painting of
scenes like these we are passing upon.

With this understanding, we might have taken one for a model, which we
have not done; we have imposed upon ourselves a sobriety which we ask
you to take into account. If, as is possible, M. Flaubert has
overstepped the bound he placed for himself, in one word or another, I
have only to remind you that this is a first work, but I should then
have to tell you that his error was simply one of self-deception, and
was without damage to public morals. And in making him come into
Court--him, whom you know a little now by his book, him whom you already
love a little and will love more, I am sure, when you know him
better--is enough of a punishment, a punishment already too cruel. And
now it is for you to decide. You have already judged the book as a whole
and in its details; it is not possible for you to hesitate!

* * * * *

THE DECISION

The Court has given audience for a part of the last week to the debate
of the suit brought against MM. Leon Laurent-Pichat and Auguste-Alexis
Pillet, the first the director, the second the printer of a periodical
publication called the _Revue de Paris_, and M. Gustave Flaubert, a man
of letters, all three implicated: 1st, Laurent-Pichat, for having, in
1856, published in the numbers of the 1st and the 15th of December of
the _Revue de Paris_, some fragments of a romance entitled, _Madame
Bovary_ and, notably, divers fragments contained in pages 73, 77, 78,
272, 273, has committed the misdemeanor of outraging public and
religious morals and established customs; 2nd, Pillet and Flaubert are
similarly guilty; Pillet in printing them, for they were published, and
Flaubert for writing and sending to Laurent-Pichat for publication, the
fragments of the romance entitled, _Madame Bovary_ as above designated,
for aiding and abetting, with knowledge, Laurent-Pichat in the facts
which have been prepared, in facilitating and consummating the
above-mentioned misdemeanor, and of thus rendering themselves
accomplices in the misdeameanor provided for by articles 1 and 8 of the
law of May 17, 1819, and 59 and 60 of the Penal Code.

M. PINARD, substitute, has sustained the prosecution.

The COURT, after hearing the defense, presented by M. SENARD for
M. FLAUBERT, M. DEMAREST for PICHAT, and M. FAVERIE for the PRINTER,
has set for audience this day (Feb. 7) for pronouncing judgment, which
is rendered in the following ter