“Ah! you don’t know how to love,” she retorted, closing her eyes; then she turned her head on the pillow and made him an imperative sign to leave the room. Monsieur Graslin pleaded strongly but in vain with his fellow-jurymen for acquittal, giving a reason which some of them adopted; a reason suggested by his wife:-- “If we do not condemn this man to death, but allow him to live, the des Vanneaulx will in the end recover their property.” This weighty argument made a division of the jury, into five for condemnation against seven for acquittal, which necessitated an appeal to the court; but the judge sided with the minority. According to the legal system of that day this action led to a verdict of guilty. When sentence was passed upon him Tascheron flew into a fury which was natural enough in a man full of life and strength, but which the court and jury and lawyers and spectators had rarely witnessed in persons who were thought to be unjustly condemned. VI. DISCUSSIONS AND CHRISTIAN SOLICITUDES In spite of the verdict, the drama of this crime did not seem over so far as the community was concerned. So complicated a case gave rise, as usually happens under such circumstances, to two sets of diametrically opposite opinions as to the guilt of the hero, whom some declared to be an innocent and ill-used victim, and others the worst of criminals. The liberals held for Tascheron’s innocence, less from conviction than for the satisfaction of opposing the government. “What an outrage,” they said, “to condemn a man because his footprint is the size of another man’s footprint; or because he will not tell you where he spent the night, as if all young men would not rather die than compromise a woman. They prove he borrowed tools and bought iron, but have they proved he made that key? They find a bit of blue linen hanging to the branch of a tree, possibly put there by old Pingret himself to scare the crows, though it happens to match a tear in Tascheron’s blouse. Is a man’s life to depend on such things as these? Jean-Francois denies everything, and the prosecution has not produced a single witness who saw the crime or anything relating to it.” They talked over, enlarged upon, and paraphrased the arguments of the defence. “Old Pingret! what was he?--a cracked money box!” said the strong-minded. A few of the more determined progressists, denying the sacred laws of property, which the Saint-Simonians were already attacking under their abstract theories of political economy, went further. “Pere Pingret,” they said, “was the real author of the crime. By hoarding his gold that man robbed the nation. What enterprises might have been made fruitful by his useless money! He had barred the way of industry, and was justly punished.”