he bad left with the Cardinal. He accordingly opinion was unanimous—that I should as a duty withdraw diet of the jury tban it would be to run the chance of
applied to him for it in April, 1554, when the Cardinal from all occupation, and even for some time receive no getting it from the Emperor ; but, though the Cardinal
was in Paris. The Cardinal then said he would search more letters. To write to you to-day is positively painful bad no desire that the plaintiff should be deprived of his
for it among his papers when he returned to England, to me, and an actual suffering. Hence I have sent you rights, he felt bound to protest against the attempt now
neitherwill
foarcreepilie; issegri. at leeltwitetrtioteftoielrelltihnepEs
traop.;rnorrnowT. This
For
retttheer
imiaandlee
etoithfiexr
and restore it. The document, however, was not forth-
coming. The Abbe then came to England, but the do-
pi resent I restrict myself that
iinntgeLoiounof
Ipravionsly to himi
n law with
tohr justice.
Helder, to which he was not
curnent could not be found. He then applied to Mr. my departure I announced my N. Cardinal Wiseman, examined by Mr. Phipson, said
Chelsea, but at present the chapel is closed. plesilit was not at
Helder, Mr. Wyse's attorney, and was informed that the
document had been handed back to the Cardinal. The of urgent matter, I write by this post to M. the Vicar- —ln 1847 I had been many years acquainted with Mr.
Wyse. Mr. and Mrs. Wyso lived apart. In 1847 the
Cardinal then said it had been handed to Mr. Wyss, but General, Dr. Whitby, at Moorfields, to whom
you will plaintiff called upon me. It was the first time I had seen
when asked to write to Mr. Wyse to get it returned, he have the kindness to present yourself. A most indispene him. He came to me as a French priest who had come
refused to do so. The Cardinal, however, promised to sable thing is the progress in the English language, as on a business of charity. He stated he came to effect, if
write a letter to the Emperor, stating that he had seen the French at Chelsea should at least confess and possible, a reconciliation between Mr. and Mrs. Wyse,
even sermonise in English. I beg you, therefore, to apply the document ;but he left London the day after without
yourself ti.r.• it.
writing the letter he had promised. The Cardinal on his
"Permit me, Sir, to make one slight observation. Sincey conduct was then exceedingly good and virtuous ; and
that he had known Mrs. Wyse for some years •; that her
return to London again promised to write a letter to the
ij..noutnharlaenddisscatvered that your documents were not mislaid that it was his desire to make peace between her and her
Emperor, and asked the Abbe to make a draught, as he
eiakeltneoms tcol mattaat this earnestness in your husband. He asked me to be the conciliator, and, as a
manner of s* bishop, I considered it was my duty not to refuse when
said he was not accustomed to write letters to Emperors,
shoulders,
as if.. t,here existed some
The Abbe prepared the draught and left it with the Car- debta of justice upon my s,stroirmacferaosme the painful
dinal, but when he called for the letter he was again told position in which you e placed,one of my flock was concerned. I believe he asked me
confess to secure him an interview with Mr. Wyse. The Abbe
that he had gone out, of town. The Abbe then tried to that lam sensibly affected to hear that you. *hold me as at the first, or at a subsequent interview, showed me two
get the document from Mr. Wyse ; but, finding he could under the obligation of supporting you, or to procure you sets of documents. Some were bills of exchange, signed
not get it either from Mr. Wyse or from the Cardinal, a situation, as if I keel been the depository of a certain by Mr. Wyse's son, He also showed me an acknow-
he at length brought the present action. His only object sum, or its equivalent, which you ought to reserve, but ledgment of Madame Wyse for 25,000 f. He said he
was to recover the document, whica the defendant bad which was lost through fault of mine. I fear that in Paris wished to ask Mr. Wyse to pay it. All my duty was to
no right to detain ; but if the defendant would not give I shall be held guilty of such negligence. I hope, there- put him in communication with Mr. Wyse. He did not
it up the plaintiff would be entitled to the amount fore, that you will have made known to your friends that ask me to be the intermediary between him and Mr.
were found to have been placed in other
(25,0001.), for which it was given as a security, your documents
Wyse I would not have undertaken such an office. I
hands than in mine,--I have the honour to be your very . - '
The following witnesses were then called : did not reply, " Most willingly." I never undertook to
obedient servant in J C,,
The Abbe Roux, examined by Mr.Huddlestonthrough "To the Abbe Itoux.." "N. CARD. WISEarIA.N." obtain any part of it from Mr. Wyse. I simply recollect
an interpreter, said—lan a priest of the Catholic church. On his return having seen the document, and having had it in my
Paris, to come to some conclusion, so that I might I was formerly vicar of the church of St. Antoine,
him
recover hands. The next time I saw the Abbe was in Paris, 1
Previous to the year 1845 I knew Cardinal Fesch, and my money, I could not get him to write any letter, recollect in general that the document contained some
had received kindness from his Eminence. I became ac- nl. did leceive the document. . sort of acknowledgment of a debt, and a " sacred debt."
quainted with the Abbe, Cassanova. I learnt from him Cross-examined by Mr. Keating—The advances I I now recollect, on talking about it, that it was for
the position of Madame Wyse. I knew that she was made to 25,000 f. After the Abbe Roux left I never again spoke
Madame Wyse were from my own money. I
niece of Cardinal Fesch, and that she was in a state ofa
had shares in three companies of the value of 18,000 f. Ito Mr. Wyse on the subject. I never proposed to Mr.
poverty. I saw her in the Forest of Meudon in 1845, and r.- lso borrowed for
thePrineess from one party 6,0001., Wyse to pay it. I spoke to him on the subject of
found her in a state of great poverty. She had three
chil- and from another 5,000 f. From these moneys I made the reconciliation in 1847. In the last interview
dren. They were without the necessaries of life. They had the advances to the Princess in 1345-6.7. I sold all my
with the Abbe I told bins he had better take his papers
only what was strictly necessary. I don't recollect that shares. My mother was living at Paris at that time. back. He said, "As Mr. Wyse has refused to pay the
debt, there is no other person on earth by whom I can
the children were without shoes. I saw her at the Vile So long as her son lived she would not live in a state of
expect to be paid." I am pretty sure I saw the Abbe in
d'Avray three or four weeks afterwards. She was then great poverty. She was not in a state of great poverty,
in great trouble and grief in consequence of not being I know that the Princess denies that she owed me any
Paris in April, 1854. I cannot feel sure whether the con-
able to pay her servants' wages. One was going to leave, money. She never toll me I had received large sums
versation I had with the Abbe was in Paris or in London,
and her creditors were annoying her considerably. I dis- on her account, and appropriated them to my own If I said I would "send the documents back," I must
tinguish between what she said she owed and what she use. I had disposed of some of her jewels and also
have said, "If the document has been left with me, I
' I afterwards saw the
really owed. She said she owed 30,000 f. Upon that I of some plate. I never heard that the Archbishop of On my return to London
will find it and send it back."e
a letter also to him on
endeavoured to settle with hercreditors. Itook apartments Paris had complained of my visiting the house of the
I searchedi
for her in Paris, in the rue La Fayette. I learnt that all her Princess. I never told the Princess so. I did not ob-
Abbe and could not find i
in London in May. I wrote
furniture was pledged to a person named Tisseron. I re- tarn from the Princess any other security than the one the sth of June, 1854. After that letter I saw the Abbe
deemed it. I also paid 1,830 f. A great part of her clothes for 25,000 f. I did not obtain one for 60,000 f. I never frequently. The Abbe used to come to me and ask for his
was pawned, and also some plate and jewellery. There told her that I had put those securities in the fire, or title. I referred him to Mr. Harting, my solicitor, with
to trace it. When I was in Paris the Arch-
was a necklace which had been given by the Grand that I would do so. I could not pretend to throw them instructions
bishop spoke to me about a certain Abbe Roux. The
Duchess of Baden to the daughter of Madame Wyse. !I in the fire, for it did net exist. The Princereledid not
Abbe came over to England, and I appointed him
took it out of pledge and gave it to her. I afterwards repay me. How could she ? She had not enough to
temporary employment, The Abbe to to
to
found that her debts ware more than 30,000 f. A jeweller keep her. Madame Blanchon was present when the
write a letter to Prince Lucien. I appliedbelievel gave ' !1) 4
had obtained a prise de corps, and on that the Princess document was signed, but no one else. She is not here,
introduction to the Prince. He also applied o arleatiomgiavtle
was imprisoned in the prison of Clichy. That was in It was near the end of A ugust, 1847, when Madame
el COpy of the
him a letter to the Emperor. He sent me
1845, not long after she had been in the apartments. Blanchon told me my mission was ended. I saw Dr,
document, which he said he wrote out from memory,
With much difficulty I got her removed from the prison Wiseman when I first came over to London. This paper
abneldiesvaeidlhseighnaedd
been
nh
taociperatrifiisc,aaten.d 'theaasked
eAd bfobre
thatcam
to a maison de surete. I paid her expenses while she was is a copy of the copy which I kept. Before I left Paris asked me to certify that I had seen Fetch a document.
there, as she had no means. I thank I paid about 300 f. I kept a copy of the document I was taking over, and
a month. She was there about six weeks or two months, the copy produced is copied from the one I left at Paris.
I afterwards settled with the jeweller, and obtained her It is a copy I made for my solicitor. I do not know 25,0011. from the Government, and they had said to him I,
discharge from the maison de saute. I then took apart- what has become of the original copy. This is an exact e your title." He then said., "If you will write
means for her in the Boulevard des Bonnes Nouvelles. copy of it. I think the Princess owes me some thou- a declaration that you have seen this document, your
She was under condemnation for fraudulent abstraction sands more, but I only claim the 25,0001. It was in word will be equivalent." He Veen wrote out'the docu-
ment, and, considering it to be
of goods. The Princess's advocate was Lazoni. To free 1854 I for the first time discovered that the original was the substance, I signed
the certificate. I cannot gar-
her from that I paid I,ooot, and the costs. I also paid the in the hands of Mr. Wyse. I swear it. This letter is in e the exact date, but I be-
lieve it was in the autumn eA 1854. The Abbe also asked
wages of the Princess's servants. I gave her a share in a my handwriting, dated the 9th of March, 1848.
me to write to the Em er
mining company, That was to raise money to pay her The following passage of the letter was then read to
tp_
.ar to the same effect. That was
subsequent to the eer la
elebte with. The value of the share was from 1,5001. to the witness : certificate. I suppose because the first
sufficient. I
was not
. .
1,6001. I also received other jewellery for the Princess. " I also beg Mr. Wyse to be so good as to remit to Mr.promised to send such a letter, but
I afterwards decline I also sent M. Tisseron to London to effect a recon- Oppeneau the acknowledgment for 25,000 f. which Madame for valid reasons. I gave Abbe
a shelter for a3tir
ciliation with the Princess's husband. These transactions Wyse, gave me. If this lady came to know that this seen- .Le. I appointed him first to ash
ituation
were in 1845-6 7. Madame Wyse's governess was named city hat gone out of my hands I believe her quite capable at. Islington ; aten I appointed him to a French chap-
Elanahon. I learnt from that lady what led me to think of maintaining that she owes me nothing." laincy at Ch-stsea. There were two superior chaplains.
I never tot that my mission was finished, and that I ought to settle The witness was then asked whether he now persistedd 'aim the salony was 203/. a year. All de.
my accounts!. I produced all my accounts at the time in saying that it was in 1854 when he knew for the first Pen" o a 'the income chiefly. They all live in common,
to the Princess when the document was executed, and time that the document was in Mr. Wyse's hands? He an- and laatve everything supplied.
they were then thrown into the fire, Madame Blanchon swered —A friend, Mr. Oppeneau, came to London with caross-examined by M S tP.
a ergean Pigott—I never had
was present. There were documents and notes at my that letter, and on his return he told me that the document /Ale for B,ooof '.in my possession They went to Mr,
house which are preserved. The accounts that were was still in the hands of Dr. Wiseman. After that I 1 Wyse, but I can't tellwhether I*
gave theta to Mr.
Wyse
learnt were made out from them. The document in slues- could no;; doubt that it was in Dr. Wiseman's handese kor not. There were several interviews. When I said,
lion s
_wearssedrawn up and written by the hand of the Prin- But in 1854 I discovered from Mr. Helder that it was " You had better take your papers to Paris," I don't
h (It was here read, as follows, from a copy in Mr. Wyse's hands. The first time I saw the Cardinal
mmyr pvvosyseesesinohno.nt
know whether I had them. I meant the B,ooof. bills
in the handwriting of the plaintiff :—) I had the document and the bills, and it was ur
e that oc- and the 25,000 f. paper. lam sure I had them not in
"I, the undersigned, wife Wyse, born PrincessL t• • easion I left them with him. Ido not recsi
_ e izia . . . afect that I
Bonaparte, acknowledgeh •
having received from Monsieur asked him to obtain for me an intery e with M
he told me I mightin afterwards
ateingi
billsys sure r
anything
anythinghas
a ant
goo e
i 0:. conversation
rl.
wa m
y aneo.t came tome
ei,twwbo aatii ntrumohele:
not aware that I ever asked Mr. Wyse to pay the 25 000 f.
Wyse, saw r. .y e his house, after
my unfortunate days—namely, 8,0C31. • 184- 12 0001 •
in o„ .in the Cardinal had given up the bills. 1. did not give the
nor to recognise the debt. lam sure the papers were
1816, and 5,000 f. in 1847, desirous that this moue shall , Mr.
not left with me in any manner;
_I said, in answer to
bring him 5/. per cent, interest, con'tr:ing h y(eardinal the document to give it to vv se •al should rfoarrianeg have been mad to do so. When 1 heard Mr. Wyse had
an interrogatory " I remember o have titian such a de-
lay children may become the heir to ping
his -fwathoeer'vsie
in case of my death before having acquitted my debt t ' the document I expressed diesatisfaction. I did so to
the Cardinal. I asked him to get it back. I knew it
ccouinmsetnatnaesesmarretaiOdnyedstaintetrthiontterwrohgeattoerryttlhnedesramtheewcairsa
Abbe Roux, not to forgret that it is a sacred debt which
had been given up by mistake. I cannot understand
left with me to give to Mr. Wyse, or vial handed to him
should take precedence of all others.
by the plaintiff, I have no recollectiow whatever." My
what I meant by the Passage in my letter of the 9th of
"L. WYSE,
"Born Princess Letizia Bonaparte. March, 1343. Possibly a rumour may have reached me
"Paris, Sept., 1847."
that the document was in Mr. Wyse's hands. I only memory refreshed by documents makes me now recol-
This copy is in my handwriting. I made it when I gave saw Mr. Wyse oaneckehaehen I was in London the first lect that they were not left with
the original to Cardinal Wiseman. (A bundle of papers time. I did not,
meats" I mean the Abbe me. By the "docu-
im for money. I was to address
was here placed in witness's hands.) These are the vouch• myself to his man of business. I think Mr. Helder said Mr. Wyse in 1847, and sp
*8
lettaa. of Marcia 1848. I saw
°Jae to him about the recon-
ers for the payments I made for the princess. At the Mr. Wyse would 'not time the Princess executed the documents my conviction his wife's debts. I did not ciliation, but I don't third
see the Cardinal on thispbauysiness between the years 1848 Mr. Wyse said he woe
and 1854. I kannedw IC I spoke about the money.
ad have nothing to do with the
was that she owed me more than the 25,000 f. mentioned.ithe Archbishop of Paris saw Abbe Roux. That
It was signed in Sept., 1847, on the 6th I believe, but I the Cardinal,
was about the reconciliation. When
am not certain. In Nov., 1847, I came to London to sees tt rhea t e
When I saw the Cardinaliern a.aercammeaded me to him. I said in my leittrar of the sth June, 1354, that the do-
Mr. Wyse. He referred me to Mr. Helder, his solicitor, the document perfect!y, WithPontishe said he recollected currant was
t• .eft ,eft rather than deposited," that does not
being able to state the remind me t ,
The defendant was then docter and Bishop of the Lou- amount. He said he thought itoat I saw Mr. Wyse. I knew the oblige-
don district. I learnt from him that he knew Mr. Wyse, He did not say he did not know waswhatamong his papers, lions had '
oeen given up to Mr. Wyse. The impression
t had become of it,
and that he would assist me to the utmost of his power, I saw Mr. Helder in 13'40n mY • .mind now is that it was not lelt with me • indeed
J , once before Mr. Hartin after ' '
in consequence of his promising to assist me in this mat- went with me, and once after. I asked Mr. Held g
was is documents, lam sure, lam now satisfied it
ter, I gave the cardinal some bills to the amount of write to Mr. Wyse to give the document. I can'ter to . , not left with me. It was never left in my posses-
-B,ooof. I gave them up without any condition whatever. whether I expressed to Mr. Helder or to Mr. say
Si'dn'
I am now certain, from reconsidering the whole
I also confided to the cardinal the document signed by any dissatisfaction with the document being.
in Rantingthe, of Otte circumstances and the documents—l allude to the
the Princess to show to Mr. Wyse, and to si
gned the hands of Mr. Wyse. I did not ask Mr. Wyse tt* I :obe Roux's letter, written in 1848 to Mr. Helder —if
money I advanced to the Pr,ncess. I said, "Here is the Pay me in 1854 ; I only wanted the documentba• J it passed through me at all, it was a mere banding over,
document which shows the amount I have generoutly Ido not recollect that I told Prince Lucien •Jir ' Mr. Wyse and the Abbe were not present together with
advanced to the Princess. Will you kindly be the inter- the Princess repudiated the debt ;I do that me. My belief is that the documents were all handed
anediary between me and Mr. Wyse to obtain that have I did. The Prince did not tell re not be. over at the same time. I can't recollect that the Abbe
amount 1" He replied ":Most willingly." I gave the Emperor would not pay the debts if the P -•." that the ever asked me to write to Mr. Wyse on the subject. I
document into the hands of- • Nothing dieted them. The Prince L • has b • eincess repo_ feel confident he never applied
Dr. Wisensan. Lucien ear - to me to act in any
more passed as far as I remember. On that visit to Lon- nay solicitor. After the correspondence a euhpeenaed by way with Mr. Wyse afterwards. He asked me to
don I saw m —la Wyss, Rthankedbut
e me for the billsabout his writing the letter to the ' with the Cardinal write a letter to the Emeror. I promised, but I
he would not allow me to speaka Emperor I do
remember taw. he offered to Mgr . s not did not do it. I write tot he Emperor and to other
Paris and left the docurnents' to his wife, I left for
had seen the document in • '
quest a a certificate that he gracious sovereigns •
once a year, and I have written to
Some in Dr Wiseman's hands.
years after I learnt that theF, *
say it was the
amerorof the French dinal did notsign •
was paying the debts of hie family, entered on my ecclesiasticalit. I day before I left London for File yhe asked me to write
1854. At that time I believe Y. That was aboutduties
the cardinal ere complaints -made a- ainst
I w at. Chelsea. There the letter. The circumstances stated in the letter of the
recollect Passion Week in 1854, At
that was at Rome. g me at Chelsea, and I 27th of August were reasons why I should not write
prepared to, answer
diaal was in Paris. I had an interwiew time the car. was p ' them, An inquiry was not di- such a letter. I intended to write the letter, but I
minded his eminence of the document I hadwi him*
I re. rected, but my auarars were suddenly (bruaquement) changed my mind. I did not communicate to the Abbe
him in 1847. He replied that he was about confided to withdraw'', from me. That was in December, 1855. that I had mind. •
changed my I did not tell the Abbe
London in a few days, and to return to Re-ex • a 1 Mr Huddl t
he would send me back -amine dy • es on—With respect to that I was not in the habit of writing to the Emperor,
the the veer,
document, which was doubtless among his plaints at Chelsea, I was prepared to answer, but I asked him to
papers. I re. no - Prepare a draught, but I would not write
'ceived no communication from the Cardinal, and in con , eaportunity wasgiven me. On being asked what the the letter which be wrote. Tam not aware that I told
sequence I visited London a second time about April-, c surges were, the witness said—l reserve myself for the the Abbe that I would not write a letter. I never have
1854, and saw his Eminence. He said the document at foreeclesiastical tribunal. The mosey which I borrowed written to the EmPeror on the subject.
not been found. Another search would be made ar,cCidt for thet Princess is still due, and lam paying interest Re-examined 13-, Mr: Keating—l declined to write to
would be found. I waited nearly a month in toww, and
prone.ed The Princess had the money. She also had the the Emperor ~ but it is not necessary tc say wby,
then returned to Paris. Having consulted m aof the sale of the jewels and plate. I havecon- William J 'elder, examined by Mr. Phipson—Since
`a profes. stantl
sional advisers, I wrote a letter to the Cardirealt uejapnorted my niother, but she has complained of the year 18'17 I have been solicitor to Mr. •%Vyee. I saw
euclos- my feYrnai ing a copy of the document which I had deposited with Princess ti,'
Lir: 8° much money to the Princess. The Mr. Oppor .eau on the 4th of April, 1848. I did not tell
him, and received this letter in reply, dated the sth of have done all' an income of only 2001. per annum. I Oppenca, i that the document had been • back t giveno
I could t
June, 1854. The letter was as follows : Blandon here. Iprocure the attendance of Mme. the Car dinal. I saw it in Dec., 1847, at Mr. Wyse's,
"London, June 5, 1854. the original cop coaitspied the document produced from Wilts u-place. I have not seen it since, nor heard of it.
" Sir— I remember perfectly upon the occasion of your When I wrote he I also sent a copy to the Cardinal. I rec eollect the Abbe and Mr. Harting coming to me on
first visit to London you showed me some papers relative knew there wee otter of the 9th March, 1848, as I the .4th of Aug., 1854. I told them I had seen the do-
to the family Wyse, in which you desired tun hake efforts Mr.
W - 's a negottation between with Mr. Wyse in 1847, and that I bad no
to procure a domestic reconciliation. Among others there w 8 , Yee, I thought the document
the Cardinal and eumr ,nt
was certainly a document in which Madame Bonaparte ye s bands, er that it might he lost 'tad
might be inDec.,'ln 1847
Mr. recol letting of seeing it since.l saw the Abbe
Wyse declared herself your debtor for a very considerable , get it again. When I came to Lo oat
'tad I might not after I had spoken to Mr. Wyse. It was on the 25th of
sum, the amount of which I dnot remember, and I dare
o
nondon in
not determine the much my income would t
no debt of Madame Wyse's. I
0 amount • but it appears to me that the be at Chelsea exactly how Wys a would recognise
document was the soma 'fwhich would
be about 200/. a year, It , but he said it n saw the Cardinal on the subject.
you sent me a copy,
eve r
dated Paris, Sept., 1847. °II
lady in question, would not r. Wyse, the
anyobligation on his was assured that Price, Luci .ese memory by this memorandum made at the
part to pay the debar eontrraeect°gdnir
what I did tell
y Madame Wyse.He has sent a cert'fi a*
aY ; tic aa. I have no memorandum of
the document remained withoute i cate.
effect. You say it ra- The deposition of Emanuel La ' b memorandum that when Oppeneau
mained in my hands, certainlyzonis, a French avoc t ill:. I have a
vir.
not in the ho pe that it was was read to show
The memoran-
of seine, or that it should be made use r hope
its that the plaintiff bad paid •a ua ' ' ailed I referred him to Mr. iseman. J. since worth of about 90 ocif
:—" N. He never called
was not depended uponin Englauouori gel. inn. , -,. on account of the Prince e, and :hal Ann contained this note
at ment at Mr.
It was therefore just left, rather than depowivte iFranco. M. Blot, au officer of the French Government, was v again." In Dec., 1847, I „saw the docu had become worthless. I think it evaa •praeasele; ', as I jog her debts. lie stated that her acknowledgm pa". Waste's, for the purpose of advising whether he should
ent of
to Mr. Wyse with the obligations of Mr. Alfred lliieveelndeusit) her debts was not necessary in order to obtain - recognise his liability. I advised him not to do so. I
yment.
son. Search is being made to find it at this gentle n's The deposition of Theophyle 'Lasser Pa
do not know whether the Abbe, ever called on me alone,
on was read t '
and at hie lawyer's, but I have no hesitation in avile'rarin,. show that he received I,Boof. from the plaintiff' on ; A) ' Re-examined by la t. g--alr. Wyse has been in
Mr. ea. In
that snob a document existed, and was seen- by me. Mu': COU'.lt of the PtillueSP, to recleeni her furniture,1 *C- Greece since 1849,
and r I
4,\ I The depaitien of Letitia Wyee wail then read. She ,
' .