ページの画像
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

To M. L. Carpentier, etc. "Most honored colleague:

It is not without emotion, believe me, that I write to confirm the conviction which my telegram announced to you this morning.

sentimensaw fit to

re

Permit me to say first that you overestimate the influence of a president of Assizes at the present day. During an of Rousseau-esque epoch tality, our legislators final sumprohibit our making a measming up of the testimony, a ure which had as an immediate sult a series of scandalous acquittals, for the simple reason that the attorney has the last word. Reduced, therefore, to the role of interrogators, it is extremely difficult for us to give any expression of opinion. I was thus unable either to forward or prevent the conviction.

Moreover, if one regards from a higher standpoint the verdict rendered by the jury, one cannot but reflect that order and public safety had been gravely menaced, and that, beyond doubt, by an employee of the company. It was needful, therefore, in order to quiet public opinion and uphold the majesty of the law, that an employee of said company should be overtaken by the hand of justice.

You urge with all the authority born of long experience and a trained mind that the guilty employee is Grenielle. This conclusion, I cannot help feeling, is based more on sentiment than on reason. Sénéchal's personality appealed to you; Grenielle's did not. That is all. This point was very strongly brought out by the representative of the Ministère Public, who dwelt, moreover, on the fact that it was impossible

to cherish for a moment the idea of seating Grenielle in the place of Sénéchal acquitted. He proved, on the contrary, that as far as Grenielle was concerned, there could be brought against him nothing but vague suppositions which amount to nothing. The jury which was composed of most estimable men, took into account, I think, that in acquitting Sénéchal the conviction of any one would be impossible; the audacious crime at Barneville would go unpunished, thereby encouraging the perpetration of further crimes of like sort. The jury, therefore, although with some hesitation, declared Sénéchal guilty.

Is he in truth guilty? All human justice is fallible, and one is never sure of anything, but, in the bottom of my heart, I am more inclined to side with the jury than with you. I was struck with the rapidity with which the theft was committed, and Sénéchal seemed to me more agile, more subtle, more quick-witted than Grenielle, who is a loutish fellow-cunning, I admit, but stupid.

Altogether the representatives of justice have done all for the best and, in so doing, they have done their utmost. Cuique Suum, my dear colleague, for perfection is not of this world. In truth, by looking beyond as you are doing, it seems to me that life would soon be rendered insupportable and all to no purpose.

Accept the assurances, etc.

Document No. 5.

De Maucourcy."

To M. de Maucourcy, counsellor of the Court of Caen:

"Monsieur le Président d'Assizes:

It is plain that it was a mistake on my part to attempt to move you to pity. In your eyes the main thing is the enforcement of the law. I cannot be as

philosophical as you, I cannot lay aside as easily the burden of possible responsibilities. I envy you your serenity of mind. In my eyes, Sénéchal is not the culprit. He is a victim, and to me nothing seems more indefensible, I may even say more odious, more revolting than the condemnation of an innocent man.

In my retirement I still have sufficient energy to devote myself to proving to the ministry, to the press and to the public, that a deplorable miscarriage has taken place.

Forgive me for not being able to keep under better control the emotion that I feel, and for replying thus ungraciously to your courtesy, and accept the assurance, etc.

Document No. 6.

L. Carpentier."

New Caledonia Penitentiary,
Office of the Director-General,

Nouméa, Jan. 12th, 1891. The director of prisons, chevalier of the Legion of Honor, has the honor to inform M. L. Carpentier, former juge d'instruction, by order of M. the Keeper of the Seals, Minister of Justice, of the result of the investigation conducted by him in reference to one Sénéchal (Charles Jules), former assistant-stationmaster at Barneville, to determine as far as possible whether a miscarriage of justice had taken place with regard to said Sénéchal.

The director having summoned the prisoner to his office, began by reminding him that he still had seven years to serve, not one day of which would be remitted if the stolen money were not returned. He then read to the prisoner a document bearing the minister's seal, promising that "in case the said Sénéchal restored the four thousand francs he would, by special grace be accorded a remission of three years of his sentence." The prisoner made no reply to

this, although the communication was made to him in the kindest manner, save by indignantly and vehemently protesting his innocence.

The director, seeing that for the moment nothing could be done with the prisoner, dismissed him.

A few weeks later the director transmitted to Sénéchal the copy of a letter which his sister had written to the hospital at Caen, in which she applied for a position as nurse and repudiated all connection with her brother. She spoke unreservedly and unsparingly of "the miserable wretch" whose crime she regarded with the "utmost abhorrence."

Sénéchal was seized with an access of fury. He demanded a hearing from the director and confessed all to him; he related the circumstances of his guilt and even indicated the spot where were hidden the 4,000 francs (the little fountain at the lower end of the Barneville station). It seems that Sénéchal and. his sister, wearied and humiliated by the mean and narrow existence to. which his meagre salary as assistantstationmaster condemned them, had together planned this robbery which they carried out in concert. They calculated that suspicion would fall upon Grenielle, whose reputation was against him. A few years later, Sénéchal would have quietly left the company, and ho and his sister would have opened a jewelry-shop or a lodging-house. This was their plan which had been foiled · because they had not taken into consideration that the ticket agent could see through the opening in the glass. partition.

The immediate result of this confession was the institution of proceedings against the sister. Upon her arrest at Caen, the young woman was not long in making a full confession. Any further talk of a miscarriage of justice is now, therefore, out of the question.

Sénéchal is one of the most docile of the inmates of the prison. He seems

to have little moral sense. Vanity is his chief characteristic, and he was highly flattered at the interest and sympathy with which he inspired the former juge d'instruction.

Document No. 7.

(Written on a visiting card of M. Carpentier.)

Presents his thanks to M. le directeur des éstablessements pénitentiaire de Nourméa for his communication; he apologizes for not replying earlier, but until now his health has been

too precarious to admit of his writing. Nothing has ever been so painful to him -he confesses it frankly-as the knowledge that he has devoted himself for so long a time to so vain a task. He is overcome at having to admit to himself-too tardily-the folly of embarking on this crusade of rehabilitation without other ground than his faithhis faith!-that is to say, the mirage of his imagination.

Alas! for this folly he has been cruelly punished, for his disillusion is complete and bitter. He is still prostrated by it, and at his age, one seldom recovers from blows such as these. ...

WHAT SHALL WE DO FOR A LIVING?

In a little book recently brought out by the headmaster of one of the great English public schools, he comments on what he observes as a growing indifference and inability on the part of the present-day youth to select a field for its life's labor. He thinks it is a bad sign when a lad of sixteen has not some decided inclination as to "what he is to be."

This writer was speaking of youths who regard a calling in life chiefly as a "career," and who (too often unfortunately) are not obliged to think of it as a necessary means of gaining a livelihood. One would like very much to get the utterance of the experience and opinions of the headmasters and headmistresses of our Board schools on this same subject. They could tell us better than anybody else, under what influences varied methods of bread winning are chosen-or how often they are not chosen at all, but rather accidentally imposed on young people by their surroundings and their limitations. One scarcely knows how far they are able

to trace their former scholars about in the world; but where they do they might be able to give us striking instances of the waste caused by misapplied capabilities, or, on the other hand, of the triumph of inborn instinct and ability over all hindrances.

There is no doubt that many of the first stretchings of the young mind towards its unknown future are very wild and vague. I know of a little boy who confided to his aunt "that he would like to be a cabman if cabmen could be buried in Westminster Abbey, and if not, then he would choose to be a general."

I dare say we have all known little people who have had longings to grow up and keep a sweetie shop, and with the very unbusiness-like view of enjoying their own stock.

Such fantasies pass away. By the time that boys and girls are getting up in the "standards," they can grasp some of the realities of life-the stern necessity for earning bread-and all the limitations of sex, of place, or of purse,

which often seem to shut us in far more really than they do, and which, as time passes on, we often discover to be little more than barricades raised round us to test our strength and agility in leaping over them!

What are the influences which commonly bring about decision in this matter of choice of life-work?

There is parental leading and authority. When these are enlightened and unselfish their worth cannot be overestimated. Anyhow, a father very rarely gives his son too roseate a view of the advantages of his own calling. If the boy adopts it, it may be through some hereditary instinct, or under the force of sheer necessity, he generally does so with his eyes open to all its drawbacks.

On the other hand, parents often lay plans for their child's future and try to fit him into them. The hole of their ambition is a round hole, and the boy is a square boy, and if he gets forced into it, he will get sore chipped in the process. Parents often have a very natural wish to keep their children with them at any cost; forgetful that they will not remain always with their children, who may have to stay withering in the uncongenial soil where they planted them, long after their own heads are laid in the grave. Worse still, they do not always consider health, or inclination, or ability, but only ask where is the best opportunity "to get on." It is asked: "What trade is the most highly paid? What calling is the most genteel?" It is not asked: "What is this boy fit for?" but "What is it becoming to his family that he should be fit for?" I remember reading a letter that was written to John Ruskin by a gentleman who was in great distress, because his young brother, who he thought should go into one of the learned professions, had gone off to British Columbia, and got work in a salmon-canning factory! John Rus

kin replied that, on the whole, he thought it was quite as honorable to prepare potted fish as to distribute potted talk! Some parents see this. I know a case just now in which the son of "gentle" people, with many other possibilities open to him, has declared his own ardent desire to be a cook. His father, after giving and taking time for consideration has yielded to his desire and he is now in training under a chef. But too often young people whom nature has plainly intended to be hewers of wood and drawers of water, and who would be happy and honorable in such vocations, are sent up to college because it is thought derogatory to their family's standing that they should work with their hands; it often ends in their family having to put them out of sight as wasters. Or parents of a humbler class, as they grow old and easier in circumstances, resolve to give themselves "a social lift" by sending their youngest boy to the university, though he may be the fool of the family, or a roystering youngster who would far rather go on a cattle ranch! Schoolmasters have always been very severe on this perverse judgment of fathers as concerning the fitness or unfitness of their children. Roger Ascham, Queen Elizabeth's tutor, even went so far as to wish that this parental power was clipped in the interests of the commonwealth, for he said, "Fathers in old time, among the noble Persians, might not do with their children as they thought good, but as the judgment of the commonwealth always thought best."

As to the wishes of the young people themselves, they are swayed by a thousand winds. They think of the present rather than of the future. They want to stay with a favorite companion; or they simply wish to gratify a roving impulse. Some have a personal attraction to a possible employer. One desires "liberty," another looks for

"gentility." One inclines where he can make "most money," another studies only where he will get the "easiest time."

Some allow influences and circumstances, which a little resolution might easily control, to push them into a place in life for which they have neither liking nor fitness. Do they reflect what they are doing? The process of earning a living absorbs at least onethird of a man's whole life-eight hours out of the twenty-four-half of his waking time! Therefore, to choose an uncongenial form of bread-winning means that they are bound in disagreeable slavery for that portion of their existence, and must seek all enjoyment, not in the persistent condition of their life, but in its mere accidentals. A man or woman who does not take a pleasure and a pride in his or her work is not worth employing. It must be a wretched thing to labor longing only for the clock to strike the hour of release. Those who, having strong individual inclinations, are able to secure a livelihood by the exercise of these have a perpetual cause of thanksgiving. Without doubt they may get weary of it sometimes-and have "too much of a good thing"-but they are as delighted to return to it as we are to get home when we have been refreshed by a holiday. It has been said that "there is nothing in life which holds, except one's work and one's prayers"-for these go on when all else changes and ceases, and by these we hold to our fellow-men and to God when all the other surroundings of our lives drop away.

Some people may be inclined to imagine that only occupations where so-called "talents" come in, can really be so delightful as to be a chosen occupation. This is a mistake. Many men, some great in mind, some in position, have found utmost pleasure in the simple manual arts by which other men gain bread. Louis XVI of France de

lighted in locksmith work; other princes of more modern date have been skilled taxidermists. Jenny Lind, the great singer, liked to occupy her leisure with needlework; a famous French authoress loved to soothe her stormy soul with "a long, white seam." If these people had not had princely rank or royal genius, there is no doubt how each I would have chosen to earn bread, and been happy in the earning.

Nobody should choose an occupation in which he is not willing to live and to die. It is a pitiful thing when a man goes to his work only to gain enough money to leave off doing it. When a man loves his work and does it well, he does not want to delegate it to others, to shuffle out of it when he can, to get rid of it as soon as he may. On the contrary, he feels a tender pathos when he finds that his "working days are drawing to a close;" and though he may be glad enough to rest in his old age, yet the tools of his art or craft will be often in his hand, and its interests will always arouse his interest.

When we approach the definite choice of occupation from a practical point of view, the first question to ask is, What work does the world really want?

People make very pathetic mistakes: at this point. Perhaps they once made. even more than they do now. I remember when mothers used to fancy that if their daughters ever required to earn bread, they would readily secure places as "companions" with home and good salary-for arranging flowers and carrying on small talk! I remember one poor, poor lady, who felt that the world was very unkind when she found that it would not let her earn a good income by making pincushions!

But we must always remember that while the world will not pay for work it does not need, it could ill do without some work for which it is not particularly inclined to pay.

It requires people who will speak very

« 前へ次へ »