Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1893-02-23
TO A DUNGEON CELL.
Imprisonment and Fine of 8, 200 Francs.
Other Victims Of the Scandal.

court of appeals building before IL
o'clock in the morning. The ap.
proaches to the cour. were filled to
the last niche by noon, and five
minutes after the doors were thrown
open the room was packed to suffoca-
ton.
Presiding Judge Perivier read the
decision, after having dismissed the
prisoners plea that they should bene-
| fit by the statute of limitations. AL
though the basis of judgments were
given in exceptionally minute detail,
the audience listened from first to last
with oppressive intensity ofinterest.
The charge offraudulent proceedings
against Ferdinand de Desseps, Charles
de Lesseps, Henry Cottu and Marcus
Fontaine was held to be proved. On
this point the judgment referred to
the company's methods in issuing
loans, and the persistent putting done
by the press TAT the instance of the
directors. These practices, the judg-
ment stated, when not directly origi-
mated or endorsed by the directors
had been connived at by them. Ferdi-
nand de Lesseps, aided and abetted
| by his son Charles, Nj. Cottu and NJ.
Fontaine, had persistently concealed
the operations OF the canal company
in order that the quotation OF shares
might not be affected unfavorably
the directors had dealt with under
| writing syndicates, which, as far as
| their utility was concerned, We're fic-
titious and were known to be fcti-
tious. In underwriting loans these
syndicates had taken upon themselves
no risks and yet they had received
enormous sums OF money from the
company. The expenses necessarily
attendant upon the issue of loans had
been grossly exaggerated by the direct
ors, and this exaggeration also consti-
| tuted a fraudulent act.
The plea OF the defense, that despite
these fraudulent acts, the directors
were not amenable because the loan
especially in question had not sue
ceeded. the decision pronounced
| worthless in view OF the evidence that
the directors had not scrupled to ex-
pose the capital of the company to
| the risks involved in the fresh issue
and even reiterated their rpromises to
complete the canal with the proceeds
of the loan. By article 40S of the
code, concerning breach of trust, it
was not necessary that the money
| should have been misappropriated or
squandered, or should have benefited
the directors in order that they be
found guilty. Their fraudulent intent
| was the same whether or not their
purpos was carried out. This intent
| was proved by the fact that the sums
paid to Baron de Reiuach, Hugo
Oberndoerffer and others could not be
regarded as having been subscribed for
the purposes to which they were put.
In dealing with Gustave Eiffel's
breach of trust the decision held that
NJ. Eiffel had received 100, 900, 900 for
| the construction of ten locks and had
promised to complete them by 1890.
The evidence had shown that he had
not even purchased the specified
materials necessary in the construc-
| tion OF the locks; in fact he had bought
in France, all told, but 1928, 900
francs worth of materials. He had
failed furthermore to fulfill the obliga-
tions he had undertaken, while in
reality he was simply misappropriat-
ing the funds.
In conclusion Judge Perivier read
these sentences:
Ferdinand de Lesseps, five years i'm
prisonment and 5000 francs fine.
Charles de Lesseps, five years i'm
prisonment and 5000 trans fine..
Marcus Fontaine, two years i'm
prisonment and 5000 francs fine.
Henry Cottu, two years. imprison-
ment and 1000 francs fine.
Gustave Eiffel, two years imprison-
ment and 10000 francs fine.
Immediately after the reading of the
sentences NJ. Eiffel left the court room
with his counsel, whom he had in
structed to appeal to the high court
of cessation. Charles de Lesseps and
Marcus Fontaine remained under
under arrest. Both looked hag-
gard and disheartened as they de-
parted with Henry Cottu for the Office
of the public prosecution.
The chamber OF indictments has had
published it's reasons for throwing out
the true bill found by M. Franqueville
against Nj. Rouvier. While admit
ting that M. Rouvier received the
1883 from M. Vlasto, the chamber
held that no connection had been
established between the acceptance OF
the money and NJ. Rouvier's vote on
the lottery loan bill.
| The sentencing of the prisoners in
the Panama trials caused the utmost
transformation. Charles de Lesseps
was calm during the decision, but
burst into tears when he heard the
sentence passed upon his father. NJ.
Fontaine was prostrated. Charles de
Lesseps sent telegram to LIE Ches-
naye, Informing Nine. de Lesseps of
the result of the trial. Nine. de Les
seps probably will not communicate
the news to her husband unless COM
PEELED by circumstances to do so. The
general belief is that a sentence will
nevrr be executed against him.
The fines imposed were the utmost
penalty, but they will not prevent
action at law to recover the money
squandered. The only possible appeal
from the decision given today Is one
of the court of cessation for the revis-
ion of the sentence. The excite
ment caused by the announcement OF
the sentences in the parliamentary
lobbies, on the streets and in the cafes
surpassed anything of the kind since
the opening of the Panama investiga-
ton. The newspaper booths were be.
sieged by crowds fighting for the sue
cessive extra editions. The complete
absence of sympathy for Charles 6e
Lesseps has been especially note
worthy. The popular verdict seems
to he that he has paid the penalty for
withholding the names of royalist
deputies who were implicated in the
Panama bribery. The worst feature
of all is that the sentences have failed
to dispel the suspicious and doubts OF
the people as to the honesty of the
governments intentions. While the