Glasgow Courier. — 1846-12-24 (Glasgow, Strathclyde, Scotland)

PARRICIDE-SHOCKING CASE.  A youth of 19, named Chevillon, and a boy of 16, named Guy, were tried lately at Versailles, by the Court of Assize of the Seine-et-Oise; the first for parricide, and the second for complicity in the murder. The circumstances of this case are horrible. The father of Chevillon, a labouring man, little more than 40 years of age, was, about 12 months ago, attacked with a paralysis of the limbs, for which he was treated without effect in several hospitals. The poor fellow, however, did not despair of recovery, and, having a little money, he resolved on returning to his lodging—a room on the ground-floor of a house at Versailles—and there obtaining medical assistance. His son, also a labourer, but a youth of dissolute life and very profligate habits, occupied the room with his father, who was so completely helpless that he could not rise from his bed, and it was necessary, when he wanted air, to lift him from it, and place him at the door. on the 23d of August last he was still sanguine of recovery, and had a foot-bath, and took some refreshment. Only a day or two previously he had received from some member of his family, on whom he had claims, a sum of 200 f., which was placed in a bag near his bed. On the following morning, at half-past seven some neighbours were called in by young Clievillon, who told them that his father was dying. This was indeed the case; they fOund the father insensible, and removed him to an hospital, where he died a few hours afterwards. On a post-mortem examination the medical men thosiseed,-that the man -had wet died of the maladrtinder which he had so long suffered, but of suffocation; and as it was known that the son was in company with Guy, the 3 ounger prisoner, and had passed the night of the 23d of August in debauchery, spending a good deal of money, and as the 200 f which the father had received were not to be found, it was supposed that he had stolen it, and caused the death of his parent. Young Chevillon and Guy were arrested, and the following confession was made by the latter. Ile said that he was in the room of the deceased with the son, who purchased some charcoal at the desire of the father, to make a small fire on the hearth, to warm some broth; but instead of doing this the son made a large fire on the floor, and unseen by the father took away the bag containing the 200 i. The roam became very hot; the sick man complained, but the son told him the heat would do him good, and then left with Guy, closing the door after him. They went to a dance, and when that was over, to a public-house, where Chevillon drank in company with several persons of bad character. At about five in the morning he sent Guy to his father's lodging to see whether he was dead. Guy returned, and said that he had not had courage to enter the room, but had looked through the window and seen the father in the agonies of death. Chevillon remained drinking for about two hours, and then went to the place himself. Finding the father speechless, and therefore unable to give any information as to the cause of the hopeless state in which he was lying, Chevillon, after sweeping the remains of the charcoal into the fire-place, went out and called the neighbours. Chevillon, at first, denied that he had made any fire, and pretended that his father's death had taken place in the due course of nature, but some of the witnesses having declared that the stone floor of the room was hot when they entered, and that there were still embers on the hearth, lie shifted his course and made the following statement: —His father, lie said, httd become weary of life, and resolved to abridge his sufferings by suicide, lie had given the 200 francs to his son, as being no longer of use to himself, and desired him to make a large charcoal fire on the floor' in order that the fumes might produce death, and when the fire had been kindled he ordered the son to leave. This statement did not impose upon the exatniniug magistrate. and it was contradicted, not merely by the confession of Guy, but by much circumstantial evidence. The prisoner Chevillon persisted in his falsehood, and pretended that he thought he was doing his duty in obeying the injunctions of his father. On the trial the counsel for Chevillon endeavoured to shake the evidence as to the cause of the death of the deceased; and, secondly, supposing that he might have died of suffocation, sought to obtain credit for the statement of his client, urging at the same time that in law the man who assists another to commit suicide is not guilty of murder. The jury, however, found Chevillon guilty of parricide, but with extenuating circumstances; and he was sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment with hard labour. Guy was acquitted.— Go/iguana.