Causes Célèbres. persistency of Lesnier, the father, who as sisted the magistrate with his whole soul. One Lavaud stated that three or four days after the death of Gay, the wife of Lespagne had said, in speaking of young Les nier : " Oh, mon Dieu! this poor man will be accused, but it was not he who killed him." A woman named Sarrazin went still further. Marie Cessac said to her, " It was not Les nier; it was my husband." To fitienne Geudre she said, in February, 1854, "We know who killed him, and we know it was not the Lesniers; but we are not sorry to see them out of the way." What influence had caused Marie to lie? They naturally supposed her husband was the one who forced her to do so; but she never mentioned him. She accused of hav ing suggested her statement to her a for mer priest of the parish of Fieu, who had a deep hatred for young Lesnier. He had obliged her to yield by threats and menaces, and had given her money. This priest had been dead for some time. This story appeared highly improbable. The instigator of this lie, the suborner of Daignaud, and the assassin of old Gay must, in the opinion of the magistrate, have been one and the same person. A new witness, one Coculet, declared to the magistrate that one day he had acciden tally overheard a dispute between Lespagne and his wife. Pierre said to Marie, " You will do with him as you did with Lesnier; you will send him to the galleys." " Villain," replied the wife, " which one of us is it who is the cause of Lesnier's being in the galleys?" The guilt of Lespagne was not slow in being demonstrated by numerous proofs and trustworthy witnesses. The mother of Malefille, a godson of Les pagne who had died some months before, stated that some days after the murder, see ing her son sad and distracted, she ques tioned him. " Oh," said he, " I am very unhappy; I know something, but I cannot speak of it; I promised to say nothing."
135
When Lesnier was condemned this torturing secret escaped Malefille; he told his mother that it was a great misfortune; that Les nier was innocent; that Lespagne and Beaumaine, his brother-in-law, did the deed; that when Lespagne went to take away some wine, the old man tried to prevent him, and Les pagne, who had a hammer in his hand, struck him a blow which felled him to the ground. The two brothers of Malefille confirmed this statement. Their brother had told them more than once that the hammer with which the old man had been killed was still in the house of Cessac, brother-in-law of Lespagne. A search was made at this house, and five hammers were found. Each one of these instruments was successively presented to Lespagne. To four of them he said : " That is not the one." At the sight of the fifth his features contracted, and with a quick movement he turned aside his head. He hes itated an instant, and then suddenly cried : "It was not with a hammer that I killed him!" This involuntary confession settled the matter. From that moment Lespagne was recognized as the murderer of Gay; but he pretended to have been only an innocent cause of this death. He went, he said, to the house of Gay on the 15 th of November, about six o'clock in the evening, — a singular hour to choose at that time of year to visit such a place! He loaded some wine upon his wagon; but just as he was about to de part he got into a dispute with the old man. He pushed Gay, who fell. Not dreaming that any serious result could follow this fall, he departed, leaving a torch burning before the house. He supposed Gay would come and take in the torch. He returned to his home, and did not learn until the next day of the events of the night. This investigation vindicated the Pro cureur Imperial; the innocence of Lesnier was apparent; the false witnesses, the true author of the crime, were in their turn placed in the hands of justice. But all was not yet ended. It was necessary by a first
