The daily morning journal and courier., 1904-01-16

l SoiS we'll, anu IueFe WAS every prospect of a speedy recovery. A friend of the
 countess, Mme. de Mosczska, lady of position, told the doctor that she had
 been present at the accouchement. Dr. Rosinski saw the child, but it was not | undressed in his presence. He does not ! appear to have expressed at the time ' any doubts regarding the authenticity | of the birth, and only declared that the child was strong and remarka bly, 1 fine one
 l Another witness of high character and position, pr. von Jazdvevslxi, a Roman l Catholic priest, and a member of the
 Reichstag, had visited the countess both before and after her accouchement and had not the slightest doubt as to
 the genuineness of the child.
 ] The child grew and prospered, and it's 1 likeness to the countess became every 1 day more apparent The representa-
 tives of the rival line, nevertheless, con tinued to cherish their suspicious. Count Miecislav Kwilecki went so far l as to propose to Count Vesierski Xviii ecki that if the latter would privately
 own to him that the child was supposi- titious, he would keep the secret until l immunity for the crime had been se- cured by lapse of time. This extraordi- 1 nary proposal, which, if accepted would ] have secured the succession to the rival i line, was rejected; and the Vesierski 1 KWileckis now institutel a civil action ] against Count Miecislav demanding the l public recognition of the legitimacy of 1 their son. This action was tried at Po- sen in 1899: the countess and her boy
 were present in court, and the resem-
 blance was recognized. After the trial had been adjourned the defendants failed to put in an appearance and the
 case was decided against them by de-
 fault.
 The rival branch did not conform to the judgment of the court, but contin- ued to disseminate the assertion that the child was supposititious Ali anna teur detective named Hechelski was ] employed, whose methods were far from unexceptionable His chief witness was a girl named Jadyiga Andruszevska, ! formerly q maid of tine countess. Sine
 had been harshly treated and ultimately dismissed. Her evidence was to the ef- feet that her mother, who had mean time died, had in January, 1887, gone to Craeow and had obtained by purchase an infant then over a month old, which she had brought to Berlin and delivered to the Countess Kwilecki at her lodg- ings on January 27. The child had been bought near Cracow from a poor girl who had given birth to it on December 1 g, 1896.
 This woman appeared in court and gave her evidence to the effect that two ladies, apparently of rank, had visited her in January, 1897, and had taken away her boy in exchange for one hun dred gulden. She had subsequently, re- pented and had tried to find the ladies at hotel in Cracow but they were gone. She had another child, who was brought into court dressed in a suit ex- actly like that of the young count and heir of the Kwileckis, but it was diffi-
 cult for the public at least to trace any resemblance between them.
 The woman made every demonstra- tion of distress over the loss of her aI- leged younger boy, but it was too much 1 for the jury to believe that she had first recognized her long lost child from a
 photograph, seeing that her story was that she had parted with him when he was only month old. The resemblance of the younger child to the countess was again generally recognized. There was vast amount of other ev- idence, largely collected by Hechelski
 The son of the midwife Dwell gave dam aging evidence against Hecheski, who, it appeared, had spoken to him of considerable sum Of money in another connection when he visited him at War saw.
 There was a detective from Paris, who had made elaborate inquiries and had received information from large num-
 Der of sages femnnes. There was a Par is telegram which bore suspicious as- pect. It ran, Femme trouvee, mais de- mande trop cher" and it had been de- livered at the wrong address in Posen and had fallen into the hands of the en- emy, Count Miecisiax Kwileckwi. But it was explained by the defence as refer ring to French sage femme whose ser vices had been originally sought. The newspapers which freely com mented on the proceedings during the trial, strongly condemned the conduct of the public prosecutor and of his jun lors, who threatened the jury that if they returned a verdict in favor of the countess there was every likelihood that the system of trial by jury would be abolished. The counsesl for the defence on the other hand, indulged in a great .1f fa11 T e
 made sentimental appeals to the jury and actually referred to the side taken by public feeling, and particularly by
 the majority of the female public in Berlin.
 The presiding judge, Landgerichts-
 rath Leuschner, who had strongly ta-
 ken the side of the prosecution through out the trial. charged the jury to-day by calling their attention to the points on which they had to give their verdict