The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1851-03-05

Execution of an Innocent Nan in Trance.
The family OF NJ Lcsurqucs, who had
been executed 5G years ago ior murder and
robbery. had pctiiouod the Assembly To-
cause the innocence Of tie father to he pro.
claimed, and that his character should be re
established. The Assembly ordered re-
port 10 be drawn up 10y NJ. Laboulic, and
hi, report is to-day published by the papers
The facts are of unusual interest. They
arc simply these;
In the month of April 1895, the Paris
and Lyons mail was stopped at Mongeron
by five men on horseback, who, after mur-
dering the courier and driver, pundered it
Of its contents. Among the arrests Of per
sons suspected of having been engaged in
this crime, was that Of a man named Gucno:
bnt, after undergoing an interrogatory. and
being confronted with witnesses, the Com
mlssary OF Police deca ed that there were
no grounds for further proceedings against
him, and he was set at liberty, The commits
sary having seized the papers of Gueno
promised to return them.
On the day following the liberation Of
Gueno the commissary was engaged in hear
ing further evidence, when ne was informed
by one of his agents that two womcr. of the
locality where the crime was committed,
were in the room adjoining the cabinet OF
the comnissary, and had there recognized
among the persons present two OF the muir
derers. The commissary had the women
before him, and, after reminding them ol
the gravity oil their statement, desired that
one Of the men pointed out should lie intro
duccd. This person, 10 the astonishmcnt OF
the rlliccr OF justice, was Gucno The COM
miSsary bad a strong conviction Of the inno-
ccnce of this man, but, as the women swore
positively that they had seen him at the
place of the murder Immediately after its
preparation, he was compelled to order that
he should remain in custody. When Gucno
o
commissary, lie replied that it was for the
purpose of claiming his papers, and That he
was accompanied by friend named Lcsur.
ques This was the other man spoken OF by
the women. Iesurqucs was then confronted
with his accusers, and they swore positively
to his identity. The rcspectabiiy OF Lesur-
ques, great as it was, did not suffice, after
such direct testimony, 10 induce the commits
sary to leave him at liberty. The women
said they recognized him perfectly, and even
described the plated spurs which they said
he wore at the lime of the murder. Lcsur-
ques, therefore, was arrested.
Subsequently other persons were arrested,
and brought to trial with Lesurques. Gucno
was acquitted, and Lesurques would also
have escaped but for an unfortunate fatality.
Several persons Of tie highest respectability
established q clear GiiJi-they swore that at
the time Of the murder Lesurques was with
them in Paris Among these witnesses was
NJ Lcgrand, wealthy jeweller Of Palais
Royal, This gentleman, who was an init
mate friend OF the prisoner, sworc that on
the sth Florea, the day OF the murder,
LesurqneS passed great part Of the nom
ing at his house, and he mentioned, as a
proof that he was not mistaken as to the
day, that he had made, whilst Lesuraues wa.
with him, a sale, an entry Of which was in
lis books When the books were produced
however, it was found that tie entry was un-
der date of the 9TH, but that Ihe figure had
been altered into s. This unfortunate cir.
cumstance, which subsequent events have
shown to be on error of the clerk in frs
putting for an s, was regarded by the iu-
ry as proof Of perjury on the part of Le-
grand, to serve his friend, and the witnes,
was ordered into custody on n charge of per.
jury. From this moment the jury paid very
little attention 10 the defence. I he witness.
cs for the prosecution, mised by the strong
resemblance of Lesurques to Il man named
Dubosq, who really was one OF the criminals
and was afterwards tried and executed, sworC
positively TO his guilt, and he was found
guilty.
After his condemnation, many circum'
stances transpired to demonstrate his limo
cence, and he petitioned the legislative body
for relief from The verdict OF the jury. The
petition was referred to the Council of State
but eventually the law was suffered TO take