Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 01.pdf/190

 Causes Cefcbres. against whom they acknowledged they had no sufficient evidence. M. Vieillard entered upon a new struggle with this absurd and iniquitous decree. This was a bold act on his part, for already the authorities were annoyed by his efforts and seemed to consider them as a personal insult on his part. A decree was issued enjoining the procureur-general to forbid any further petitions being presented in favor of the accused. What infinite pains to repress the truth! M. Vieillard, however, was not discour aged. He appealed to the Council of State. Two years more passed by before success crowned these new efforts. The Revolution had commenced, and disorder reigned su preme. It was not until the 14th of Novem ber, 1789, that the Council of State set aside the decree of the Parliament of Rouen, and ordered the case to be brought before the Council for final disposition. A hearing took place on the 3d of Janu ary, 1790. The procureur-general, M. Blanc de Vermeil, showed that the Parliament of Rouen had wilfully violated the laws protect ing innocence; that there was not a shadow of a proof against the accused; that their in nocence was completely demonstrated; that Lefret was convicted by four witnesses of having wickedly and calumniously imputed to Verdure the assassination of his daughter; that this same Lefret was the only one upon whom suspicion of the crime could justly rest. Therefore he asked for the honorable dis charge of the Verdures, and that Lefret, as a punishment for his atrocious calumny, should be condemned to the galleys for life. On the 7th of January M. Vieillard ad dressed the Council. He divided his argu ment into three parts : the first establishing the legal innocence of his clients; the sec ond their actual innocence; the third dem onstrating the spirit of persecution which had distinguished the proceedings. The following passage gives a good idea of the terrible disadvantage under which the defence labored in those times : —

167

"Have you," said he, addressing the judges, — "have you out of the ninety-eight wit nesses, heard at the former investigation, found a single one who swears to anything concerning Verdure, from which you might infer that he was a man without character or guilty of any action which might render him suspicious? No; these ninety-eight witnesses are all favorable. That is not all; I offered a list of a hundred and forty-seven witnesses. Well, what did these honorable magistrates do? They shut their eyes to the ninety-eight witnesses who had been heard; they shut their eyes to my list, and asked the father how it happened that he had such a bad reputation in his parish. A question which resulted from a wicked prej udice, a prejudice which has been the cause of all the misfortunes of these unhappy ones. It was this same prejudice which dictated this proposition which was pre sented to Verdure. They said that if he could not tell who assassinated his daugh ter, it must be that he himself committed the crime; a proposition which leads to the most serious reflections. Hereafter, when a child is murdered, of all the indi viduals who compose society, they upon whom the strongest suspicions must fall will be the father and the mother. Yes, I repeat, it is this prejudice which is respon sible for all." The procureur-general then made a con cluding argument, paying a great tribute to the counsel for the defence, for his noble firmness and indefatigable and disinterested zeal. After this last act in a procedure which had lasted more than nine years, the accused finally had the satisfaction of having their innocence proclaimed. On Feb. 1, 1790, the family were pre sented to the National Assembly. M. le President Target addressed them as follows : — "Your long sufferings have deeply moved the Assembly. Such painful experiences have for an end the correcting of errors which have made so many victims. Forget,