been robbed, and a female, weeping bitterly,
exclaimed that she was ruined!" The President: "You
accepted what was offered to you?" "Yes, for what
could I do? I had no means of going to law. I
was the earthen crock against the iron pot." Mirès
observed that when the last witness had deposited
his shares they were only worth 460 fr. each.

M. Beauvais stated that he had long known Mirès,
and had deposited funds and securities in his caisse.
In 1856, seeing that Western Railway shares had
risen to 980f., he wrote to Mirès to order him to sell
fifty-one which he possessed. The order was not
obeyed. He then directed that the sale should be
made at 975f., but none was effected. At last he
ordered that it should take place on the best terms
that could be obtained. He waited, and heard
nothing more of the matter. In 1859 he was astonished
to be informed that he had been "executed" (sold
up). He then learned on inquiry that his Western
shares had been sold in 1856, also some Saragossa
shares, and other securities at a later period, and he
knew nothing of all that! Mirès said that if the
order had really been given in 1856, and not
executed, he would indemnify the witness for the loss he
had sustained. He had received about six hundred
letters a day, and had not had the time to read
them.

M. Courtois, of Amiens, stated that in 1856 he
had deposited thirty-two shares in the caisse, and
that an advance had been made to him on them to
pay some calls which had become due. In 1859 he
received a letter saying he had been executed, but
recommending him to authorise Mirès to buy back
his shares at a lower rate than his had been sold for.
His first impression was that the letter was a
mystification, but he came to Paris and went to the caisse.
"I found there," continued the witness, "a number
of persons who were heaping imprecations on Mirès.
I made a great noise. I said to every clerk I saw,
'By what right have you sold my shares?' But I
could obtain no satisfactory answer. I insisted on
seeing Mirès himself, and after a while some one said
to me, 'There is M. Mirès.' I went up to the person
indicated, and repeated my question, by what right
my shares had been sold. 'Why,' said he, smiling
with great affability, 'For your own interest.' On
that I got into a passion, and even went, I believe,
the length of calling him a swindler! 'And,' I
added, 'you are making more dupes now, for there is
at this moment a crowd at your doors on the pretext
of subscribing for bonds in your Roman railways,
but the crowd is a packed one.' (A laugh.) At
last a great big fellow in green livery made me a
sign to go away, and as I did not obey I was turned
out." Mirès.—This deposition is a painful example
of all I have had to suffer. The loss which the
witness has sustained cannot be ascribed to me. It is
owing to his having bought at an excessively high
price, and to the war having caused a heavy fall. He
owed us money, and we wanted him to give
additional security.

Further explanation followed on the part of
Monsieur Mirès, and in the course of his
observations the president dropped the word
"spoliation." Monsieur Mirès fired at once.
"No!" he exclaimed, " there was no spoliation.
I will not permit that word to be employed.
Accuse me of what you will, but I will not
allow my honour to be attacked—I will not
permit you to say that I am a dishonest man."
This was very like what the Irish soldier said
when a lady, with whom he was upon visiting
terms, accused him of stealing her poker. He
swore that he was innocent, by every conceivable
oath; but at last the lady told him he had not
given his honour. "Touch my honour, touch
my life!" cried Paddy; but there he distanced
Monsieur Mirès, for he added, "here, woman,
take your poker!" Monsieur Mirès, on the
other hand, did not make restitution, but, as
the following instance shows, clamoured for
"more:"

Monsieur Dethierry, a cabinet courier,
deposed that in 1857 he had a loan from Mirès
on security of sixty-eight Western and thirty-
four Caisse Générale shares. In 1859 he was
told that the former had been sold for 436 fr.,
and the latter for 167fr. each, whereas he
ascertained that in reality the sums realised were
750 fr. and 375 fr. The proposition was afterwards
made, that what had been received should
be put in the scale against what he owed.
"But," said the witness, " I answered that I
preferred having recourse to the scales of
justice. My poor wife," continued Monsieur
Dethierry, "went in tears to Monsieur Mirès;
and do you know what he said to her? 'Let
your husband bleed; let him come down with
new securities.'"

Here is another case. Colonel Donnaire
stated that one hundred and fourteen Mobilier
shares, which he had deposited with Mirès as
security for an advance, had been sold. When
he heard of the sale he was greatly astonished,
and asked Mirès by what right he had made it.
Mirès answered in a sort of whisper, "On
account of the war which is coming, but you can
buy back the shares at a lower rate!" In
presence of so much assurance witness was silent.
He afterwards learned that the sale had been
made for 220,000 fr., and yet Mirès represented
that it only realised 101,000 fr.

To conclude. A host of witnesses (there were
three hundred and sixty-three altogether)
severally deposed that they had been defrauded out
of different sums by Mirès having sold their
securities without their consent; some of them,
being in humble life, added that they were
ruined.

Monsieur Mirès and his advocates made a
desperate stand against all this testimony, but it
was too much for them. All their quillets and
their quiddities, their special pleading and their
technicalities, were of no avail in the presence
of simple downright facts, and the blow, when it
fell, was a heavy one. Three principal charges
were proved against Monsieur Mirès; the
swindling of three hundred and sixty-three
shareholders; the fraudulent disposal of twenty-one
thousand railway shares and other securities;
and the illegal distribution of dividends which
had not arisen from actual profits,—the object
of this last operation being to enhance the value
of worthless shares, and then sell them at a
premium. For these offences the highest
penalty which the law prescribes was pronounced
by the court, namely, five years' imprisonment,
and a fine of three thousand francs. The