Czytaj książkę: «Memoirs of the Duchesse de Dino (Afterwards Duchesse de Talleyrand et de Sagan), 1836-1840»

CHAPTER I
1836

Paris, January 2, 1836. —M. de Talleyrand is working hard to advance the claims of M. Molé to a seat in the French Academy. He is supported alike by M. Royer-Collard and by the Ministers; hence M. de Villemain found occasion to say, yesterday evening, that all the most diverse and inverse influences were in combination to transport or to export M. Molé to the Academy, and that he himself was strongly in favour of importation, as a seat in the Academy was no obstacle to other posts. This play on words was no less pointed than malicious.

There was much talk of the various speeches delivered before the King on New Year's Day, and in particular of M. Pasquier's speech, which was remarkable for the boldness he displayed in his use of the word "subject," which M. de Villemain called a progressive term.

The King was delighted with Count Apponyi's speech, and the Diplomatic Service were equally pleased with the King's reply. In any case, Fieschi and Mascara¹ were so much treasure-trove to all the speech-makers; emotion and sympathy in every degree were noticeable, and M. Dupin was moved even to sobs!

Concerning M. Pasquier, a notice was inserted by some jester in a low-class newspaper to the effect that his recent illness was caused by his recognition of Fieschi as his natural son! The old Comtesse de la Briche, who is falling into her dotage, went off in all seriousness to relate this piece of folly with sighs of profound emotion in the salon of Madame de Chastellux, the Carlist headquarters. Such want of tact is almost inconceivable, and great merriment was aroused!

Paris, January 4, 1836.– The illness of Madame de Flahaut's second daughter has become critical, and provided me yesterday with an illustration of that truest of parables, the beam and the mote, when Madame de Lieven said to me, in reference to Madame de Flahaut: "Can you conceive that she talks politics to me at a time like this and orders her carriage to visit Madame Adélaïde? She will even leave her daughter's room to discuss public affairs with her visitors, and asks me to dinner to-morrow to distract her thoughts, as she says, and not to be left alone in her anxiety!" Apparently people cannot see themselves as others see them, and such incidents give one startling cause for introspection.

The much-discussed communication from President Jackson,² which has been expected with great impatience, has reached the Duc de Broglie, by way of England. He went to the King five hours later, to inform him that the communication had arrived; when the King asked to see it the Duc de Broglie told him that it was of no importance and that he had already sent it to the newspapers! He made the same observation to his colleague, M. de Thiers, who told every one he met during the evening, on the faith of this information, that the message was of no political significance. The next day the King and M. Thiers were able to read the message in the papers, and found that it was very cleverly conceived, very insolent to M. de Broglie personally, and exactly calculated to terminate the existing dispute. Council after council was then held, and lively discussions took place; at length the royal will has triumphed, with the support of M. Thiers, and the communication will be declared satisfactory. The intervention of England is to be declined, and a statement will be made that France is prepared to pay the sum of twenty-five millions as due under the terms specified. M. de Broglie eventually yielded, though his surrender was delayed by the wound to his self-esteem. At first he refused to submit for approval his note thanking England for her offer of intervention, but it was eventually shown to the King yesterday. It was criticised as being too long, too diffuse, and too metaphysical. There was a vigorous discussion in the council, but the King concluded the matter by giving his hand to the Duc de Broglie with a kind word. At the same time a considerable amount of ill-temper remains on both sides. However, a war with the United States would be very disadvantageous to French commerce; so this conclusion will probably have a good effect upon public opinion.

Paris, January 11, 1836.– Yesterday morning I had a call from M. Royer-Collard. He had just left M. de Berryer in a state of considerable vexation and disgust; their conversation had dealt with Prague. M. de Berryer said that at Prague M. Royer was in many men's minds and was well spoken of; that Charles X. had several times repeated his fear that he had not sufficiently considered several things which M. Royer had told him in a long conversation at the time of the much-discussed address³ of 1830. The curious point is that when the old king attempted to recall these important points, of which he had but a vague recollection, he found himself unable to remember them. The incident is very characteristic of the man's good intentions and incompetency.

Paris, January 16, 1836.– M. Humann, Financial Minister, delivered a tirade yesterday in the Chamber of Deputies, in which he very imprudently raised the question of the reduction of the State bonds, without previously consulting his colleagues. It was thought that a dissolution of the Ministry would be the consequence, but the difficulty has been settled, and matters remain as they were, for the moment.

The King has personally seen Count Pahlen and soothed his feelings, and it is hoped that the speech of the Duc de Broglie in the Chamber of Deputies will not lead to any outburst.⁴

Paris, January 24, 1836.– The Chamber of Deputies remains disturbed and restive. Apathetic as the session was at its opening, it provides vexation enough to those responsible for the government. The prevailing ill-temper is especially manifested against the Duc de Broglie, the tone of whose speeches displeases the Deputies. His observation in the Chamber the other day, "is that clear?" is regarded as almost unpardonable.⁵

Paris, January 28, 1836.– Yesterday we were dining with Marshal Maison. It was a remarkable dinner for many reasons, but especially for the stories told by the Marshal's wife, one of which amused me for a long time afterwards. They were speaking of crowded balls and saying how difficult it was to discover the exact number of guests actually present; thereupon the Marshal's wife observed in her high, shrill voice: "I have an admirable method which has always worked successfully in all the balls I have given; I put my chambermaid behind the door with a bag of beans at her side, and I say: 'Mariette, when any one comes in, you will take a bean out of the big bag and put it in your handbag.' Thus the numbers are exactly known, and that is the best way of doing it." So strong an inclination to wild laughter overcame me that I nearly choked, and Mmes. de Lieven, von Werther, and von Löwenhielm, who were present, were in the same predicament.

Paris, February 1, 1836.– If I were at my dear Rochecotte, as I was last year, I should think that spring was beginning on February 1, whereas here one can say nothing of the kind. My old dislike of Paris has been growing upon me for some time. Not that people are in any way disagreeable – indeed, the contrary is the case; but life at Paris is too exhausting, the atmosphere is too keen, attractions are too numerous and widely spread, while at the same time they are not sufficiently strong. There is no leisure, constant worry, and a continual sense of want.

At London I lived amid a society at once high and simple-minded; social success and leisure were possible at the same time. M. de Talleyrand there enjoyed good health and was occupied with important business. The excitement which I then experienced had its compensations; I had time for my own occupations, for reading, working, writing, and thinking, nor was I pestered by every idle person. If calling is a tax upon one's time, calls can be paid at London with an empty carriage and with cards; in short, life was then a pleasure. Hence my deep and melancholy regret for those years which will never return; hence my longing for the calm and sweetness of Rochecotte, with its wide horizon and its pure sky, for my clean house, my kind and simple neighbours, my workpeople, my flowers, my big dog, my little cow and goat, the good Abbé, the modest Vestier, the little wood where we used to gather fir-cones – the place, in short, where I am at my best, because I have time for valuable introspection, for enlightenment of thought, for the practice of good and the avoidance of evil, time to unite myself in simplicity of heart and mind with the beauty, the strength, and the graciousness of nature, which there gives me shelter, refreshment, and repose. But a truce to these self-complainings, which are useless and ungrateful.

Yesterday I saw Dr. Ferrus, on his return from Ham. His account of what he found there is as follows: Both the orders and the attitude of the doctors were extremely kind, but it was necessary to find some excuse for action, and the two ex-Ministers who were really ill, MM. de Chantelauze and de Peyronnet, insolently refused to permit a visit from the doctors; while the others, MM. de Polignac and Guernon de Ranville, though very compliant, submissive, and anxious to take advantage of the kindly attitude of the Government, were unfortunately unable to plead any malady. Hence it was necessary to postpone the desired attempt to improve their condition.⁶

Paris, February 6, 1836.– Yesterday morning I went to the session of the Chamber of Deputies, with the Countess Bretzenheim, who had invited me to accompany her; there I heard for the first time a speech by M. Thiers; he spoke admirably, in opposition to the much-discussed proposal for the conversion of the stock, so imprudently put forward by M. Humann. While M. Thiers was speaking I thought I noticed him spitting blood several times; I wrote to ask him how he was, and the following is an extract from his reply: "I am exhausted; I did not spit blood, but in those few moments I shortened my life by several days; I have never encountered so strong an opposition of opinion, and an iron will is required to overcome an obstinacy so plain as that displayed by the Chamber. I am very sorry that you should have heard me speak, as the figures must have wearied you, and have given you a poor idea of our public oratory. We should be heard and judged only upon days of excitement, and not when we are discussing accounts. In any case, I am doubtful of the consequences, and were it not for the King I should be inclined to wish that the Ministry would resign. The struggle against such imprudence and foolishness is an unbearable task."

This letter prepared me to some extent for the events of the evening. However, M. Royer-Collard, who came to me in the course of the morning, believed that the Ministry would emerge triumphant, for the reason that the Chamber would find difficulty in using an advantage, if they gained one. He was overcome with admiration for the speech of M. Thiers, and had told him as much in the Chamber. On this occasion they spoke to one another again, for the first time since the discussion of the September laws.

My son, M. de Valençay, came directly from the session of the Chamber of Deputies to dinner with us. He told us of the stupefaction produced in the Chamber by the strange conclusions of Humann, and the excitement of the Ministers because the project for converting the Government stock had been postponed by a majority of two votes only.

The Journal de Paris announced the resignation of the Ministry at a later hour, and General Alava, who had just seen the Duc de Broglie, told us at eleven o'clock in the evening that the King had accepted their resignations, and had sent for MM. Humann and Molé.

At that moment I received the following note from M. Thiers: "We have resigned in full freedom and seriousness. The King knew beforehand, and agreed with every one, and myself in particular, that this result was the inevitable consequence of our intention to oppose the scheme for conversion. Our honour would be compromised if we did not persist in our action and force a new Ministry to take office. It matters not if that Ministry be weak and helpless; the burden of proving the fact will rest upon the Third Party. No other action is possible, either for the King or for ourselves, and would in any case be a deception in the style of Charles X."

Paris, February 7, 1836.– There is no news of the Ministry except the fact of resignation, which is definite. It is thought that M. de Broglie will never take office again, as the animosity of the Chamber is chiefly directed against himself.

M. Thiers made no attempt to oppose resignation; he was actuated rather by the desire to secure an honourable withdrawal and to dissociate himself from colleagues whom he did not like than by any special devotion to the point at issue, though his defence was marked with great skill.

The King summoned M. Humann, who refused, M. Molé, who declined, M. Dupin, who spoke at random– shades of meaning which are worthy of note. In short, nothing has been done, nor can any action be regarded as probable. The friends of M. Molé say that he will no longer be sent from pillar to post or put up with requests, refusals, and vexations such as he experienced in November, and that if people will not submit to his views he will decline to interfere.

Paris, February 8, 1836.– Yesterday I had a call from M. Royer-Collard. He explains the attitude of the Chamber towards the last Ministry as follows: The Ministry had lasted for three years and was worn out, especially the doctrinaire members of it, while the Cabinet had wearied the Chamber by too constantly pressing for decisions and making personal matters Cabinet questions; moreover, the Chamber had gone beyond its powers in the announcement issued at the time when the laws concerning intimidation were passed;⁷ it had been by no means popular in the provinces, while the disdainful folly of M. de Broglie had filled the cup to overflowing. Finally, as the country was prosperous and peaceful both at home and abroad, the Chamber had thought the moment opportune to enounce its rights and to show the Ministry that it was not indispensable; while a popular question in the provinces had provided it with an opportunity for displaying its power, in which determination it was supported by its political ignorance, which will not allow it to foresee the extent of the crisis. M. Royer-Collard added that the only two Ministers who could have preserved their reputation in the Chamber were MM. Thiers and Duchâtel, but that here again some small period of exile would be necessary.

Yesterday we dined with M. Thiers in fulfillment of a long-standing invitation. He was highly delighted and fluttering whenever he pleased. He proposes to travel, and to visit Vienna, Berlin, Rome, and Naples; he will start in April. M. de Broglie, who was also at dinner, appeared sad and downcast, and I was astonished that he made no attempt to hide his feelings; it was not the devil, but the doctrine, that he was burying.

In the evening I paid a visit to Madame de Lieven and made the acquaintance of M. Berryer. M. Royer-Collard, who sees him constantly, told me in the morning that M. Berryer was very anxious to make my acquaintance. We were on our best behaviour. He talks simply and kindly.

Paris, February 9, 1836.– Yesterday we dined with the Sardinian Ambassador.⁸ I was told that nothing had been yet decided concerning the Ministry, and M. Molé, who was sitting near me, confirmed this statement. He has declined to join the Third Party, in spite of the universal desire that he should do so. I believe that, for want of a better leader, M. Dupin will eventually profit for the time being by this state of affairs; as, however, the little group which he leads is very weak, he will be obliged to base his power upon the Left, and this will cost him dear. His position will be analogous to that of the English Whig Ministry confronted by O'Connell. I hope that this state of affairs will be of no long duration, though a short time is quite enough in which to take many retrograde steps. At the Château sadness prevails, uneasiness in the diplomatic world and anxiety in public opinion.

The young and beautiful Queen of Naples died on January 31, a few days after the birth of her child. The news arrived yesterday.⁹

Paris, February 10, 1836.– The judges in Fieschi's case, and the audience, take a remarkable interest in this man. He is an unprecedented character; he has a fine intellect and a real genius for strategy, while the terrors of his situation never obscure his memory, his self-possession, or his penetration; he is a man of strong passions, especially where women are concerned. His affection for Nina Lassave is remarkable; he constantly writes to her, and when he learned that she had been unfaithful to him he reproached her for not waiting a few days and sparing him this last bitterness, as his execution would have set her free; all this was written in the most touching style. Another point is that when M. Ladvocat sent money to Fieschi, that he might provide himself with some small dainties in prison, instead of spending the money, he sent it to this woman Nina. She wrote to thank him more or less in the following terms: "I thank you for thus depriving yourself for my sake; with what you have sent me I have bought a few decent things to do you credit before your judges, but as you will soon be unable to send me anything more, I am economising, and am now mistress of forty francs."

This remark concerning economy is disgusting. Moreover, she wrote to Fieschi to assure him that she had remained faithful to him, which is untrue. Everybody seems to have been far more interested by these amorous details than by the actual crime. What a strange time it is! Fieschi's correspondence, in passing through the hands of M. Decazes, became the amusement of the House of Peers; but the truly astonishing fact is the notoriety which the whole story has given to Mlle. Nina, who was formerly resident in the Salpêtrière. It is asserted that monetary proposals have been made to her by men of high position; there is no doubt that one hears the strangest descriptions of her beauties and her imperfections, and it is a positive fact that she has only one eye.

If Fieschi is a lover, he is no less attracted by religion. When the almoner of the Chamber of Peers asked those under trial if they wished to hear Mass, Fieschi alone replied yes, and said that he was anxious to hear it as he was neither a heathen nor an atheist; that if he was not a theological expert he had nevertheless read Plutarch and Cicero and firmly believed in the immortality of the soul; as the soul was not divisible it could not be material, and that, in short, he believed in the spiritual nature of man. He asked the almoner to come and see him again and not to leave him after his sentence had been pronounced. In view of such inconsistencies, how is it possible to pass any absolute judgment on men?

I believe the following to be an accurate bulletin of the Ministerial crisis: Yesterday morning the King sent for Dupin, Sauzet, and Passy, and commissioned them to form a Ministry upon two conditions only: firstly, they were not to give a post to any one who had voted against the repressive laws; secondly, the Minister for Foreign Affairs must be a man who would reassure European opinion and be agreeable to himself. The three men replied that they understood the King's wishes, but that they could not bind themselves until they had consulted their friends; they then withdrew. At the Chamber they sent round a list, which was drawn up nearly as follows: Dupin to be Minister of Justice and President, Passy to be Minister of Finance, Flahaut of Foreign Affairs, Molitor of War, Montalivet of the Interior. I have since learned that Montalivet refused the post in spite of the King's wishes, and that the King refused to accept the nomination of Flahaut. The King wished to appoint Rumigny or Baudrand to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and would have declared for the latter, if there had not been a wish to retain him as a companion to the Prince Royal on his travels. The Prince is very pleased at the fall of the last Ministry: I believe he is wrong; the Flahaut party are delighted. The Ministerial party hope to secure the election of M. Guizot as President of the Chamber of Deputies; the Opposition will support M. Martin du Nord.

In the evening I accompanied M. de Talleyrand to a dinner given by M. de Montalivet. Counts Pahlen and Apponyi were pale with fear inspired by the sight of M. de Flahaut's name on a list of Ministers. Marshal Maison was regretting the loss of his ambassadorship at St. Petersburg with cries of rage which were not in the best of taste.

We then went to the last Ministerial reception given by the Duc de Broglie. M. de Broglie believes himself to be fully in touch with the requirements of the time; he has no suspicion of the actual truth, that he is the sole cause and object of the squabbling which is going on, that he is the man rejected by the Chamber, and that if he were to say to his colleagues, "I see that I am myself the real stumbling-block; I will withdraw, but I beg you to remain," M. Molé would take his place and everything would be settled to the general satisfaction.

Paris, February 11, 1836.– Madame de Rumford died yesterday morning after breakfast; she had had some friends to dinner the evening before. She had been much changed for some time, but has always refused to acknowledge herself an invalid, and remained as discourteous to death as she was to those about her. The loss of her salon will be felt; it was a meeting-place, and there are very few that are habitually regarded as such. Every one found something there to remind him of this or that period of his life. This loss has saddened me; it is not well to have reached the age of eighty-four. But M. de Rigny was fifty, Clémentine de Flahaut sixteen, Yolande de Valençay two! Life is threatened at every step of the ladder, and one must always be ready.

That old cat Sémonville, whose claws are always ready, reached the Luxembourg yesterday with the announcement that the Ministry was at length settled. He was surrounded with questioners, and gave the list as follows: "President of the Council, Madame Adélaide; Justice and Public Worship, the Duchesse de Broglie; Foreign Affairs, the Duchesse de Dino;¹⁰ Interior, the Comtesse de Boigne; War, the Comtesse de Flahaut; Marine, the Duchesse de Massa; Finance, the Duchesse de Montmorency; Commerce, the Marquise de Caraman!" I sent this piece of wit to Madame de Lieven, in reply to a note asking for certain information; she replied that the King's condition at least was fulfilled, and that the Minister of Foreign Affairs was not likely to disturb Europe.

This is poor stuff, but poorer still is the fact that it is impossible to form a Ministry, in seriousness or otherwise. Yesterday I was at the Tuileries. The Ministers who had resigned were all grouped about the King, but, I think, with no particular object. It is deplorable!

Paris, February 12, 1836.– Of Ministerial news there is none; all that I have learned yesterday is as follows: Dupin, Passy, and Sauzet spent three hours with the King, and told him that they could not undertake the formation of a Ministry, as various intrigues had made the attempt impossible; they were, however, ready themselves to enter the Ministry, if their services were agreeable to the King. They then withdrew, and the King sent for M. Molé in the course of the evening, but I cannot say what passed at this interview.

Paris, February 13, 1836.– I have the following information as regards the events of yesterday concerning the Ministerial crisis. M. Molé declares that he will not take office without M. Thiers, who will not come in without M. Guizot; he, again, will not act without M. de Broglie, unless the latter recognises that he is himself the only real obstacle, insists that his colleagues should take office without him, and writes them a letter to that effect, dated from Broglie. M. de Salvandy attempted to enlighten him upon this point, but met with a very poor reception. A lively scene is said to have taken place between MM. de Broglie and Guizot; certainly M. de Broglie is obviously agitated, and so ill-tempered as to rouse the pity of his friends and the contempt of other men. Some people think that the King will summon de Broglie and request him with greater authority than Salvandy used to put an end to this deplorable state of affairs, which is only continued on his account.

Dupin's chance has entirely disappeared. During the two days when it was thought that he would be Minister, Thiers and Guizot both entered the competition for the Presidency, and so gained an opportunity of counting the votes in their favour. M. Guizot received eight, M. Martin du Nord fifteen; the remainder of the Ministerial party would have voted for M. Thiers and secured for him the refusal of the position.

Paris, February 16, 1836.– Fieschi and his accomplices have been condemned to death; M. de Mareuil came yesterday to tell us of the sentence, at eleven o'clock in the evening.¹¹

It seems that many of the peers gave long explanations to justify their manner of voting. A small fraction of the Chamber considered that the circumstantial evidence against Pépin and Morey was inadequate to justify the extreme penalty, and preferred to inflict penal servitude for life. Fieschi was condemned to death unanimously, and M. Barthe asked that the punishments reserved for parricides should be added to the death penalty.

The newspapers announce the death of Madame Bonaparte; her great-granddaughter – that is, the daughter of Joseph, who married the son of Lucien – was the only member of her numerous family at her side. Cardinal Fesch has been very attentive to her, and she leaves him her pictures; it is also thought that the division of her inheritance will cause fresh dissensions among her children, who are by no means at harmony with one another, for it seems that during her lifetime she gave considerable sums to Lucien, Jérôme, and to Madame Murat, which sums they are not willing to repay.

Paris, February 17, 1836.– Yesterday the King assembled his former Ministers and announced that in the first place he would not accept their resignations until another Cabinet was formed. Furthermore, he said that it was only by an accident that a majority in the Chamber had been against them; their system was that of the Chamber, although certain individuals in the Cabinet might not be agreeable to the Chamber, and he would therefore be delighted to see them all remain in office; if, however, they thought that any of their members were likely to keep the Chamber in a state of exasperation, he asked them to consider the matter among themselves and then to let him know upon what he could rely. M. de Broglie said that the King should make trial of the Third Party, to which the King replied: "It may please you, sir, to restate the weakness of that Third Party, but it does not please me to make so disastrous an attempt; I have had enough of three days' ministries; the majority is not to be found either in the Third Party or in the Left, but with you, gentlemen, or, if not with all of you, at any rate with some. Your arrangements and mutual engagements ought to give way before the gravity of the situation: so much I expect from your honesty and your desire for the general welfare; for my own part, gentlemen, I shall fold my arms and bide my time at Saint-Cloud." MM. de Broglie and Guizot replied that no member of the Cabinet was exactly bound, but that there were certain conventions which they must respect in each member's case. This was a very inopportune reply at such a moment, especially from the first speaker, who could have cut the Gordian knot at one word and have simplified the position. No one knows what the result will be, unless matters should turn out as M. Royer-Collard predicted to M. Thiers last Friday: "You are impossible to-day, but in a week you will be necessary, indispensable, and absolute."

M. de Talleyrand and myself visited the Queen yesterday. The fact that the Court was in mourning for the Queen of Naples, together with the trial of Fieschi and the Ministerial crisis, made it impossible for the Château to take part in the pleasures of the carnival, and a very serious spirit prevailed. The King's attention was occupied by thoughts of the punishment which awaited the prisoners condemned the previous evening, and he had not ventured to go out, because he knew that Madame Pépin and her children were lying in wait for him. The Château was mournful indeed, and formed a painful contrast with the joyful tumult in the streets. M. Pasquier came to tell the King that Pépin had asked to see him that morning, so that the execution must be postponed until the next day.

Before going home I spent half an hour with Madame de Lieven. No one was there except Lady Charlotte Grenville and M. Berryer, who said that when one knew nothing one was able to say anything one liked, and that he had no hesitation in asserting that Thiers' was the only possible combination, and alone likely to be agreeable to the Chamber.

Paris, February 19, 1836.– Yesterday morning I had a call from M. Thiers, who had definitely accepted the task of forming a Cabinet and acting as President. He proposed to spend the rest of the day in making up his list. He has too much common sense to underrate the difficulty of his new position, and too much courage or blindness to be dismayed by it. M. Molé failed to secure election to the Academy; it has been a disastrous week for him.