按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
The Procureur du Roi remarked here that reliance on the secret
remedies was the ‘system' of the defence。
That seemed to be the case。 The ‘system' of the prosecution； on the
other hand； was to snatch at anything likely to appear as evidence against
the two accused。 The points mainly at issue were as follows：
179
… Page 180…
SHE STANDS ACCUSED
（1） Did Meilhan have a chance of giving Lacoste a drink at the fair？
（2） Did Lacoste become violently sick immediately on his return from
the fair？
（3） Did Lacoste suffer from the ailments attributed to him by his wife；
and was he in the habit of dosing himself？
（4） Did Meilhan receive money from Mme Lacoste； and； particularly；
did she propose to allow him the supposed annuity？
With regard to （1）； several witnesses declared that Lacoste had
complained to them of feeling ill after drinking with Meilhan； but none
could speak of seeing the two men together。 M。 Mothe； the friend cited
by Meilhan； less positive in his evidence in court than the acte
d'accusation made him out to be； could not remember if it was on the 16th
of May that he had spent the whole afternoon with Meilhan。 It was so
much his habit to be with Meilhan during the days of the fair that he had
no distinct recollection of any of them。 Another witness； having business
with Lacoste； declared that on the day in question it was impossible for
Meilhan to have been alone with Lacoste during the time that the latter
was supposed to have taken the poisoned drink。 Lescure； in whose
auberge Lacoste was supposed to have had the drink； failed to remember
such an incident。 The evidence that Meilhan had given Lacoste the drink
was all second…hand； that to the contrary was definite。
For the most part the evidence with regard to （2）； that Lacoste became
very ill immediately on his return from the fair； was hearsay。 The
servants belonging to the Lacoste household all maintained that the
vomiting did not seize the old man until the night of Wednesday…Thursday。
Indeed； two witnesses testified that the old man； in spite of his supposed
headache； essayed to show them how well he could dance。 This was on
his return from the fair where he was supposed to have been given a
poisoned drink at three o'clock。 The evidence regarding the seclusion of
Lacoste by his wife was contradictory； but the most direct of it maintained
that it was the old man himself； if anyone； who wanted to be left alone。
On this point arises the question of the delay in calling the doctor。
Witness after witness testified to Lacoste's hatred of the medical faculty
and to his preference for dosing himself。 He declared his faith in a local
180
… Page 181…
SHE STANDS ACCUSED
vet。
On （3）； the bulk of the evidence against Lacoste's having the suggested
afflictions came simply from witnesses who had not heard of them。
There was； on the contrary； quite a number of witnesses to declare that
Lacoste did suffer from a skin disease； and that he was in the habit of
using quack remedies； the stronger the better。 It was also testified that
Lacoste was in the habit of prescribing his remedies for other people。 A
witness declared that a woman to whom Lacoste had given medicine for
an indisposition had become crippled； and still was crippled。
With regard to （4）； the Mayor merely repeated the evidence given in
his first statement； but the cure'； who also saw the deed assigning an
annuity to Meilhan； said that it was not in Mme Lacoste's writing； and that
it was signed with the unusual ‘‘Euphemie。'' This last witness added that
Mme Lacoste's reputation was irreproachable； and that her relations with
her husband were happy。
Evidence from a business…man in Tarbes showed that Mme Lacoste's
handling of her fortune was careful to a degree； her expenditure being well
within her income。 This witness also proved that the Fourcades' evidence
of Euphemie's misbehaviour could have been dictated from spite。
Fourcade had been found out in what looked like a swindle over money
which he owed to the Lacoste estate。
The court then went more deeply into the medico…legal evidence。 It
were tedious to follow the course of this long argument。 After a lengthy
dissertation on the progress of an acute indigestion and the effects of a
strangulated hernia M。 Devergie said that； as the poison existed in the
body； from the symptoms shown in the illness it could be assumed that
death had resulted from arsenic。 The duration of the illness was in
accord with the amount of arsenic found。
M。 Flandin agreed with this； but M。 Pelouze abstained from expressing
an opinion。 He； however； rather gave the show away； by saying that if he
was a doctor he would take care to forbid any arsenical preparations。
‘‘These preparations；'' he said moodily； ‘‘can introduce a melancholy
obscurity into the investigations of criminal justice。''
Some sense was brought into the discussion by Dr Molas； of Auch。
181
… Page 182…
SHE STANDS ACCUSED
He put forward the then accepted idea of the accumulation of arsenic taken
in small doses； and the power of this accumulation； on the least accident；
of determining death。
This was rather like chucking a monkey…wrench into the cerebration
machinery of the Paris experts。 They admitted that the absorption and
elimination of arsenic varied with the individual； and generally handed the
case over to the defence。 M。 Devergie was the only one who stuck out；
but only partially even then。 ‘‘I persist in believing；'' he said； ‘‘ that M。
Lacoste succumbed to poisoning by arsenic； but I use the word ‘poisoning'
only from the point of view of science： arsenic killed him。''
％ VII
The speech of the Procureur du Roi was another resume of the acte
d'accusation； with