At last, then, after more than three miserable years of imprisonment,
the victim of Madame Duparc and Procurator Revel had burst her way
through all intervening obstacles of law and intricacies of office, to
the judgment-seat of that highest law-court in the country, which had the
final power of ending her long sufferings and of doing her signal justice
on her adversaries of all degrees. The parliament of Paris was now to
estimate the unutterable wrong that had been inflicted on her; and the
eloquent tongue of one of the first advocates of that famous bar was to
plead her cause openly before God, the king, and the country.
The pleading of Monsieur Fournel (Marie's counsel) before the parliament
of Paris, remains on record. At the outset, he assumes the highest ground
for the prisoner. He disclaims all intention of gaining her liberty by
taking the obvious technical objections to the illegal and irregular
sentences of Caen and Rouen. He insists on the necessity of vindicating
her innocence legally and morally before the world, and of obtaining the
fullest compensation that the law allows for the merciless injuries which
the original prosecution had inflicted on his client. In pursuance of this
design, he then proceeds to examine the evidence of the alleged poisoning
and the alleged robbery, step by step, pointing out in the fullest detail
the monstrous contradictions and improbabilities which have been already
briefly indicated in this narrative. The course thus pursued, with
signal clearness and ability, leads, as every one who has followed the
particulars of the case from the beginning will readily understand, to a
very serious result. The arguments for the defence cannot assert Marie's
innocence without shifting the whole weight of suspicion, in the matter
of Monsieur de Beaulieu's death by poisoning, on to the shoulders of her
mistress, Madame Duparc.
It is necessary, in order to prepare the reader for the extraordinary
termination of the proceedings, to examine this question of suspicion in
some of its most striking details.
The poisoning of Monsieur de Beaulieu may be accepted, in consideration
of the medical evidence, as a proved fact, to begin with. The question
that remains is, whether that poisoning was accidental or premeditated.
In either case, the evidence points directly at Madame Duparc, and leads
to the conclusion that she tried to shift the blame of the poisoning (if
accidental) and the guilt of it (if premeditated) from herself to her
servant.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account