The Press., 1901-09-26

TENTION.
his notary for information. Nothing
could be learned of him there. l
spent two days wandering about in the
hope of catching sight of him, and a
private detective in my employ spent
three more but we got no trace. Then,
fearing that he had made away with
himself and by the advice of the no.
tary, went to the police. To my great
amaZement, no sooner had my story
been related than l was put under ar
rest and our joint apartments were
searched from top to bottom. When
Indignantly protested, the inspector an
swered:
HE was your friend. You are the
last one who saw him. You must pro-
duce him or lie under the suspicion Of
having encouraged him to self MUIR
der. Perhaps you wanted to rid your
self of him when you found that he
was ruined"
l sent for the notary, but he was
nOncOmmittal. He was evidently
afraid of the police. He did say that
Leon considered me his best friend and
that had been very anxious about his
disappearance, but there was no hearth
ness in his defense of me. All the sat
isfaction that l could get from the
American minister was that he would
watch the case. l was Officially de-
tanned" for being accessory to the
mysterious disappearance of Leon
Messerve. I was arrested for inter-
ference with an officer in discharge Of
his duties, although l had simply pro-
tested. Further. l was put under sur
veillance as a suspicious person. All
this meant that was locked up In the
house of detention while the police
went hunting. not for the missing man,
but for evidence to incriminate me. I
could have got bail, but as l was not
citizen of the country bail was re-
fused. l was willing to employ agents
to make further search for my friend,
but this was not allowed. Even the
notary was forbidden to make any
move in that direction.
For seven weeks l was prisoner,
while the police had charge Of my
apartments and would give me no news
whatever. The lawyer l employed
said that we must let the law take its
course-that is, we must wait until the
officials of the law got ready to let me
prove my innocence. If l couldn't
prove that l was not accessory to the
missing mans suicide, then it would
go hard with me. There came a day
at last when l was arraigned in court.
1t was not on the main charge, but on
that Of obstructing the law. had
simply asked the inspector what he ex-
pected to find in my apartments to
show what had become of my missing
friend. That was made out to be lob
structing," and / was fined sum equal
to about 500. The next day I was
brought up on another charge. 1t was
my duty under the law to have notified
the police at once of Icons disappear
ance, but had waited several days be-
fore doing SO. Being derelict in my
duty, 1 was fined 81. There was still
a third charge. / had employed pri-
vate detectives when should have no.
titled the regular, police. This was
holding the law in contempt. 1t was
clearly within the province Of the
court to fine me for that, but as l was
stranger in France and had not been
found guilty Of any criminal offense
this charge would be overlooked. I
was then given my liberty, with
warning to be more circumspect in the
future. My attorney had not opened
his mouth in my defense, but had to
pay him a fee of $25.
Upon being turned out of the court
room made my way to my apartments
to find that Messerve had been. home
for three days, but that the police had
prevented him from notifying me. He
had left the rooms fully intending to
make an end OF himself, but had en-
countered friends, drunk with them
and finally brought up in a gambling