Still, in spite of all his efforts, the body of the evidence was against Michu; and the prosecutor, judge, jury, and audience were impressed with a feeling (as the lawyers for the defence had foreseen) that the guilt of the servant carried with it that of the masters.

So the vital interest centred on all that concerned Michu.

His bearing was noble.

He showed in his answers the sagacity with which nature had endowed him; and the public, seeing him on his mettle, recognized his superiority.

And yet, strange to say, the more they understood him the more certainty they felt that he was the instigator of the outrage.
The witnesses for the defence, always less important in the eyes of a jury and of the law than the witnesses for the prosecution, seemed to testify as in duty bound, and were listened to with that allowance.