New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-11-29
MR.. FEUARDENTs CRITICISM.
WHY HE ATTACKED GENERAL D1 cEsNoLA
THE BASIS OF VARIOUS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
EXAMINATION,


A great many ladies were present. during the
trial Of the Feuardentd Cesnoa libel in the United
States Circuit Court yesterday General Mcclellan came
I'm before and sat with General d Cesnoa for
time The crosse Examination OF Mr.. Feuardent was con-
tnued by Mr. Sckney The statue OF Aphrodte ana Eros
again referred to- Mr. Feuardent re-asserted tht
the body was made mp OF "unrelated fragments" In
answer to questions by jurors he said that the places OF
iunctre could not be discovered by chseling that
bath was necessary and that this test had been reseu
Mr. stickney then read extracts from Mr. COOKS pshpn
let concerning No. So the statue holding horned heau
This il headess statue. Mr. Fcuarient testhed tha1
based his statement that it once possessed head on
the article by Mr. Hitchcock in Haper's Magazine OF
July 1872 An extract read showing that the
statue described by Mr. Hitchcock was three times the
size of fe and the witness testified that No 80 Is about
six feet high. Mr.. Fcuardcnt continued:
General N Cesnola must have mised Mr.. Hitchcock as
to the Dimensions. think have seen in the museum h
the head that is the original OF tue Wood,cu. III n
Harper article was undecided between two heaus one
OF which has disappeared may have been mistaken
when said that the head illustrated In HdrpS mas Dech
exhibited In the Park building.
pamphlet produced written and puhhshedO ny
Mr. Fcuardent in 1873. in which he described No 80,
commented on the style OF the drapery and advanced tho
theory that the statue was Of priest OF Venus Inc
witness explained that his position before writing the
pamphlet was that OF person who receives bad oahh
note When he suspects its character lac examines H.
and not until Since lie wrote the pamphlet Oh NO.
40 he had examined the and found IT was the com
postion OF fragments strangers 10 each Other when nc
afcrgard charged The testimony was then diIectc" 10
the statement In Mr. Cooks pamphlet, for when Mr
Feuarleut has avowcd responsibility throwing DOUBT On
the rpnuinencss Of the Golgoi find, and calling INTO qrs
ton tie existence the temple described by General al
Cesnoa The pamphlet states that the existence ot 'he
temple al Goco rests General di Ccccaides unSup-
ported assertion Extracts from Ceccaide ara 'cr oI
Mr. Iangs printed in note IN Ccccades publication
were read showing that General d Cesnoas ehca' aOhs
were within their knowledge, and that Mr. Lang had seen
the tclrrc or rather temples rs he claims. Mr. feu-
ardent also said that he had watercoor sketches
nv an artist who had been Cyprus pcturiur the site or
the ancient temple He added that h" based his asser-
ons that General Ccsnola had bought large portions
of his collection. from the natives ou the report oi
an arclaologis named Richter Alc had printed matter
NJ Ricbcrs bearing on this point hut not In court lie
CHARGED General If Ccsnoa with iHvc'ue Tho nrton ol
the Gogoi find Ly coaiing MS Statements In London
and his publications In the RorUe Turin COW in C"ccalde
Lang Il. Cc>uoa'- cyprus" and the article Ia Hd'Per%
The contract bcyccH General III Cc~no!n ard The trustees
completing sale of The collection 10 London was thch
read By its terms GIO.OOo wa, The price ana $1,000
was ia I've paid down and the remainder within two years
with interest Tac witness said that that hc knew moth
ing OF General d, CosHoa representations about the col
lection hut he meant. when hc c'cr!a~i the statement
in print that General I'll Cr,nna hid "bia'n~l money
under false protrncc- 20 say that be- nd sold false an
tiJucs The witness proceeded;
Mr. Richter. residing IN cyprus. Is the nulv Arch
roluci-t bc,idr- myself That know " a." ~ IN'h,,u
DAMAGING criticism ou the Ccsuua Collection. INC
CCJrHs Herald of Octol.r l~@j o. THE only publication
have Acrc. showing M. lIohtrr, opinions.
Mr. Newton, book then rad fi'u. 10 the cnrct
that Genera, i Csoa's discovery ~ rHd ornaments ui
CIuui unparalleled. aud That any di7r"'"f'l "ght
have rested content Win tls s'nrl" a'lrN'n'ni VI
Wa. add0,l thai Tits collection Wrhi have ci h'h me
British Museum. bit that % 'ut r'' &" NrN-N ofA r
Fc'lricn ,lierlI'm.d all mtril"n =" hl'lf ''l'I"i 9"
C'-noa wbcn ice made hi' i,''.1i"n,. re- il,,',..G
card No. to convict On" inv ia''irr '"mulli'r q"
ui--tat.irrrt I'll Fcuardn1 hut UrcttHt-' t"-jitri
iili when Gr the Ilu'rElHlh ifuul "tai". 70" e"
with Tho hand auC piicri on. hf hl' lr lh
ar, tic rfofa.rsln hcoi1. the statue Co. tti con
Nh. ~tCkurt pspcft ding ln d~h h'i ""lI'l
r .IfVr the committee bln made Hu ."H'0' hlH
take ,,r q Wilul trurEt ~h"u ib"N rrEai od ihat
hand ptit ui lac solid -lnl' "'N Ni i"tht7
nlicc,-i Mr. Chpt'c said that % appeared by tho VII
Ir.,s Testimony that lac hid withheld hf- Ln""l,'iAr
from the committee and nd subsequently published
IL in the shape of q drfauai"ry clnL ~
Mr. Fcuar.u en- continuing h- evidence. ~'id th"l MS
motive IN making The SIT amateur publication was 10
serve art aud the pihc tud partly b"cau" hc "i '"rh
ANNOYED by hS cpilr~ 0rdcIc' with Genera. dI '-1d
he asked 70 hc Eaa ever sail 60 VI Gui,ha'u'iie lh'
General dI Cc-ola th'ri, that he Gd n"t care
whether nr not she suit, hui that be WUl rain
HIN The question ulrd ont
Before the redirect examination. General I'll t-"lA
r,uuc. copy of account rrri"r'd Q" hi'H rs MI
Irfarlrut ia itulpu and The Idir. VlirI VIZ I"iir.
NJ Ntifu'-. ilr replied That thcN "'ir
not a. his possession aHd he w'ld not. ihrir"I pro"
du.c thrui. ON u.dirrci examination. vi I'nHid'hl
ry.nrIis.i lis III testimony tt br !i received
400 nom GcurII di tc7Itt, ana That Ac l'l u""'u
t, lrrrInt in response IT. ir7iue-i Tie pared
t,c it.i- la In icg,r ani The a'''ani .ui''i
Eg.S, To- " iihu lsoaiids Hi~ bank book pat III
g, h.cncc starving that N"'c.cr -. ls.2, H. b,ri
made a deposit 81 GlioO