The Fairmont West Virginian. (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1904-1914, 1912-03-23

you should intrust your diamonds
to me, so that might raise money up
on them with which you could pay the
price that he demanded"
Marie Laiarge lmplored her former
friend to save her from conviction
upon the lesser charge. Remember"
she wrote-and In this we seem to de.
tect the threat Of blackmail-"T have
all the proofs IN my hands, your letters
to him aud his toyou, and your letters
TO me. There isone thing for youto
do. Acknowledge in writing under
your own hand, dated June. that you
consigned the!fdiamonds to my care,
with authority tosell them II Thought
It advisable. This will lend the mat.
ter"
Mime. de Leautaud positively denying
the truth of this accusation, Marie La
FARCE offered her statement 10 the jury.
The diamonds, she said, had been
given to. her to sell that the proceeds
might be given tg,.a young man who
possessed the Power 10 levy blackaat1
upon Nine. de LcautauG. Her accuser,
she continued, had actually assisted
her TO take the jewels out-of their set.
tihgs; but as yet 1t had been found
impossible to- dispose OF them. The
young man was named Felix Cave.
and was the son OF a schoolmaster,
whose acquaintance The girls had made
while at school Id Paris. Having &c.
casionally met him while attending
mass, they wrote him an anonymous
letter making a rendezvous in the gar
den of the Tulllerles. CHere Nine, dc
Leautaud declared that it was Marie
Lefarge who had been the sole object
Of his devotlon) Aecording TO the
accused womans story, Nine. de Leau-
taud, after giving her the diamonds,
proceeded TO a number OF tricks IN or
der to create the impression that they
had been stolen; and the police had
eyen been summoned TO search the
chateau. All this procedure was to
throw her husband OF the scent aud
to prevent him from discovering her
secret.
b The jury refused to accept this ex.
PLANTATION, and Marie Dafarge was sen.
fenced to two yeaEs' imprisonment for
the theft! Meanwhile, however, the
murder charge had Been proceeded
with. The post mortem examination
had been completed. But the French
experts Of that day seem to- have been
as much at variance as those Of our
own time. Despite the fact that, La
large had died maniFesting every symp-
tom of arsenical poisoningsthe pres
ence OF this drug In his bodysYas never
satisfactorily proved. Ortifa, the most
eminent toXlcologlst Of the day, could
discover only halfa milligramme Of ar
seuic in The body. Raspall. another
distinguished French 5phystcIan, found
no more than the one;hundredth part
OF a milligramme, and therefore de.
clarcd in favor Of thesaccused woman,
us did several other experts, who could
detect no arsenic ut all. But the ont.
burst OF public indignation, aided BY
the machinery Of the criminal law Of
France which presupposes the guilt OF
the accused until his, innocence is
proved, induced theajury to return
verdict Of guilty. Marie Lafarge
was sentenced 70 Imprisonment athard
labor'for Ifey-after exposure in thepub.
lie pillory. This latter portion Of
her sentence was however, remItted.
The shorter sentence. OF two years.
Imprisonment for the theft of the dia.
monds was merged In the greater,
Marie Lafarge was sent TO the prison
at.Montpelier, where she remained dur.
Ing a period Of fsyears. The anlmos.
lily against her which had largely. been
responsible for her conviction now
gave way to a revulslon Of feeling,
.A,,st,.t,, o,,,l ItnIvl CtornDar gLlIna mild