One of the oldest and most characteristic features of the French administration of justice, the _juge d'instruction_, has but recently disappeared. The very extensive powers of this magistrate, but vaguely defined by law and custom, lent themselves readily to the abuses which undoubtedly constituted a grave defect in the criminal jurisprudence of the nation. To him were confided all the details of the preliminary investigation of a crime and the detection of the criminal, the seeking for clues, the right of search, of arrest of any suspected characters, of summoning witnesses and experts, of interrogating the accused, and--but too generally--of wresting a confession from him by any means that might present themselves. One of the methods employed was the ostentatious consultation before him of a blank memorandum which, the accused was given to understand, contained the complete avowal of a confederate. In the famous _affaire Wilson_ of a few years ago, concerning the alleged sale of decorations of the Legion of Honor, M. Vigneau, the official charged with this investigation, telephoned to one of these purchasers of red ribbons in the assumed character of M. Wilson. These irregular practices, however, it is asserted, were mostly practised by younger and more inexperienced Juges d'Instruction, and were greatly disapproved by the graver and older magistrates. The accused--who not infrequently would declare subsequently that the statements which he was reported to have made by the _curieux_, in thieves' slang, were but a distorted version of his words--was considered to have an additional security in the presence of the magistrate's _greffier_, or clerk, who took down his testimony, and in the fact that he himself need not sign this statement if he considered it inexact.