Marie Lafarge Convicted of poisoning her own husband with arsenic in 1840. Date of Birth: 15.01.1816 Country: France

1. Biography of Marie Lafarge
2. Early Life
3. Marriage and Disappointment
4. The Trial and Controversy
5. The Trial of Charles Lafarge

Biography of Marie Lafarge

Marie Lafarge, convicted for poisoning her own husband with arsenic in 1840, was a central figure in a high-profile court case in France. The progress of her trial was extensively covered by daily newspapers, making it the first case in the world to result in a conviction based on direct expert evidence obtained through forensic toxicology methods. The Lafarge case had a significant impact on French society and can only be compared to the Dreyfus affair in terms of its influence on public consciousness.

Early Life

Marie Kappel was the daughter of an artillery officer and later claimed that her grandmother came from a noble background, tracing her ancestry back to Charlemagne. Her father died while she was 12 years old, and after her mother's death, she was taken in by her aunt, the wife of a director at the Banque de France. Although her guardians cared for her and placed her in a boarding school for noble girls, Marie desired to be on equal footing with the daughters of aristocrats. However, her dowry was meager and did not satisfy her ambitions. By the age of 23, she had not yet married, and her relatives turned to a marriage broker for assistance. The only candidate was Charles Lafarge, a 29-year-old man from a distinguished family. To improve his financial situation, Charles agreed to the marriage.

Marriage and Disappointment

Marie Lafarge arrived in Le Glandier, the Lafarge family estate, on August 13, 1839. However, she was disappointed to find the "castle" to be a gloomy, semi-ruined monastery infested with rats. The Lafarge relatives were ordinary peasants, and instead of wealth, the estate was burdened with enormous debts. Marie locked herself in her room and threatened to poison herself with arsenic if Charles did not agree to annul the marriage. Charles proposed a compromise: they would not consummate the marriage until his financial affairs were in order. Marie wrote letters to her friends and relatives without showing any signs of disappointment. In fact, she even wrote recommendation letters for Charles in Paris and made efforts to support his business ventures. In December 1839, Charles Lafarge planned a trip to Paris, and before his departure, Marie left him a sweet pie. Charles fell ill after eating it but did not seek medical attention, thinking the pie had spoiled during transport. Despite his illness, Charles returned to Le Glandier. Marie took care of him, but his condition worsened. The family doctor diagnosed his illness as cholera, and no one suspected foul play when Marie obtained a prescription for arsenic, claiming it was for rat poisoning. Charles's health continued to deteriorate, and the family organized round-the-clock vigilance. Marie treated him with gum arabic, which she claimed to consume herself. Another doctor confirmed the diagnosis of cholera but did not suspect poisoning. Unbeknownst to Marie, a distant relative named Anna Brun became suspicious when she found a malachite box containing white powder in Marie's possession. The powder turned white flakes into the water she offered Charles, and it had a burning taste. Marie insisted it was whitewash from the ceiling, but Anna started to monitor her closely, preserving leftover food and drinks offered to Charles. In early January 1840, Anna informed Charles's relatives about her suspicions and pleaded with him not to consume anything given by Marie. Marie's innocence was temporarily supported when she showed them rat poison paste, claiming it was harmless. However, on January 12, 1840, Anna discovered white sediment at the bottom of a glass of sweet water given to Charles. Dr. Lespinas, called for consultation on January 13, diagnosed poisoning, but Charles Lafarge passed away a few hours later. Marie appeared calm, and shortly after her husband's death, she went to a notary with her will. Meanwhile, Charles's brother reported the case to the police. On January 15, judicial officer Moran arrived in Le Glandier, and Anna Brun presented him with the remnants of food, as well as drawing attention to the fact that the rat poison paste was entirely harmless. Moran also discovered that Marie Lafarge had purchased arsenic in December 1839, just before sending the sweet pie to Paris. Consulting with Lafarge's doctors, Moran proposed conducting a test for arsenic, a procedure already used in Paris at the time. Dr. Lespinas, embarrassed by his own ignorance, immediately agreed to cooperate. Despite their lack of experience, Lafarge's remains were exhumed before the burial, and his internal organs were examined using a makeshift apparatus called Marsh's test, which revealed the presence of arsenic.

The Trial and Controversy

The trial of Marie Lafarge opened on September 3, 1840, as a case of European significance, with correspondents from many countries present. The defense attorney, Maitre Paye, built his defense on the ignorance of the doctors who conducted the autopsy and Marsh's test, and insisted on calling the renowned chemist and toxicologist, Matthieu-Joseph Orfila, as an expert witness. However, the judge deemed it unnecessary. Local pharmacists summoned as expert witnesses in the courtroom were unable to detect arsenic in Marsh's test, which was conducted publicly. As the trial was open to the public, the audience expressed outrage and demanded the defendant's acquittal. The prosecutor insisted on exhuming Lafarge's body, but the pharmacists once again failed to find traces of arsenic. The prosecutor then demanded an analysis of the food consumed by Lafarge, and finally, the pharmacists declared, "there was enough arsenic to poison a dozen people." Due to the contradiction, the prosecutor insisted on summoning Orfila, and the defense did not object, confident in a favorable outcome. Orfila demanded that his experiments be conducted using the same technique and conditions as the local pharmacists. He performed Marsh's test on the premises of the court, behind closed doors and under protection. He found arsenic in all the preparations from Lafarge's body, as well as in the food and drinks. He also categorically stated that arsenic could not have entered the remains from the surrounding environment (this claim was questioned only in the 1950s during the Marie Besnard trial). Orfila also examined the "gum arabic" from Marie Lafarge's malachite box, which turned out to be arsenic. Marie Lafarge was immediately arrested and taken to the prison in Brive. By then, news of Marie Lafarge's story had reached the newspapers, prompting a group of four lawyers, including Theodore Bac (future mayor of Limoges), to defend her. Prior to the trial, a scandal emerged in the press, revealing that Marie Lafarge had stolen valuable items while staying at the home of the Vicomtesse de Leto (which occurred before her marriage). This accusation had been made against Marie before, but the Vicomte dismissed it as laughable, and the case was closed. However, during the search of Le Glandier, the stolen items were found. Marie claimed that she had given them to the Vicomtesse herself, who was being blackmailed by a secret lover. By this time, public sympathy was already strongly in Marie Lafarge's favor. Nevertheless, she was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for theft.

The Trial of Charles Lafarge

The trial for the poisoning of Charles Lafarge began on September 19, 1840. It was a case of European significance, with correspondents from many countries present. Maitre Paye, who had insisted on summoning Orfila, attempted to delay the trial and called his longtime adversary, Francois-Vincent Raspail, as a witness. However, Raspail arrived in the courtroom only 4 hours after the sentence was pronounced. Marie Lafarge was sentenced to life imprisonment on September 19, 1840. On the same day, she was sent to Montpellier to serve her sentence. Due to the intense public reaction, King Louis-Philippe I commuted her sentence from hard labor to life imprisonment. While in prison, Marie Lafarge wrote a memoir titled "Heures de prison," which was published in 1841. In 1852, Marie Lafarge, terminally ill with tuberculosis, was granted amnesty by Napoleon III and released. She moved to Ussa, where she passed away on November 7 of the same year, maintaining her innocence until the end. The Lafarge case deeply divided French society. George Sand, a passionate admirer of Marie Lafarge and her works, vehemently criticized the court's verdict in her correspondence with Eugene Delacroix. (Marie Lafarge was an avid fan of George Sand's work). Chemist Raspail, who supported Lafarge's innocence, even wrote pamphlets criticizing Orfila's methods. The prevailing prejudice against exact sciences in society at that time led many to consider the arguments presented in court as unconvincing. In response to the backlash, Orfila conducted a series of public lectures at the Paris Academy of Medicine, explaining the basics of toxicology and Marsh's test, thereby laying the foundation for the development of forensic toxicology as an exact science. The Lafarge case was widely discussed in Parisian salons.