CHAPTER XXV.

THE "INSTRUCTION"

From December 5th, 1907, to March 13th, 1909, my "Instruction" took

place in the Palace of Justice, in the Cabinet of M. André, the

Examining Magistrate.... I am not superstitious, but I state for the

sake of those interested in such coincidences, that the cell to which I

was taken after my arrest was cell No. 13, that my _Instruction_ lasted

13 weeks, that my final interrogatory took place on March 13, and that

the jury returned to decide my fate on November 13 (1909).

As I have already explained, what is called the "Instruction" in France

is the preliminary but exhaustive, definite inquiry into a crime.

Before my first appearance at the Palace of Justice, Maître Aubin came

to Saint-Lazare.

"The _Instruction_ will begin to-day, Madame. Summon to your assistance

all the courage you possess. André is no genius; but he is a relentless,

pertinacious judge who will do his utmost to make you contradict

yourself and draw terrible conclusions against you from those

contradictions. You are innocent, but he will make you feel that you are

guilty; every hesitation, every slip, however unconscious or

unimportant, every reticence will become formidable weapons in his

hands. Don't accuse any one--Couillard or Wolff, or Balincourt. Even

though he examines your private life--and he is sure to do that--don't

mention your 'friendship' with M. B., the Attorney-General, or your

intimacy with President Faure. They would only irritate him. Besides, if

you did, he would only change the subject of 'conversation.' You must

forget that you have received in your Salon, Ministers of State and

Diplomatists, eminent politicians and eminent judges, even though you

are asked who came to your house. Just reply to André's question and

nothing else. Say merely 'Yes,' or 'No,' whenever possible, for he will

twist your replies as often as he can do it 'legally,' into something

damaging to your case. I know that he is absolutely convinced that you

are guilty and he will do his best to make even you believe it! It is

scandalous, infamous, and everything else you like to call it, Madame,

but I can't help it!"

I was bewildered!

Marthe came that same morning to give me courage, and also Pastor

Arboux, Soeur Léonide and one or two other Sisters accompanied me, on

my way to the prison door, as far as they could, and they, too, spoke

many kind words to me.

Downstairs, under the porch, I saw three of the inspectors I knew so

well, waiting for me. I was told to enter a taxi. One of the inspectors

sat near the driver and the other two men inside with me. They were

armed with revolvers, and looked anxiously through the windows.... They

feared the crowd, but our journey was uneventful.

"Have you discovered anything?" I asked them. "Have you found any new

clue? Are you on the tracks of the murderers, at last?..."

"Alas, no, Madame."

"Will the _Instruction_ be very long?"

"Most likely it will. Ah! that judge! He is making all kinds of

investigations. He sends us to all kinds of places. We don't get a rest.

M. André is killing us!..."

"So much the better!" I replied in my eagerness.

The two inspectors laughed.... That was the first laughter I had heard

since Ghirelli and Rosselli had burst into endless laughter because I

did not know that the coffee was sold ready prepared.

We reached the _Dépôt_ near the Sainte Chapelle, the stained windows of

which I saw from a distance; and I thought of the day when I took Marthe

to that marvellous Gothic jewel to admire her grandfather's work. The

inspectors, after wishing me "good luck," entrusted me to the care of

the _portier_ who in his turn led me to the Sisters' gate. The

_portier_, too, was kind and polite. A man of middle age with clean-cut

features and grey hair, he saluted me in the military fashion.... Every

time I came to the _Dépôt_, he had a good word for me, and these little

attentions were a source of great comfort to me, who, at Saint-Lazare,

heard day after day the foulest and vilest insults.

A Sister took me to a small cell, and locked the door on me. But it was

soon opened again, and I heard a voice say, "The Sister Superior." I

looked up and was transfixed. I have seen many beautiful women, both in

life and in art, but none could have compared in divine loveliness with

the woman who entered my cell at that _Dépôt_. The oval of her face was

perfect, her eyes, which seemed like liquid and transparent turquoises,

neither blue nor green, were exquisite.... Her voice was the most

musical I had ever heard. Her refined and shapely hands were poems of

loveliness. But her supreme charm was her expression. It was not of this

world; it was too noble, too lofty, and, above all, too serene....

Later, when we had often spoken together, I begged her, discreetly,

hesitatingly, to tell me about herself. She merely said, "I am the

Sister Superior of the _Dépôt_... and I have suffered a great deal in

the past...." I never dared ask her another question, but I have often

wondered what great lady she was... and to what great sorrow she

referred....

My cell at the _Dépôt_ was even worse than my cell at Saint-Lazare. It

was small and low, and had only an air-hole for window; there was a bed,

a board fastened into the wall, used as a table, and a three-legged

stool held to the floor by a chain.... But when the Sister Superior

entered the cell, everything seemed radiant and beautiful.

She coaxed me into eating a little, asked me a few questions about my

daughter, and comforted me.

Then the Director of the _Dépôt_ entered, a tall, well-dressed,

stern-faced man, with the look of the officer about him. He, too,

compelled me to eat: "The _Instruction_ will exhaust you. You will need

a great deal of physical as well as moral strength." After he had gone,

the Sister Superior advised me to lie down on the bed until I was sent

for, and I did as she told me.

A sister came to fetch me, and led me to a door where two soldiers of

the Municipal Guard were waiting for me. It was an awful blow to me. I

did not mind the inspectors. I knew and liked them, and they had long

worked with and for me... but a soldier on either side of me!...

They saluted me, however, and later, when I asked one of them why he

always saluted me, a prisoner accused of murder, as he would an officer,

he replied: "I don't know myself, I'm sure, Madame... but there, I can't

help it."

The two guards took me along a passage. We passed before a row of cages,

inside which were men with horrid faces. They shouted at me through the

bars, and the guards told me to hasten.... I learned afterwards that the

official name of this passage lined with cages is "_La Souricière_"--the

"mouse-trap."

We reached another building. The authorities were so afraid of

enterprising journalists that guards had been posted at every door, a

precaution, however, which did not prevent a photographer--on the

_Matin_ staff, of course--who had climbed up to a carved-stone ledge

above a door at the top of a staircase, from taking a snapshot of me as

I walked up the steps between the guards!... I confess, however, that I

was so frightened for the man's safety in his perilous position, that I

forgot to be angry.

I entered a room where I found my three counsel. After a few words of

encouragement, Maître Aubin took me to Judge André's Cabinet.

I felt miserable, ashamed, and indignant.

I saw M. André. He wore a frock-coat and a black tie. He seemed a man of

about fifty, was very stout, with a red, congested face, and a greyish

beard. His hair was dark and spare. His eyes seemed to jump about behind

the pince-nez, and they seldom looked straight at any one.

"Sit down!" he ordered. His voice was even more vulgar and aggressive

than his appearance.

He sat at a long table, with my counsel behind him; opposite him sat his

clerk, M. Simon, who wrote down the main questions and answers. I sat at

one end of the table, with the two municipal guards behind me, and

opposite, at the other end of the table, was the window, so that the

light struck me straight in the face.

M. Simon, the _greffier_, was middle-aged, slim, and had a shrewd,

pleasant face. He was calm, methodical, and kind. How many times, during

that bewildering and painful _Instruction_, did he give me a glance of

sympathy! How many times did he stealthily wipe away a tear!... How

often, when I made a triumphant reply, did he half-mischievously wink at

me, like a _gamin de Paris_, as if to say: "You got home all right that

time."

Behind me the guards sometimes whispered, after some fierce battle of

words between M. André and me: "Well done!"... and in their own simple,

spontaneous way, they added:... "little woman!"

That "Well done, little woman" of the guards, and the winks of

encouragement from the clerk, more than once gave me renewed strength at

moments when, worn by my ceaseless efforts, I was about to give up the

awful struggle, not in despair, but through sheer physical and mental

exhaustion.

* * * * *

M. André's first move was a dramatic one, and one which he evidently

thought would crush me outright. He handed me a letter--written by

myself to my husband, in a rather angry tone--and asked impressively:

"Was this written by you?"

"Yes, Monsieur."

"To whom was this letter addressed?"

"To my husband."

"At what date?"

"I don't remember!..." I then explained that M. Steinheil and I always

wrote to each other when we did not agree on some point, 'so as to avoid

discussions and scenes....' And M. André thus led me to state that my

husband and I were not on the best of terms, and that I did not love

him.

I meant, of course, that there was no question of passion between us;

but the sentence was written... "I did not love my husband," and these

words became one of the greatest arguments against me, one of the

proofs of my guilt.... You did not love your husband, therefore you

killed him!

Having achieved this momentous victory, M. André proceeded, in the most

aggressive tone, to interrogate me about my "friends," but took good

care not to question me about the Attorney-General or President Faure.

And as Maître Aubin made signs to remind me of his warnings, I did not

mention them.

After that, the examining magistrate put to me endless questions about

my jewels.... I have explained at length all about them to the reader,

and need not go into the matter again. Nor need I reproduce here the

whole of the _Instruction_. Several parts of it have already been

quoted, and I intend quoting the last episode of this atrocious

martyrdom in full.

* * * * *

From time to time M. André ceased questioning me, and tried by little

dramatic interludes to throw me off my balance.

During the very first hour of the first _Instruction_ he abruptly turned

to me and exclaimed fiercely: "Your veil is down; why is your veil

down?... It is down because you want to hide your face, it is down

because you are guilty!... Raise that veil at once, raise it, I say!..."

Another time, he rose, bent forward towards me, and shouted: "You are

the assassin!"... I rose in my turn, and, completely losing control of

myself, I cried back: "It is you who are the assassin! You are murdering

my daughter and me!"

He was furious. "I'll have you arrested!" he shouted.

"I'm arrested already," was my obvious reply. He made a violent gesture,

went into the next room, and banged the door.

M. André invariably sought refuge in the next room, whenever I had the

better of him.

He smoked cigarette after cigarette during my _Instruction_, and blew

the smoke in my direction. It was so obvious an impertinence, and he

showed such satisfaction at my impatience, that one day I did not reply

to his question.

"Why don't you answer?" he exclaimed triumphantly. "Is it that you

realise that it is no longer any use struggling against all the evidence

that reveals your guilt?"

I merely replied: "I cannot speak on account of the smoke, _Monsieur_."

M. André continued smoking, but henceforth blew the smoke in a different

direction.

"It is really amazing..." he said to me one day. "Can't you see that, if

you were not guilty, you would ask your whole family, your friends, to

visit you at Saint-Lazare! You are ashamed, because you are a criminal!"

Such words hurt beyond description, but I managed to reply:

"Monsieur, Marguerite Japy does not receive her friends in a

prison-parlour."

M. Simon, my three counsel and the guards, nearly clapped their hands.

Another time, he suddenly placed under my eyes photographs of the bodies

of my husband and my mother, as they had been found on the morning after

the crime.... I have been told that all I said was: "Poor mother, poor

Adolphe; at any rate, they probably did not suffer much, they must have

died very quickly... there is no expression of agony on their faces. I

wish I too had died that night."

M. André tore the photographs from my hands; his dramatic move had not

had the result he expected.

The most extraordinary incident--I could say comical, had the

circumstances not been so tragic--during that eventful and harrowing

period, took place towards the end of the _Instruction_.

M. André, haunted by the thought of my guilt or rather by the thought

that he must find me guilty, stood up and suddenly exclaimed in his

usual hoarse and angry voice, and underlining, as it were, his every

word with threatening gestures: "Yes, you are guilty! I tell you that

you have strangled your own husband and your own mother, with your own

hands, your powerful assassin's hands!"

[Illustration: M. ANDRÉ, MY EXAMINING MAGISTRATE

"You are the Assassin!"]

Now I have unusually small hands, and scores of times Bonnat and Henner

have sketched or painted them, and made amusing remarks about "those

ridiculously tiny hands." I stretched out my arms, and placed my hands

under the very eyes of the examining magistrate.

In spite of his blind fury, he was able to realise their size, but he

was not going to allow himself to be thwarted by such a trifling matter.

He caught his breath, then, coming nearer to me, he exclaimed: "Yes, all

murderers have long arms and enormous hands.... Well, you are different,

you are an exception, that's all.... And the very smallness of your

hands proves that you are guilty. Even in your physique you deceive, you

lie.... And those little hands which look so innocent are the more

criminal, since they look so innocent. There!"

And he concluded this frenzied outburst by dealing a terrific blow on

the table with his clenched fist.

I looked at him, I watched _his_ hands....

"What's the matter! Why do you look at me like that!"

I looked fixedly at the hands of the examining magistrate, enormous,

red, hairy hands, and then let my gaze wander over his long arms, until

my eyes met his....

I was trembling with pain and anger. This man had treated me like a

murderess from the very first minute of the _Instruction_, and had

tortured me as those two journalists had one night, only more

relentlessly, and with greater persistence.... They had an excuse--they

were after copy--but this judge had none. He was supposed to be seeking

light, and truth, and justice. And no judge should take it for granted

that the person he is interrogating has committed the crime of which

he--or she--is suspected.

"What are you looking at?" M. André asked.

"I was examining your hands, _Monsieur le Juge_."...

"Well...?"

"... And I was thinking what a fortunate thing it was for you that you

are not accused of any murder, for even though you were as innocent as I

am, the size and look of your hands would unmistakably denounce you as a

murderer--if you had to deal with a judge after your own heart!"

M. Simon, the _greffier_, had ceased writing, Maître Aubin was smiling.

I could hear the two guards chuckle, and M. André, utterly routed, left

the Cabinet, and for a long while we heard him walking up and down in

the next room.

Each _Instruction_ lasted from noon until seven or eight in the evening.

I was then taken back to the _Dépôt_, where I waited one hour and often

much longer before being escorted to Saint-Lazare by two or three

inspectors. It was sometimes ten or eleven, when, thoroughly exhausted,

and having had no food for twelve hours or so, I entered my cell where

Firmin and Jacq were waiting for me. Firmin never went to bed until I

was back.

Sister Léonide, too, awaited me.... After the third or fourth

_Instruction_, she was so alarmed at my appearance that she thenceforth

always had some kind of surprise in store for me when I returned from

the Palace of Justice. On one occasion she gave me a little plate, an

ordinary, coarse, penny white plate, but what a luxury!... Then she

presented me with three parcels wrapped in tissue paper, and in them I

found a little salt, a small piece of butter, and... three hot potatoes

in their jackets. It seemed to me that I was hungry, that I must be

hungry, after those _Instructions_, but somehow I could not eat. On that

occasion, however, I was overjoyed to see food _on a plate_, and Sister

Léonide fed me with a spoon, as one feeds a child. After that she

brought me three baked potatoes every evening.

She asked me one day how it was that I was so fond of them, and I told

her that it was my father's favourite dish. Potatoes "in their jackets"

are called in French _pommes de terre "en robe de chambre"_ (in their

dressing-gowns), but my father said, far more prettily: "_en robe des

champs_," which sounds alike, but means in their country clothes, in

nature's garb.

In spite of Sister Léonide's care, of my daughter's solicitude, and of

the devotion of my three counsel, that _Instruction_ was using up the

little vitality and strength I still possessed. It was dreadful to have

to reply to all kinds of insidious and perfidious questions, for seven

or eight hours at a time, especially as the questioner never once ceased

to make it perfectly obvious that he considered me a murderess, a

murderess without even an accomplice... until the very end, when, after

reading the various experts' reports, he admitted that I had probably

been assisted.

M. André was convinced that I was guilty, but in view of the long report

which he would have to draw up at the end of the _Instruction_, and

which would go to the _Chambre des Mises en Accusations_, he had to

accumulate at least as many proofs as possible of my guilt, and as there

were none, his task was arduous! And it was the very difficulty of his

task which made him so aggressive, threatening, and palpably unjust.

There was not a method, there was not a trick, that he did not think

permissible. In order to put me off my guard, as it were, he would jump

from one question to another, question me, for instance, about a detail

of my life at Bellevue, then abruptly ask me the exact figures of the

various sums of money that I said were to be found in the drawer of the

desk of my boudoir, on the night of the crime. After bewildering me with

questions about the exact origin of such amounts (six months after the

money had been stolen) he would ask me a list of the contents of our

medicine-chest at the time of the murder!

At every _Instruction_ he dealt with everything--at once....

And when I hesitated, faltered, made a slight mistake or did not exactly

repeat the answers I had made on other occasions to the same questions,

he jumped up with glee: "I've got you!"...

Another of the examining magistrate's favourite methods was to ask me a

question of such a length that when written down, it covered quite two

large pages.... And woe betide me if I missed a single one of the

numberless points included in that one question! When, on a few

occasions, I ventured to ask that some portion of the endless question

be repeated to me, I was told, in a melodramatic tone, that I wanted

time to reflect, and that I should not need to reflect if I were

innocent, that the truth never hesitated, but burst forth at once.

When I collected myself by a truly superhuman effort and appeared calm,

I was cleverly concealing my hand, and therefore I was guilty.

When my nerves failed me, and I broke down, or sobbed; my weakness, my

grief, were due to remorse; therefore I was guilty.

When I cried that I was innocent, I was playing a comedy, but he was not

to be taken in by my grimaces! I was acting; therefore I was guilty.

When I did not mention my innocence, I was overwhelmed with shame, and

did not even dare to say that I was not guilty; therefore I was guilty!

Whilst I was thus being slowly tortured, the three men and the woman who

that night entered my house in the Impasse Ronsin, who committed the

double murder, who robbed, who bound and gagged me... were free,

somewhere in the world, in Paris, perhaps, and possibly reading the

latest details of my _Instruction_ in the newspapers, for after each

"sitting" a résumé of the proceedings was handed to the Press, in which,

as the reader may surmise, I appeared more and more guilty!

Eight months after the end of the _Instruction_, at my trial, the Judge,

M. de Valles, was to declare: "I feel the shudder of a judicial error,"

and the jury acquitted me. Eight months! Why did not M. André feel that

"shudder of the judicial error"? Because, and this is his only excuse,

he was obsessed by the firm conviction that I was guilty, and, more or

less unconsciously, he made nearly everything fit in with that

conviction, and, at the same time, ignored or passed rapidly over almost

anything that he could not. A few instances taken from the Dossier of

the _Instruction_--signed by M. André, M. Simon, and myself--will

illustrate my assertions:

(M. André had been asking me endless details about a ring and a pearl,

when he pointed out to me some contradictions in my past statements.)

_Answer._ "You are speaking to me about statements I made at a time when

I was half mad. At that time the question of my jewels was quite

indifferent to me. I had but one tormenting thought, the loss of my

mother."...

(M. André interrupted me with the following triumphant exclamation:)

_Question._ "Then you felt no sorrow at having lost your husband!"

_Answer._ "But yes, of course."...

Another instance:

_Question._ "It can hardly be admitted that robbery was the motive of

the crime, for one cannot very well conceive that the thieves, _after

committing a double crime in order to act at their ease_, would neglect

to rob, and should leave on the spot, the following booty: (1) In your

mother's room, three rings on a tray; (2) One diamond brooch, two

valuable pendants, two pins with small stones--which your mother had

brought to your house when she put up there in May.... (3) In your

husband's room, the latter's clothes were not searched, and yet they

were placed, conspicuously, on a chair, and they contained a gold watch,

a purse containing eighty francs (£3 4s.); (4) In the boudoir, a bank

note of fifty francs (£2) was left, although it was conspicuous; (5)

From the statements you made just now, some of your daughter's jewels,

which were then in her room, where you slept, were not stolen!"

_Answer._ "What can I answer you... anything may be found strange....

People who had just committed a murder would not perhaps be as calm as

you think and so would not steal everything."

(I then explained that my mother's bag was on the floor in a box-room,

that night.)

_Question._ "That explanation is hardly satisfactory."

_Answer._ "All I can say is that people, after committing two such

ghastly murders, and after believing they had made a third victim of me,

may have lost their heads, and only have had one thought: to disappear

as rapidly as possible."

(_Dossier_ Cote 3239)

* * * * *

What likelihood was there that the men had come to kill? M. André took

it for granted, and made the extraordinary remark that they had "killed"

_in order to act at their ease_! Personally, and it has been the

opinion of every person I have met who has carefully studied the case,

that the men came to steal, and were disturbed in their work, by the

sudden appearance of my husband, armed with an alpenstock, and by the

cries of my mother, and that it was then, and only then, that the

murders took place?

As for the robbery, did not the men steal several hundred pounds, and

some twenty pieces of jewellery, belonging to me and my mother?

_Question._ "Since your last examination, we have compared the recital

of the drama as you made it then with the one you made at the beginning

of the investigations (May 31st and June, 1908). We find that whilst you

merely mentioned to us, as the acts of violence you suffered at the

hands of the criminals, one blow on the head and the trampling on your

stomach, you had previously mentioned other acts of violence: on May

31st, 1908, to the police-commissary, you said that you had received

blows with a stick, on your head; on May, 31st, to the police-commissary,

and then to M. Leydet, you said you had been seized by the throat at the

beginning of the scene; on May 31st and on June 5th, to M. Leydet, you

said that one of the men had clasped your wrist, and finally, on June

26th, to M. Leydet--to whom you never mentioned more than 'one blow on

the head'--you declared with precision that the blow had been like one

dealt with a club, or with a hard body, and that it had evidently been

meant by the criminals to be the finishing stroke. How do you explain so

many _variations_ in your successive recitals?"

_Answer._ "You should not take into account the statements I made on May

31st (shortly after the fatal night); I did not know what I was saying

then, I was out of my mind, I was frightened of everything. One of the

men did seize my wrist.... If I spoke with more precision on June 26th,

about the blow on my head, it is because, since the drama, I had been

trying to recall every detail of it."

_Question._ "On November 26th (1908), you stated that you had invented

the whole story of the men with the beards, etc., and the red-haired

woman and the black gowns."

_Answer._ "That was the result of the work of the journalists. They led

me to distraction, madness."

_Question._ "In any case, _the tale of the black gowns_ is full of

material impossibilities. Why should the criminals, at the beginning of

the scene, have thrown a cloth on your head, since they did not keep it

there, and since you were able to get rid of it immediately afterwards?

How can you explain this: those dark lanterns threw a great light on

you, and yet, the criminals made the mistake and persisted in it, of

thinking they were in the presence of a young lady, of a child? They

were in the shadow, and yet you distinguished them so perfectly that you

were able to observe thoroughly every one of the actors of that scene,

to notice the absence of a collar from their special costumes, and the

ugliness of the red-haired woman, and to read clearly the expression on

the face of that red-haired woman. How can one explain that all the

doors being open, you did not hear your husband leave his bed and take

his alpenstock, nor hear either your husband or your mother scream

whilst they were being strangled?"

_Answer._ "A cloth _was_ thrown over my head. I don't know whether the

lanterns were dark lanterns or not. All I know is that their light was

the greater because it was reflected by the five mirrors in the room....

There is nothing extraordinary in the fact that the criminals took me

for my daughter. I look older now, but at that time I had quite a

youthful appearance, so much so that I was most of the time taken not

for my husband's wife, but for his daughter. As for the doors--which

were open when we all went to bed--I don't know whether the criminals

left them open. All I heard, I repeat it, was the word 'Meg,' spoken by

my mother at the moment I said."

(The next question, asked without any transition, was):

"Did you put a pearl in Couillard's pocket-book on November 20th?"

(_Dossier_ Cote 3249)

* * * * *

(The reader will probably agree that my answers, especially for a woman

tortured as I had been for so many months, were fairly clear, precise,

and satisfactory. The Examining Magistrate thought differently:)

_Question._"... Your cleverness at dissimulating before the Law has

become such that in the course of our interrogations we have rarely

obtained from you a clear and convincing explanation, such that, every

time we have asked you to reply in a precise manner to our questions

concerning the dominating facts of the case, you have, as a rule, tried

to avoid replying, often by saying you did not remember, or even that

you did not understand. _You have even gone so far as to let the fear

that your face might betray you in our presence, make you hide it behind

the black veil with the wide thick edge which you are still wearing, and

which, in spite of the exhortations we addressed to you during one of

our first interrogations, you have never raised above your forehead.

Your face has no more revealed itself than, willingly, you have revealed

the bottom of your thoughts._"

(_Dossier_ Cote 3240)

* * * * *

(I had been told not to speak about President Faure, even when asked

about my friends, nor about the famous pearl necklace, even when

questioned about the stolen jewels. The necklace was mentioned, however,

but not by me. And I realised then the truth of Maître Aubin's words,

when he had said that neither the Government nor the Law wished to have

anything to do with my relations with Félix Faure and the mysterious

necklace affair. M. André, who, when I hesitated, compelled me to reply

in no half-hearted manner, made a striking exception on that occasion,

as the reader may see from the following quotations from the Dossier.)

(It appeared that M. André had recently interrogated, amongst other

people, a man called Brun, a decorator, who had long been one of my

husband's acquaintances, and who years ago, at M. Steinheil's request,

pledged some jewels of ours at the Mont-de-Piété. The "pearl necklace"

affair came out quite accidentally. M. André asked me about Brun and the

pledged jewels, and I replied that I only remembered Brun having been

once to the Mont-de-Piété for my husband, and that, ten years ago.)

The Judge asked: "Don't you know that it was a pearl necklace Brun

pledged?"

I hesitated to reply, and finally said (I quote from the Dossier):

"Allow me not to talk about that. It was a necklace I received as a

present; it had five rows of pearls. I gave it to my husband, and told

him he could do what he liked with it, that he could sell it when he

pleased."...

(_Dossier_ Cote 8308)

* * * * *

I explained that my husband and I lived quite apart, but that I allowed

him to make use of my jewels when he was short of money. When I had

finished, M. André made no remark at all about the pearl necklace, and

proceeded with his interrogating as if that jewel had had no importance

whatever.

Two days later, however, during the next _Instruction_, M. André,

wanting, perhaps, to make sure that the necklace Brun had spoken of was

really the mysterious and all-important necklace given by President

Faure, asked me a few details about it. I replied:

"The five-row pearl necklace, of which I spoke to you the day before

yesterday, was sold during the past ten years little by little, that is,

pearl by pearl or in series of pearls, by my husband. I did not have

anything to do with those sales.... All I know is that at the time of

the drama there still remained some pearls from that necklace.... Those

pearls were then in the lower drawer of the wardrobe where I usually

placed my jewel-cases. I had seen, towards May 5th or 6th, about ten

pearls. I had not taken them to Bellevue, and since the drama I have not

seen them again. They have therefore been stolen, unless my husband had

sold them between May 5th and May 30th, but that would surprise me...."

_Question._ "Why have you not spoken about those pearls?"...

_Answer._ "On account of my daughter. I wished to keep silent about the

origin, that is, the giver, of those pearls."

_Question._ "By mentioning their disappearance, nothing compelled you to

indicate their origin?"

_Answer._ "I did not wish to speak about that necklace"....

(_Dossier_ Cote 3310)

* * * * *

Once again M. André did not insist.

During another _Instruction_, one month later (_Dossier_ Cote 3389), M.

André tried to make me contradict myself about the necklace, stating

that one of my accounts of the occasion when M. Brun consented to pledge

jewels for my husband did not tally with another; he also remarked that

my friend M. Mustel, the piano and organ manufacturer, who had seen the

famous pearls, had described, in quite a different way from that in

which I had described it, a family scene, at my house, about certain

debts of my mother's which I was ready to pay by selling the pearls I

still possessed. But all this had but a very vague connection with the

necklace itself. I may further state that M. Brun stated that he

received only about £6 for the necklace he pledged, so that either he

referred to a necklace of which I know nothing, or he made a huge

mistake. At any rate, I do not know of necklaces with five rows of

pearls that would merely fetch £6 when pledged!

I may quote a few lines from M. Brun's evidence:

"M. Steinheil asked me... to pledge at the Mont-de-Piété a pearl

necklace of several rows... On the same day, at the office in the Rue

des Blancs-Manteaux, I pledged the necklace, in my name, and received, I

believe, 150 francs (£6)."

(_Dossier_ Cote 1929)

* * * * *

Now, as every one knows, the Mont-de-Piété is a State Institution, and

its books are kept in the same thorough and methodical manner as that of

all other State "Administrations." The Mont-de-Piété, in reply to

inquiries ordered by M. André replied that:

"... The pledging of a pearl necklace (whether by the Steinheils or by

M. Brun) was not mentioned in their books..."

(_Dossier_ Cote 1919)

The pearls were not mentioned in the final report of M. André, nor in

the Indictment, nor were they once referred to at my trial. Can any one

blame me if I say I have always thought that "the authorities" _knew_

about the necklace but _did not want_ that mystery to be unravelled, no

more than they wanted to know that some of the jewels stolen on the

night of the crime came from a President, and two, at least, from an

Attorney-General. I have also always thought that "the authorities" knew

that I possessed important documents and the Memoirs of Félix Faure.

True, by order, I never spoke of them except to M. Desmoulin, the

Director of the Prison, my counsel, and Pastor Arboux--and I just

pronounced the word "documents" before M. Leydet and M. Hamard--but

whether the authorities knew about them or not, I can only say that no

mention of them was made to me.

* * * * *

At Saint-Lazare, one day--at the time of that long and nerve-racking

_Instruction_--two municipal guards came to take me to the Palace of

Justice.

I said to the gaoler: "Where are 'my' inspectors?"

"Madame," the man replied, "it is no longer M. Hamard who sends for you,

but M. André, the judge, and M. André, it seems, has given new

instructions."

The non-commissioned officer very politely made me enter a _fiacre_ (a

four-wheeled cab). He then sat down near me, and the other soldier sat

opposite me. Both had revolvers at their side. The carriage started on

its journey.

"Why have not the inspectors come, as usual?" I asked.

"Ah! Madame, we don't know.... Your judge doesn't seem to like you."...

"I hope not; I cannot believe that."...

As we neared the Palace of Justice, I noticed that the driver was not

taking us the usual way. The non-commissioned officer said: "We are

going round to the Boulevard du Palais," and when, seeing that I was not

being driven to the _Dépôt_, I asked where he was taking me, he replied,

after much hesitation: "To the _Souricière_ (the Mouse-Trap)."

"What!" I exclaimed in fearful dismay, "you mean to say that I am going

to be shut up in one of those cages, like a beast?... Is the women's

_Souricière_ like that of the men?"

"Yes. Madame.... You will have to wait there until the Judge is ready to

receive you."... And with great gentleness, the man added: "We have lost

a great deal of time on our way to Saint-Lazare, and fetched you as late

as possible, so that you will not have to wait long."

I thanked the officer, entered through the "new" door, and was taken

through low, damp, cold passages to the _Souricière_. Saint-Lazare is

bad enough, Heaven knows; the _Dépôt_ worse, but the _Souricière_ is an

abomination. Let the reader imagine two rows of cages, one on top of the

other, and with steps to reach the upper row. Opposite, on a kind of

platform, sits a Sister, who can see through the iron bars of each case

the prisoners of both rows of cages.

When she saw me, the Sister on duty, Soeur Berthe, a very old,

sweet-eyed sister, tottered towards me and took me to one of the empty

cages.

When I say cages, I am not exaggerating. Each cage, unspeakably filthy

and foul-smelling, is about seven feet high, five feet long, and three

feet wide. The door forms one wall, as it were; the upper half is a

square hole barred from side to side and from top to bottom. Air enters

through this hole, which has no glass. The door opens from the outside.

I had not been in "my" cage for one minute before I was ill, and I had

to remain there, frozen, dejected and ill, from nine o'clock--for, by a

refinement of cruelty, M. André had sent early for me at

Saint-Lazare--until noon. Women in other cages, near me and above me,

shouted at me. They could not see one another, but they had all

witnessed my arrival through the bars of their "windows"; somehow, they

knew who I was and the insults I heard at Saint-Lazare were hurled at me

again! Sometimes, one woman just to contradict the others, would take my

part and scream at the top of her voice: "I tell you she is a kid (_une

gosse_), and kids haven't what's needed to strangle a man and a woman!

Shut up, you fools!" Fierce quarrels ensued, from cage to cage. Every

woman shouted and thumped on "her" walls. The whole flimsy structure of

the "Mouse-Trap" shook ominously... and Sister Berthe on her platform

went on knitting quietly, without raising her head. She had witnessed

such scenes ever since she had been on duty at the _Souricière_, and did

not even take notice. After a time, the women quieted down, and I heard

them say to the Sister: "I am hungry.... Give me a cigarette. That

deceives hunger.... We all know you have cigarettes!" And the kind old

Sister sometimes handed them cigarettes through the bars!

I heard afterwards that those wretched women often had to wait in those

foul cages for eight or nine hours for the Examining-Magistrate or the

prison van--which they call the _panier à salade_ (salad-basket).

Eight or nine hours in a cage!... I thought of an examining-magistrate,

M. L., whom I had known years ago. He was a great admirer of mine, and

frequently forsook his duties to come and pay me compliments or to

listen to some music in my salon.... And I thought him a charming man!

Now, I realised that whenever he wasted time at my house the woman,

perhaps several women, had had to wait in a cage, hour after hour, until

his return, and I felt bitterly ashamed of myself for not having guessed

that a magistrate, like a doctor, has patients who cannot, who must not,

wait.

I waited only three hours in my cage! But when I entered M. André's

Cabinet, I felt more dead than alive, and I said to him: "You will not

see me again. You sent for me at Saint-Lazare hours too soon. I have

spent three hours at the _Souricière_, and I understand that it was

owing to an order given by you. How can you expect me to answer your

questions, after what I have just passed through?"

On three occasions, before _Instructions_, I was locked up in a cage at

the "Mouse-Trap," and from nine in the morning till seven or eight at

night I had to go without any kind of food. But after those three times

I looked so weak and haggard, I have been told, that M. André cancelled

his order, and once more I was placed in a cell at the _Dépôt_, pending

the _Instruction_, and once more the Sister Superior with the Madonna

face wrapped me about with her radiant kindness, comforting me with her

sweet, wise words, and the divine light that shone in her eyes.

My Memoirs · 第 25 / 32 章