The last Punic war, Vol. 2 (of 2) : $b Tunis, past and present : with a narrative of the French conquest of the regency.Broadley, Alexander Meyrick
History
The last Punic war, Vol. 2 (of 2) : $b Tunis, past and present : with a narrative of the French conquest of the regency.
Broadley, Alexander Meyrick
Tunisia -- History; Tunisia -- History -- French occupation, 1881-1956
M. Léon Renault next gave his version of the Crédit Foncier business,
and denied having threatened the Bey. It is not clear to what extent he
admitted the project published by MM. Rochefort and Pelletan. Be this as
it may, it is certain that at the time he came to Tunis, he delivered a
copy of his scheme to Mustapha, who at once communicated it to several
persons interested in the matter. M. Camille Farcy, who had followed the
troops during the expedition as the correspondent of the journal _La
France_ was then called, but he proved nothing, and the President
strenuously opposed his saying if “he had ever met a Khamír,” on the
ground of irrelevancy.
M. Cléry then addressed the jury on behalf of M. Roustan. He began by
drawing a comparison between French interests in Tunis before and after
M. Roustan’s arrival, and then went on to sketch his career and attack
the defence presented by his adversaries. After reading the various
complimentary addresses presented to M. Roustan by more or less
legendary French colonies all over the Levant, M. Cléry asked the jurors
to believe that his client and the Musallis were the only righteous
persons to be found in an otherwise universal sink of corruption. “My
task is finished, gentlemen,” concluded M. Cléry, “but you must not
deceive yourselves as to the consequences of the verdict you are about
to render. If you say not guilty, as the defendants ask you to do, you
will declare that M. Roustan has brought about the fall of Tunisian
bonds; you will declare that he is a thief, you will heap mud upon him,
and with the same blow censure the Government which employed him, and
the vote of the people from which in turn that Government emanates. It
will then be evident henceforth to everybody, that the reward of every
man who does his duty and risks his life for his country, is to be
assailed and disgraced by public opinion. They will learn that men like
this might expect the fate assigned to M. Roustan by his enemies, viz.,
to be shot at the foot of a wall like a bandit or a dog!”
The Procureur-Général now asked M. Rochefort if he would redeem his
promise of divulging the name of the author of the revelations he had
published. The editor of the _Intransigeant_ promptly answered, “Muhamed
Arif Effendi, ex-Secretary of the Bey, at present commanding a troop of
insurgents at Kairwán.” Was this meant as harmless banter, or as a piece
of adroit judicial fencing? I am unable to say. Poor Muhamed Arif died
three years ago in a lunatic asylum in Stamboul, and how any one could
be “commanding a troop of insurgents at Kairwán,” two months after its
occupation by the French troops, I am unable to conceive. The answer,
however, appeared to satisfy the Tribunal de la Seine.
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