, 1874-01-25

which was given in by two m.ids at their ezani-
c1acu,1sTANT1A1 ACCOUNT
of the assassination The first e. god daughter ter
OF Madame de Ia Pivardiere) told how her
mistress had sent hon1sbo}a oa Ga s0s Tho cenld
suspect her dreadful purpose, and then intro
duced two valets sent By the Prior OF Mlzeray.
who effected the murder The second glri de-
posed that, having been sent OF On some er.
been effected. Pathos was added to horror
when his little daughter, not years old, tod
how she had heard papa's voice crying out, ~
nv God have pity on mel -...
At this juncture, one Of the two girls was
seized witt, mn illness which ultimately proved
fatal. Upon her dying bed abe designated the
Prior as
AN Aocosu1lcE TO THE MURDER.
The Prior WAS confronted with two women.
They hesitated, stammered. disavowod all they
had sworn to. and declared that the P.ocureur du
l,oi (M Louis NiAel!e) had threatened thom till
they had testified Us they had done. Hardly Was
the Prior removed before they changed again,
asked to be brought nefore tho Prior second
time, and reasserted the original charge.
The corT1se, however, had not yet been recoy-
cred, Tie officers were Dusied getting some
sufficient evidence to provo the fact OF hia death,
when the whole theory Of the prosecution WAS
scattered to the winds by \ most unexpected oo-
currenco. Undoubted proof was onered that IL.
lie Ia P1Varulefo
WAS ALIVE!
number Of Witnesses dcposed, some before
notary. others before the Daili d'Erli, that tho
Sieur had boon seen on the 18th and 18th OF
August, at ChatcaurGux aud lssoldoun- In
other words he WAS alive two days after tho
alleged murder. Madame petitioned that ho
should be informed of the calumnies OF when
she was the victim. But where was he2 sho
presented herself before the Licutenant-Ge
crul Of Romoraptin, and procured On order to
have search made for II. de Ia PiVardlere, nnd'
when found, proper proof, before magistrate.
OF his identity should be obtained. 4 delay Of
two months had led most people to forget all
about her application whom tho slcur
MADE HIg APPEARANCE
before the officials. Unluckly he chose badly
whom to appear before at Romorantin. He wore
the air, not OF man who feared to meet The
officers OF Justice. but, an innocent gentleman
should, Of calm clf-possession.
The prisoners, Madame do Ia Pivardiere and
the Prior, now demanded that he should be con-
frouted with the two witnesses for the State.
They chose, in conscious innocence. the wrong
mothod. Tho two women swore they did not
recognize h1ml Mystery and doubt again roeo
like mist. II. Nivele, the Procurcur du Hoi.
demanded that ho should be detalued till ais
identity could be satisfactorily established. But
he was in the custody OF rival official II: 10
Lieutenant General of Romorantin refused the
demsnd. N. do Ia riyardiere was dismissed, and
DISAPPEARED IMMEDIATELY.
lie C3nG xHu Wtuk uEU EAtptt AL apfCaA WE
then taken to the Grown, and the King issued
an order for his arrest wherever found. The
Kingdom must be searched. Again the myster1-
GUS man disturbed even royal preparations hl.
de Is piyardiere voluntarily came forward. swore
to his own identity, and explained his singular
conduct BY ayowing his double marriage. Ths
time it was before the Procureur OF Ronoran-
tip Nov release seemed at hand for the prison.
erB. 4 weary year had been dragged out IN
prison. Not 30. Tho Roynl warrant was out
.1au4 41c ~n$u oil E,H 4tnh
provided himself with eafe-conduct. Tho
honor of the prosecution was wounded. The
Roval safe-coniuct STAYED tho Royal warrant,
and bindered prosecution for bigamy. Inc
Court could only recognizes tile evidence OF the
man whom the warrant presented befors them as
tho possible II. de Ia Piyardlere. His desire to
relieve his wife and the
PRIOR WAS sEUTnAL1zED
by his selfish solf-protection. The character OF
the Sieur is not deep problem. but all interest,"
-iahumane.
He claimed to be admitted to testify. He
had to force tho Court to admit his evidence.
The defcuse now attacked. III. Nlye1le held that
unless ho vas properly brought before the
Court. Monsieur might be really H. dc Ia PlyaE-
deere, but they could not evon acknowledge his
possible existence. The Court refused to look
at man who preferred q safe-conduct to an ar
rest. The procurcur alleged the ordinance Of
1859 against the two prisoners, WHO pleaded that
His testimony Was essential to their case. Il it
vas now brought in, it was agains: those ordi-
uaucca. Tho case was really closed now, aud
anv new evidence mug be un fdit justiicatf.
But tlis could only be brought III after juds
mcut Was given on the process.
THE CASE WAS DESPERATE.
To receive sentence that thcy might get in
egidonce TINT was ruled out II. dAguesscau was
now retained for the defense. He made two
allie arguments, putting in telling blow upon
thn cr11aIty aud real fallacy of II. Nlgele's
minis. It was defeating tue very ends OF
Justice to compel II. de Ia piyardiero to provo
lis idcntitv 10 ~ to destroy the prosecution,
aud fatal a prosecution before lie could
sarra11v severe mon the mcuaces which
hal nlmost dictated the evidence Of
~ nau r1'3a s,,,,,1 ~ THAR tsrrnr the cohe~
eno ""o g. -. tour,rs +ha;r n,;ndu
renee neeoed 10 shape tno noItols ,.. .n.n ~ !s,,e
bad led upon INTO pe1jAea teS.olous. ~