The trial of M. Paul Dérouléde and M. Marcel Habert afforded a very curious illustration of the emotional side of the French character. There could be no attempt to disprove the charge, M. Dérouléde having frankly admitted that he tried to lead General Roger from the path of duty. All that could be done was to work upon the feelings of the jury, and this the witnesses did with a vengeance! M. Frangais Cop-pee implored the jury to spare him the anguish of seeing his friend Paul Dérouléde branded as a felon. General Herve gavan affecting account of the circumstances under which M. Dérouléde and his brother enlisted during the Franco-German war. The ladies present shed tears as General Herve recalled these souvenirs of twenty-eight years ago, which of course had an important bearing on the case in hand. The General concluded his evidence by declaring that he relied on Dérouléde''s clarion voice to encourage the army on the way to the frontier. Still stranger than all this was the evidence of M. Quesnay de Beaurepaire, the ex-President of the Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation. For nearly an hour he was allowed to attack President Loubet. Brandishing his arms and throwing himself into theatrical postures, M. Ques-nay de Beaurepaire reposted his Panama "revelations" and again defied the Government to prosecute him. The only connection alleged to exist between all this and the charge agsivxt M. Dérouléde was that the election of M. Loubet was "the last drop of mud that caused the cup of indignation to overflow!" Half an hour's deliberation was enough to convince the jury that patriotism demanded an acquittal.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.