The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle. — 1867-11-30 (Stourbridge, West Midlands, England)

FRENCH MYSTERY.  The Civil Tribunal of Pontoise has just given judgment in a most romantic and mysterious will case. • The subject of litigation was a right to a sum of £20,000, but the interest of the case consists in the extraordinary disclosures made in court, a supposed murder and a suicide being among the salient features. The following are the details of the affair, which reads more like a penny romance than a chapter from life:— About a twelvemonthago the body of a respectably-dressed man was discovered in the Seine. From papers found on the corpse it appeared that the deceased's name was Jourdan, and that he lived at Montmorency. An inquiry WaS instituted, alit it was discovered that deceased resided in a small chateau, which he had had built originally for himself. Although young he lived with an out woman in a most retired state. Neither the one nor the other was ever seen to receive any friends, and none of the neighbours could give Information concerning the interior of the mysterious abode. . . . .  The authorities found the chateau closed on all sides, the shutters being fastened, and the doors bolted. Since the finding of the body of Jouvlan in the Seine, the old woman had not made her appearance. The doors were consequently broken open, and in a room on the first floor, stretched on the ground, was hued the lenly of the old woman 7 death had already taken place several days. Had a crime been committed? No article of value was missing, and the doctors believed that she had died a natural death. The strange coincidence of the two deaths restates a mystery. Wes the death of Jourdan the result of suicide? No tine can tell. From the inquiries set on foot it was smut discovered that the pretended Jovialt was none other than a M. Tonnlet, belonging ton rich anti highly-respectable family in Paris. In 1847 he lost his mother ; he was then only fourteen years old. Among his father's servants was an Alsatian name Marguerite Schneider, who, it appears, had an extraordinary inflnence over the mind of young Tounlet, which, the plaintiffs . allege, was of a rather idiotic turn. In 1.8.•.5 his father and on the next day young Tonnlet, who had inherited his I father's fortune, disappeared with Marguerite Schneider, leaving a letter behind stating that he bad gone to America. It appears, however, that the ill-sorted couple took a house in a most retired spot in the auhurtis of Paris, where Marguente Schneider passed under the name of Miulanie Rame, and Tonulet as her nephew. Here they led • most strange existence. No one was ever allowed to go beyond their:in-ten gate, the shutters of the house were always closed, and two Immense dogs were stationed in the garden to prevent the approech of any intruder. At length sinister rumours were spread about concerning thew mysterious hermits, and the eurioeity of the neighbours was completed when, on one fine morning, they diseovered that the misanthropic aunt and her nephew had disappeared without leaving any trace of their flight. They next turned up at Montmorency, where, as already stated, they lived a similar life, under the name of Jourdan. But the turning point in the story is yet to be told. A few months ago Tonnlet fell violently in love with a young lady of good family, at Montmorency. He propoaed for her hand, but the parents Molina that they had to do with such a strange idiotic character, refused their consent. What passed between Marguerite Schneider and her pretended nephew at this period is not known. All that in known fa that Tonnlet was found dead In the Seine, and Marguerite Schneider dead in her room. A will was discovered. by which Tonniet, • few weeks after his father's death, had left all his property, amounting to about 20,0001. to the servant Schneider.  The representatives of Tonnlet sned that the will should be annulled, on the ground that undue influence had been brought to bear on Tonnlet, who, moreover, they alleged, was not in a fit state of mind to make a will. On the side of Marguerite Schneider, a long procession of Alsatians, consisting of shdemakers, municipal guards, sellers of choucroute, &c., supported the legality of the will. Strange to say, contrary to the arguments of the Procureur Imperial, the tribunal rejected the demand for annulling the will, and adjudged the succession to the representatives of the old Alsatian bonne, Marguerite Schneider.