THE TRIAL--THE INDICTMENT.
The indictment ran as follows: On the 17th of January, 18--, in the lodging-house Mauritania, occurred the sudden death of the Second Guild merchant, Therapont Emilianovich Smelkoff, of Kourgan.
The local police doctor of the fourth district certified that death was due to rupture of the heart, owing to the excessive use of alcoholic liquids. The body of the said Smelkoff was interred. After several days had elapsed, the merchant Timokhin, a fellow-townsman and companion of the said Smelkoff, returned from St. Petersburg, and hearing the circumstances that accompanied the death of the latter, notified his suspicions that the death was caused by poison, given with intent to rob the said Smelkoff of his money. This suspicion was corroborated on inquiry, which proved:
1. That shortly before his death the said Smelkoff had received the sum of 3,800 roubles from the bank. When an inventory of the property of the deceased was made, only 312 roubles and 16 copecks were found.
2. The whole day and night preceding his death the said Smelkoff spent with Lubka (alias Katerina Maslova) at her home and in the lodging-house Mauritania, which she also visited at the said Smelkoff's request during his absence, to get some money, which she took out of his portmanteau in the presence of the servants of the lodging-house Mauritania, Euphemia Botchkova and Simeon Kartinkin, with a key given her by the said Smelkoff. In the portmanteau opened by the said Maslova, the said Botchkova and Kartinkin saw packets of 100-rouble bank-notes.
3. On the said Smelkoff's return to the lodging-house Mauritania, together with Lubka, the latter, in accordance with the attendant Kartinkin's advice, gave the said Smelkoff some white powder given to her by the said Kartinkin, dissolved in brandy.
4. The next morning the said Lubka (alias Katerina Maslova) sold to her mistress, the witness Kitaeva, a brothel-keeper, a diamond ring given to her, as she alleged, by the said Smelkoff.
5. The housemaid of the lodging-house Mauritania, Euphemia Botchkova, placed to her account in the local Commercial Bank 1,800 roubles. The postmortem examination of the body of the said Smelkoff and the chemical analysis of his intestines proved beyond doubt the presence of poison in the organism, so that there is reason to believe that the said Smelkoff's death was caused by poisoning.
When cross-examined, the accused, Maslova, Botchkova, and Kartinkin, pleaded not guilty, deposing--Maslova, that she had really been sent by Smelkoff from the brothel, where she "works," as she expresses it, to the lodging-house Mauritania to get the merchant some money, and that, having unlocked the portmanteau with a key given her by the merchant, she took out 40 roubles, as she was told to do, and that she had taken nothing more; that Botchkova and Kartinkin, in whose presence she unlocked and locked the portmanteau, could testify to the truth of the statement.
She gave this further evidence--that when she came to the lodging-house for the second time she did, at the instigation of Simeon Kartinkin, give Smelkoff sonic kind of powder, which she thought was a narcotic, in a glass of brandy, hoping he would fall asleep and that she would be able to get away from him; and that Smelkoff, having beaten her, himself gave her the ring when she cried and threatened to go away.
The accused, Euphemia Botchkova, stated that she knew nothing about the missing money, that she had not even gone into Smelkoff's room, but that Lubka had been busy there all by herself; that if anything had been stolen, it must have been done by Lubka when she came with the merchant's key to get his money.
At this point Maslova gave a start, opened her mouth, and looked at Botchkova. "When," continued the secretary, "the receipt for 1,800 roubles from the bank was shown to Botchkova, and she was asked where she had obtained the money, she said that it was her own earnings for 12 years, and those of Simeon, whom she was going to marry. The accused Simeon Kartinkin, when first examined, confessed that he and Botchkova, at the instigation of Maslova, who had come with the key from the brothel, had stolen the money and divided it equally among themselves and Maslova." Here Maslova again started, half-rose from her seat, and, blushing scarlet, began to say something, but was stopped by the usher. "At last," the secretary continued, reading, "Kartinkin confessed also that he had supplied the powders in order to get Smelkoff to sleep. When examined the second time he denied having had anything to do with the stealing of the money or giving Maslova the powders, accusing her of having done it alone."
Concerning the money placed in the bank by Botchkova, he said the same as she, that is, that the money was given to them both by the lodgers in tips during 12 years' service.
The indictment concluded as follows:
In consequence of the foregoing, the peasant of the village Borki, Simeon Kartinkin, 33 years of age, the meschanka Euphemia Botchkova, 43 years of age, and the meschanka Katerina Maslova, 27 years of age, are accused of having on the 17th day of January, 188--, jointly stolen from the said merchant, Smelkoff, a ring and money, to the value of 2,500 roubles, and of having given the said merchant, Smelkoff, poison to drink, with intent of depriving him of life, and thereby causing his death. This crime is provided for in clause 1,455 of the Penal Code, paragraphs 4 and 5.
起訴書全文如下：
“一八八×年一月十七日摩爾旅館有一名旅客突然死亡，經(jīng)查明該旅客乃庫(kù)爾干二等商人費(fèi)拉邦特·葉密里央內(nèi)奇·斯梅里科夫。
“經(jīng)第四警察分局法醫(yī)驗(yàn)明，死亡乃因飲酒過(guò)量、心力衰竭所致。斯梅里科夫尸體當(dāng)即入土掩埋。
“案發(fā)數(shù)日后，斯梅里科夫同鄉(xiāng)好友商人季莫興自彼得堡歸來(lái)，獲悉斯梅里科夫死亡一事，疑有人謀財(cái)害命。
“關(guān)于此項(xiàng)懷疑，已由預(yù)審查明下列事實(shí)：（一）斯梅里科夫死亡前不久曾向銀行提取現(xiàn)款三千八百銀盧布。然在封存死者遺物清單中只開(kāi)列現(xiàn)金三百一十二盧布十六戈比。（二）斯梅里科夫臨死前一日曾在妓院和摩爾旅館同妓女柳波芙（葉卡吉琳娜·瑪絲洛娃）相處達(dá)一晝夜之久。葉卡吉琳娜·瑪絲洛娃曾受斯梅里科夫之托，自妓院徑赴摩爾旅館取款。該瑪絲洛娃即會(huì)同摩爾旅館茶房葉菲米雅·包奇科娃和西蒙·卡爾津金，使用斯梅里科夫交與之鑰匙，打開(kāi)皮箱，取出現(xiàn)款?，斀z洛娃開(kāi)箱時(shí)，包奇科娃和卡爾津金在場(chǎng)目睹箱內(nèi)裝有百盧布鈔票若干疊。（三）斯梅里科夫偕同妓女瑪絲洛娃自妓院回到摩爾旅館后，瑪絲洛娃受茶房卡爾津金慫恿，將彼交與的白色藥粉摻入一杯白蘭地中，使斯梅里科夫飲下。（四）次日早晨該妓女瑪絲洛娃即將斯梅里科夫鉆石戒指一枚售與女掌班，即妓院女老板和本案證人基達(dá)耶娃，聲稱戒指系斯梅里科夫所贈(zèng)。（五）斯梅里科夫死后第二日，摩爾旅館女茶房葉菲米雅·包奇科娃即至本地商業(yè)銀行，在本人活期存款戶中存入一千八百銀盧布。
“經(jīng)法醫(yī)解剖尸體，化驗(yàn)內(nèi)臟，查明死者體內(nèi)確有毒藥，據(jù)此足以斷定該斯梅里科夫系中毒身亡。
“被告瑪絲洛娃、包奇科娃與卡爾津金在受審時(shí)均不承認(rèn)犯有罪行?，斀z洛娃供稱，在彼所謂‘工作’的妓院中，斯梅里科夫確曾令彼到摩爾旅館為該商人取款，彼即用交與之鑰匙打開(kāi)商人皮箱，并遵囑取出四十銀盧布，未曾多取分文，此點(diǎn)包奇科娃和卡爾津金都能證明，因開(kāi)箱、取款、鎖箱之際兩人均在場(chǎng)目睹?，斀z洛娃又供稱，彼第二次到商人斯梅里科夫房間后，確曾受卡爾津金教唆使商人飲下?lián)接兴幏壑滋m地，以為此藥粉是安眠藥，使商人服后熟睡，彼可及早脫身。戒指一枚確系商人斯梅里科夫所贈(zèng)，因彼受到商人毆打，放聲痛哭，且欲離去，該商人即以此戒指相贈(zèng)。
“葉菲米雅·包奇科娃供稱，失款一節(jié)彼毫無(wú)所知，彼從未踏進(jìn)該商人房間，一切勾當(dāng)均系瑪絲洛娃一人所為，因此該商人如有失竊情事，定系瑪絲洛娃持商人鑰匙取款時(shí)謀財(cái)所致?！爆斀z洛娃聽(tīng)到這里，全身打了個(gè)哆嗦，張開(kāi)嘴巴，回頭瞧了一眼包奇科娃。“當(dāng)法庭向葉菲米雅·包奇科娃出示一千八百銀盧布存款單并查詢?cè)摯婵顏?lái)源時(shí)，彼供稱：此乃彼同西蒙·卡爾津金二人十二年積攢所得，彼并準(zhǔn)備同西蒙·卡爾津金結(jié)婚。又據(jù)西蒙·卡爾津金第一次受審時(shí)供稱，瑪絲洛娃持鑰匙自妓院來(lái)旅館，教唆彼與包奇科娃共同竊取現(xiàn)款，然后三人分贓?！爆斀z洛娃聽(tīng)到這里身子又哆嗦了一下，甚至跳起來(lái)，臉漲得通紅，嘴里嘀咕著什么，但被民事執(zhí)行吏所制止?！白詈罂柦蚪疬€供認(rèn)，彼曾將藥粉交給瑪絲洛娃，使該商人安眠；但在第二次審訊時(shí)又*前供，聲稱并未參與謀財(cái)案件，亦未曾將藥粉交與瑪絲洛娃，而將全部罪責(zé)推到瑪絲洛娃一人身上。至于包奇科娃在銀行存款一節(jié)，彼同包奇科娃供詞相同，聲稱系彼二人十二年來(lái)在旅館聽(tīng)差所得之小費(fèi)?！?BR> 接著，起訴書列舉被告對(duì)質(zhì)記錄、證人供詞、法院鑒定人意見(jiàn)，等等。
起訴書結(jié)尾如下：
“綜上所述，包爾基村農(nóng)民西蒙·彼得羅夫·卡爾津金，年三十三歲，小市民葉菲米雅·伊凡諾娃·包奇科娃，年四十三歲，小市民葉卡吉琳娜·米哈依洛娃·瑪絲洛娃，年二十七歲，被控于一八八×年一月十七日經(jīng)過(guò)預(yù)謀，竊取商人斯梅里科夫現(xiàn)款和戒指一枚，共值二千五百銀盧布，謀財(cái)害命，以毒藥摻酒灌醉斯梅里科夫，致彼死亡。
“查此項(xiàng)罪行觸犯刑法第一四五三條第四款和第五款。據(jù)此按《刑事訴訟程序條例》第二○一條規(guī)定，農(nóng)民西蒙·卡爾津金、葉菲米雅·包奇科娃和小市民葉卡吉琳娜·瑪絲洛娃應(yīng)交由地方法院會(huì)同陪審員審理?！?BR> 書記官這才念完長(zhǎng)篇起訴書，收拾好文件，坐下來(lái)，雙手理理長(zhǎng)頭發(fā)。大家都輕松地舒了一口氣，愉快地感覺(jué)到審訊就要開(kāi)始，一切都會(huì)水落石出，正義就可得到伸張。只有聶赫留朵夫一人沒(méi)有這樣的感覺(jué)。他想到十年前他所認(rèn)識(shí)的天真可愛(ài)的姑娘瑪絲洛娃竟會(huì)犯下這樣的罪行，不由得大驚失色。
The indictment ran as follows: On the 17th of January, 18--, in the lodging-house Mauritania, occurred the sudden death of the Second Guild merchant, Therapont Emilianovich Smelkoff, of Kourgan.
The local police doctor of the fourth district certified that death was due to rupture of the heart, owing to the excessive use of alcoholic liquids. The body of the said Smelkoff was interred. After several days had elapsed, the merchant Timokhin, a fellow-townsman and companion of the said Smelkoff, returned from St. Petersburg, and hearing the circumstances that accompanied the death of the latter, notified his suspicions that the death was caused by poison, given with intent to rob the said Smelkoff of his money. This suspicion was corroborated on inquiry, which proved:
1. That shortly before his death the said Smelkoff had received the sum of 3,800 roubles from the bank. When an inventory of the property of the deceased was made, only 312 roubles and 16 copecks were found.
2. The whole day and night preceding his death the said Smelkoff spent with Lubka (alias Katerina Maslova) at her home and in the lodging-house Mauritania, which she also visited at the said Smelkoff's request during his absence, to get some money, which she took out of his portmanteau in the presence of the servants of the lodging-house Mauritania, Euphemia Botchkova and Simeon Kartinkin, with a key given her by the said Smelkoff. In the portmanteau opened by the said Maslova, the said Botchkova and Kartinkin saw packets of 100-rouble bank-notes.
3. On the said Smelkoff's return to the lodging-house Mauritania, together with Lubka, the latter, in accordance with the attendant Kartinkin's advice, gave the said Smelkoff some white powder given to her by the said Kartinkin, dissolved in brandy.
4. The next morning the said Lubka (alias Katerina Maslova) sold to her mistress, the witness Kitaeva, a brothel-keeper, a diamond ring given to her, as she alleged, by the said Smelkoff.
5. The housemaid of the lodging-house Mauritania, Euphemia Botchkova, placed to her account in the local Commercial Bank 1,800 roubles. The postmortem examination of the body of the said Smelkoff and the chemical analysis of his intestines proved beyond doubt the presence of poison in the organism, so that there is reason to believe that the said Smelkoff's death was caused by poisoning.
When cross-examined, the accused, Maslova, Botchkova, and Kartinkin, pleaded not guilty, deposing--Maslova, that she had really been sent by Smelkoff from the brothel, where she "works," as she expresses it, to the lodging-house Mauritania to get the merchant some money, and that, having unlocked the portmanteau with a key given her by the merchant, she took out 40 roubles, as she was told to do, and that she had taken nothing more; that Botchkova and Kartinkin, in whose presence she unlocked and locked the portmanteau, could testify to the truth of the statement.
She gave this further evidence--that when she came to the lodging-house for the second time she did, at the instigation of Simeon Kartinkin, give Smelkoff sonic kind of powder, which she thought was a narcotic, in a glass of brandy, hoping he would fall asleep and that she would be able to get away from him; and that Smelkoff, having beaten her, himself gave her the ring when she cried and threatened to go away.
The accused, Euphemia Botchkova, stated that she knew nothing about the missing money, that she had not even gone into Smelkoff's room, but that Lubka had been busy there all by herself; that if anything had been stolen, it must have been done by Lubka when she came with the merchant's key to get his money.
At this point Maslova gave a start, opened her mouth, and looked at Botchkova. "When," continued the secretary, "the receipt for 1,800 roubles from the bank was shown to Botchkova, and she was asked where she had obtained the money, she said that it was her own earnings for 12 years, and those of Simeon, whom she was going to marry. The accused Simeon Kartinkin, when first examined, confessed that he and Botchkova, at the instigation of Maslova, who had come with the key from the brothel, had stolen the money and divided it equally among themselves and Maslova." Here Maslova again started, half-rose from her seat, and, blushing scarlet, began to say something, but was stopped by the usher. "At last," the secretary continued, reading, "Kartinkin confessed also that he had supplied the powders in order to get Smelkoff to sleep. When examined the second time he denied having had anything to do with the stealing of the money or giving Maslova the powders, accusing her of having done it alone."
Concerning the money placed in the bank by Botchkova, he said the same as she, that is, that the money was given to them both by the lodgers in tips during 12 years' service.
The indictment concluded as follows:
In consequence of the foregoing, the peasant of the village Borki, Simeon Kartinkin, 33 years of age, the meschanka Euphemia Botchkova, 43 years of age, and the meschanka Katerina Maslova, 27 years of age, are accused of having on the 17th day of January, 188--, jointly stolen from the said merchant, Smelkoff, a ring and money, to the value of 2,500 roubles, and of having given the said merchant, Smelkoff, poison to drink, with intent of depriving him of life, and thereby causing his death. This crime is provided for in clause 1,455 of the Penal Code, paragraphs 4 and 5.
起訴書全文如下：
“一八八×年一月十七日摩爾旅館有一名旅客突然死亡，經(jīng)查明該旅客乃庫(kù)爾干二等商人費(fèi)拉邦特·葉密里央內(nèi)奇·斯梅里科夫。
“經(jīng)第四警察分局法醫(yī)驗(yàn)明，死亡乃因飲酒過(guò)量、心力衰竭所致。斯梅里科夫尸體當(dāng)即入土掩埋。
“案發(fā)數(shù)日后，斯梅里科夫同鄉(xiāng)好友商人季莫興自彼得堡歸來(lái)，獲悉斯梅里科夫死亡一事，疑有人謀財(cái)害命。
“關(guān)于此項(xiàng)懷疑，已由預(yù)審查明下列事實(shí)：（一）斯梅里科夫死亡前不久曾向銀行提取現(xiàn)款三千八百銀盧布。然在封存死者遺物清單中只開(kāi)列現(xiàn)金三百一十二盧布十六戈比。（二）斯梅里科夫臨死前一日曾在妓院和摩爾旅館同妓女柳波芙（葉卡吉琳娜·瑪絲洛娃）相處達(dá)一晝夜之久。葉卡吉琳娜·瑪絲洛娃曾受斯梅里科夫之托，自妓院徑赴摩爾旅館取款。該瑪絲洛娃即會(huì)同摩爾旅館茶房葉菲米雅·包奇科娃和西蒙·卡爾津金，使用斯梅里科夫交與之鑰匙，打開(kāi)皮箱，取出現(xiàn)款?，斀z洛娃開(kāi)箱時(shí)，包奇科娃和卡爾津金在場(chǎng)目睹箱內(nèi)裝有百盧布鈔票若干疊。（三）斯梅里科夫偕同妓女瑪絲洛娃自妓院回到摩爾旅館后，瑪絲洛娃受茶房卡爾津金慫恿，將彼交與的白色藥粉摻入一杯白蘭地中，使斯梅里科夫飲下。（四）次日早晨該妓女瑪絲洛娃即將斯梅里科夫鉆石戒指一枚售與女掌班，即妓院女老板和本案證人基達(dá)耶娃，聲稱戒指系斯梅里科夫所贈(zèng)。（五）斯梅里科夫死后第二日，摩爾旅館女茶房葉菲米雅·包奇科娃即至本地商業(yè)銀行，在本人活期存款戶中存入一千八百銀盧布。
“經(jīng)法醫(yī)解剖尸體，化驗(yàn)內(nèi)臟，查明死者體內(nèi)確有毒藥，據(jù)此足以斷定該斯梅里科夫系中毒身亡。
“被告瑪絲洛娃、包奇科娃與卡爾津金在受審時(shí)均不承認(rèn)犯有罪行?，斀z洛娃供稱，在彼所謂‘工作’的妓院中，斯梅里科夫確曾令彼到摩爾旅館為該商人取款，彼即用交與之鑰匙打開(kāi)商人皮箱，并遵囑取出四十銀盧布，未曾多取分文，此點(diǎn)包奇科娃和卡爾津金都能證明，因開(kāi)箱、取款、鎖箱之際兩人均在場(chǎng)目睹?，斀z洛娃又供稱，彼第二次到商人斯梅里科夫房間后，確曾受卡爾津金教唆使商人飲下?lián)接兴幏壑滋m地，以為此藥粉是安眠藥，使商人服后熟睡，彼可及早脫身。戒指一枚確系商人斯梅里科夫所贈(zèng)，因彼受到商人毆打，放聲痛哭，且欲離去，該商人即以此戒指相贈(zèng)。
“葉菲米雅·包奇科娃供稱，失款一節(jié)彼毫無(wú)所知，彼從未踏進(jìn)該商人房間，一切勾當(dāng)均系瑪絲洛娃一人所為，因此該商人如有失竊情事，定系瑪絲洛娃持商人鑰匙取款時(shí)謀財(cái)所致?！爆斀z洛娃聽(tīng)到這里，全身打了個(gè)哆嗦，張開(kāi)嘴巴，回頭瞧了一眼包奇科娃。“當(dāng)法庭向葉菲米雅·包奇科娃出示一千八百銀盧布存款單并查詢?cè)摯婵顏?lái)源時(shí)，彼供稱：此乃彼同西蒙·卡爾津金二人十二年積攢所得，彼并準(zhǔn)備同西蒙·卡爾津金結(jié)婚。又據(jù)西蒙·卡爾津金第一次受審時(shí)供稱，瑪絲洛娃持鑰匙自妓院來(lái)旅館，教唆彼與包奇科娃共同竊取現(xiàn)款，然后三人分贓?！爆斀z洛娃聽(tīng)到這里身子又哆嗦了一下，甚至跳起來(lái)，臉漲得通紅，嘴里嘀咕著什么，但被民事執(zhí)行吏所制止?！白詈罂柦蚪疬€供認(rèn)，彼曾將藥粉交給瑪絲洛娃，使該商人安眠；但在第二次審訊時(shí)又*前供，聲稱并未參與謀財(cái)案件，亦未曾將藥粉交與瑪絲洛娃，而將全部罪責(zé)推到瑪絲洛娃一人身上。至于包奇科娃在銀行存款一節(jié)，彼同包奇科娃供詞相同，聲稱系彼二人十二年來(lái)在旅館聽(tīng)差所得之小費(fèi)?！?BR> 接著，起訴書列舉被告對(duì)質(zhì)記錄、證人供詞、法院鑒定人意見(jiàn)，等等。
起訴書結(jié)尾如下：
“綜上所述，包爾基村農(nóng)民西蒙·彼得羅夫·卡爾津金，年三十三歲，小市民葉菲米雅·伊凡諾娃·包奇科娃，年四十三歲，小市民葉卡吉琳娜·米哈依洛娃·瑪絲洛娃，年二十七歲，被控于一八八×年一月十七日經(jīng)過(guò)預(yù)謀，竊取商人斯梅里科夫現(xiàn)款和戒指一枚，共值二千五百銀盧布，謀財(cái)害命，以毒藥摻酒灌醉斯梅里科夫，致彼死亡。
“查此項(xiàng)罪行觸犯刑法第一四五三條第四款和第五款。據(jù)此按《刑事訴訟程序條例》第二○一條規(guī)定，農(nóng)民西蒙·卡爾津金、葉菲米雅·包奇科娃和小市民葉卡吉琳娜·瑪絲洛娃應(yīng)交由地方法院會(huì)同陪審員審理?！?BR> 書記官這才念完長(zhǎng)篇起訴書，收拾好文件，坐下來(lái)，雙手理理長(zhǎng)頭發(fā)。大家都輕松地舒了一口氣，愉快地感覺(jué)到審訊就要開(kāi)始，一切都會(huì)水落石出，正義就可得到伸張。只有聶赫留朵夫一人沒(méi)有這樣的感覺(jué)。他想到十年前他所認(rèn)識(shí)的天真可愛(ài)的姑娘瑪絲洛娃竟會(huì)犯下這樣的罪行，不由得大驚失色。