The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1903-09-20
WAS SENATOR IN IT?
This Question Never Answered
in Humbert Trial.
OTHER IMPORTANT ONES
More Particulars of the Still
Unsettled Case.


Gustave Humbert. Senator and one time
Minister of Justice of the French Repuo
lie know of the swindle from the begin
ming? 1t is certain that the swindle gre"
I'D under the projecting shadow OF MS
name and influence, which were actively
exercised in its favor
The Jury was assured by the public
prosecutor that the reputation OF GustaVe
Humbert had issued spotless from all the
investigation The judge at an early
moment of the trial. taking sides against
the accused persons before him in way
contrary to all English judicial tradl-
tions. declared to Frederic Humbert that
his father was his first victim! The
lawyers of the accused took up the refrain
for their own purposes-Gustave Hum
bert's good faith is undeniable, and there
fore the Crawford inheritance cannot
have been a mere swindle.
tn most readers the reasoning of the
lawyers Of the accused will seem valid
although they are apt to draw the alter
native conclusions: If the Crawford mil
lions were imaginary and the Inherit
ance of Therese Daurignac a swindie'
then her father-in-Iaw must have been a
conscious accomplice.
First, there is the triple matrimonial al
lance of Humberts with Daurignacs, for
which Gustave Humbert must have had
reason. AS the story grew and changed
he accepted cheerfully each transforma-
ton. and borrowed or helped TO borrow
money on the strength of it. The god
mothers legacy from 1877 to 1881, the for
tune from Portugal during the first years
of spIendor. and in 1885 the sudden erup-
ton of contesting heirs from America
all were grist to his mill, he certified
them all 1t is true that no one has the
right to limit the extent of the gullibiiity
of a lifelong professor of law and Senator
and head of the judicial body OF whole
country; but the strain on common sense
is considerable when we are asked to ad-
NIT his good faith in accepting and main
tanning successfully three varying stories
of the fabulous inheritance.
It is not the same for what the presid-
ing Judge would call the other victims Of
the Humbert swindle. They believed
single story. which they heard for the
first time and which never varied. After
1885 the story had its confirmation from
the courts But the early lenders of mon
ev swallowed the story as told them by
Gustave Humbert and on the strength of
his character and position. Even If the
millions existed. as some still suppose,
then Gustave Humbert must have known
their real origin and that the stories told
TO explain their possession did not hold
together.
Only a single reference was made during
the trial TO another question which politi-
cal animosity has brought forward. When
the radical government of 1882 signalized
its first day in power by smashing ruth
Iessly the great Conservative bank of the
Union Generate. did the simultaneous out
burst of the Humbert fortune, as yet un-
explained by the Crawfords. come from
money received by Gustave Humbert as
the price of his official action? The pre-
siding judge took occasion to point out to
the jury that the lease Of the Humbert
mansion where their new riches were
first displayed was signed on the 18th CT
January. 1852 ten days before Gustave
Humbert became Minister Of Justice and
capable Of sanctioning the ruin of the
Opposition bank.
The question. therefore, remains where
It was-a knotty point for the future his
torian to unravel. lola with no knowl-
edge of the Humberts and certainly with
no spirit Of opposition towards the Radi-
cal Ministry has used lin his novel LAT
gent Money! the main facts of the I'm
ion Generate disaster to stigmatize gov
eminent Intervention where speculation
was so rampant on both sides.
A third question would concern the IN
conscious completely of Republican gov
eminent itself in countenancing and &C
crediting the validity of the Humbert pre-
tensions. When the party of Gambetta
finally gained control of the Republic.
with a fatal and ever-increasing tendency
towards Radicalsm. there was an inevita-
bic lack OF rich and fashionable Republ-
can society. The advent of the young
Humberts. living lavishly and throwing
wide their doors to successful politicians.
with the credit Of their close relationship
with a patriarch Of the new republic was
q gOdsend 10 the party in power In 1885
Frederic himself became a deputy. and his
parliamentary colleagues met at his hospi-
table receptions with half the prominent
ment Of the day. Presidents Of the repuh-
lie shared in the hospitality Of Therese
Humbert. the heiress of mysterious mil
lions, Money borrowing was never min
gled with this social success, although
such success gave credit with the profess
sional money lenders. There is rather rea-
son to think that the Humberts some
times obliged. out Of their superabundance
of riches. occasional needs Of their soci-
ETY. guests
In his clever and eloquent defense of
Frederic and Therese Humbert, Maitre
Labor spoke pertinently of their house
In the Avenue of the Grande Armee.
where all the powers Of all worldly class
e. al the representatives OF all nstitu-
lions were not only received but often
besought services. II We opened the
sealed packages of papers which are here
u have copies OF them all-if we cast to
the winds of publicity all those names
and among them the most inustrious are
the names Of those who but a year ago
were ready to make themselves the serv-
ants Of Madame Humbert. who never
asked anything Of them-it would be easy
10 make scandal here
NJ Andre Hesse who has made a name
Tor himself in his defense Of Roman
Daurisnac- insists on his clients good
fsith. He sees. in the house Of his sis
ter. the greatest names and most Illus
trlonS personases Of France passing by
Casimir-Perier. Felix Faure. Boulanger
T1rard. Freycinet. Poubelle. F7ourens
Deschanei-ah. ali passed that wayne
sees them seated az the Opera in his