nine o’clock
on Sunday, June
`` Nor is this the sole instance , even in this division of his subject , where our reasoner unwittingly reasons against himself . His evident object , I have already said , is to reduce , as much as possible , the interval between Marie 's disappearance and the finding of the corpse . Yet we find him urging the point that no person saw the girl from the moment of her leaving her mother 's house . ` We have no evidence , ' he says , ` that Marie Rogêt was in the land of the living after nine o'clock on Sunday , June the twenty-second . ' As his argument is obviously an ex parte one , he should , at least , have left this matter out of sight ; for had any one been known to see Marie , say on Monday , or on Tuesday , the interval in question would have been much reduced , and , by his own ratiocination , the probability much diminished of the corpse being that of the grisette . It is , nevertheless , amusing to observe that L'Etoile insists upon its point in the full belief of its furthering its general argument . `` Reperuse now that portion of this argument which has reference to the identification of the corpse by Beauvais .