culated to give the impression that the
young peasant girl was an apt feigner and that at the request of the
nobles she reproduced one of her ecstasies, like the Esther of the
lamented Doctor Luys.[58]

[Footnote 55: _Ibid._, pp. 2 _et seq._]

[Footnote 56: _Trial_, vol. iii, p. 13.]

[Footnote 57: _Ibid._, p. 15.]

[Footnote 58: _Ibid._, p. 12.]

In that portion of this work which deals with the rehabilitation trial
I have given my opinion of the evidence of the clerks of the court, of
the usher Massieu, of the Brothers Isambard de la Pierre and Martin
Ladvenu.[59] All these burners of witches and avengers of God worked
as heartily at Jeanne's rehabilitation as they had at her
condemnation.

[Footnote 59: _Ibid._, vol. ii, pp. 15, 161, 329; vol. iii, pp. 41 and
_passim_.]

In many cases and often on events of importance, the evidence of
witnesses is in direct conflict with the truth. A woollen draper of
Orleans, one Jean Luillier, comes before the commissioners and as bold
as brass maintains that the garrison could not hold out against so
great a besieging force.[60] Now this statement is proved to be false
by the most authentic documents, which show that the English round
Orleans were very weak and that their resources were greatly
reduced.[61]

[Footnote 60: _Ibid._, vol. iii, p. 23.]

[Footnote 61: L. Jarry, _Le compte de l'armee anglaise au siege
d'Orleans_ (1428-1429), Orleans, 1892, in 8vo.]

When the evidence given at the second trial has obviously been dressed
up to suit the occasion, or even when it is absolutely contrary to the
truth, we must blame not only those who gave it, but those who
received it. In its elicitation the latter were too artful. This
evidence has about as much value as the evidence in a trial by the
Inquisition. In certain matters it may represent the ideas of the
judges as much as those of the witnesses.

What the judges in this instance were most desirous to establish was
that Jeanne had not understood when she was spoken to of the Church
and the Pope, that she had refused to obey the Church Militant because
she believed the Church Militant to be Messire Cauchon and his
assessors. In short, it was necessary to represent her as almost an
imbecile. In ecclesiastical procedure this expedient was frequently
adopted. And there was yet another reason, a very strong one, for
passing her off as an innocent, a damsel devoid of intelligence. This
second trial, like the first, had b