M.Sabazan sent me on the draft.It seemed to me well drawn up.I rewrote it, and showed it to M.Sabazan.At the foot of the deed I put the words `Veuve Lacoste,' but I had been at pains to disguise my handwriting.I did all this with the intention of making my son believe, when my infirmities obliged me to retire to his household, that my income came from a life annuity some one had given me; and to hide from him where I had put my capital I wanted to persuade M.Sabazan that the deed actually existed, so that he could bear witness to the fact to my son.''Here, said the accusation, Meilhan was trying to make out that it was on the occasion of a letter from his son that he had spoken to the Mayor of the annuity.
The cure of Riguepeu, however, while admitting that he had received such a letter from Meilhan's son, declared that this was long before the death of Henri Lacoste.The Mayor also said that he had spoken to Meilhan of his son's letter well before the time when the accused mentioned the annuity to him and asked for a draft of the assignment.
The accusation ridiculed Meilhan's explanation, dubbing it just another of the schoolmaster's lies.It brought forward a contradictory explanation given by Meilhan to one Thener, a surgeon, whom he knew to be in frequent contact with the son whom the document was intended to deceive.Meilhan informed Thener that he had fabricated the deed, and had shown it round, in order to inspire such confidence in him as would secure him refuge when he had to give up schoolmastering.
These contradictory and unbelievable explanations were the fruit of Meilhan's efforts to cover the fact that the annuity was the price paid himby the Widow Lacoste for his part in the murder of her husband.It was to be remembered that M.Sabazan, whose testimony was impeccable, had seen Meilhan come from the house of Mme Lacoste, and that Meilhan had jingled money, saying he had just drawn the first payment of his annuity.
The accusation, in sum, concentrated on the suspicious relationship between Meilhan and the Widow Lacoste.It was a long document, but something lacking in weight of proof--proof of the actual murder, that is, if not of circumstance.
The process in a French criminal court was--and still is--somewhat long-winded.The Procureur du Roi had to go over the accusation in detail, making the most of Mme Lacoste's intimacy with the ill-reputed old fellow.That parishioner, far from being made indignant by the animadversions of M.Cassagnol, listened to the recital of his misdeeds with a faint smile.He was perhaps a little astonished at some of the points made against him, but, it is said, contented himself with a gesture of denial to the jury, and listened generally as if with pleasure at hearing himself so well spoken of.
He was the first of the accused to be questioned.
It was brought out that he had been a soldier under the Republic, and then for a time had studied pharmacy.He had been a corn-merchant in a small way, and then had started schoolmaster.
Endeavour was made to get him to admit guilty knowledge of the death of the Lescure girl.He had never even heard of an abortion.The girl had a stomach-ache.This line failing, he was interrogated on the matter of being chased from his lodgings by the landlord-father, it would seem, of the aforementioned girl.(It may be noted that Meilhan lived on in the auberge after her death.) Meilhan had an innocent explanation of the incident.It was all a mistake on the part of Lescure.And he hadn't been chased out of the auberge.He had simply gone out with his coat slung about his shoulders.Mme Lacoste went with him to patch the matter up.
He had not given Lacoste a drink, hadn't even spoken with him, at theRiguepeu fair, but had passed the day with M.Mothe.Cournet had told him of Lacoste's having a headache, but had said nothing of vomitings.He had not seen Lacoste during the latter's illness, because Lacoste was seeing nobody.
This business of the annuity had got rather entangled, but he would explain.He had lodged 1772 francs with Mme Lacoste, and she had given him a bill on Castera.Whether he had given the money before or after getting the bill he could not be sure.He thought afterwards.He had forgotten the circumstances while in prison.
Meilhan stuck pretty firmly to his story that it was to deceive his son that he had fabricated the deed of annuity.He couldn't help it if the story sounded thin.It was the fact.
How had he contrived to save, as he said, 3000 francs? His yearly income during his six years at Riguepeu had been only 500 francs.The court had reason to be surprised.
Ah! You're surprised!'' exclaimed Meilhan, rather put out.But at Breuzeville, where he was before Riguepeu, he had bed and board free.In Riguepeu he had nothing off the spit for days on end.He spent only 130 francs a year, he said, giving details.And then he did a little trade in corn.
He had destroyed the annuity deed only because it was worthless.As for what he had said to the Mayor about drawing his first payment of the pension, he had done it because he was a bit conscience-stricken over fabricating the deed.He had been bragging--that was all.
The President, having already chidden Meilhan for being prolix in his answers, now scolded him for anticipating the questions.But the fact was that Meilhan was not to be pinned down.
