Chapter XIII: Book XV: 263 (3)

This indifference of the country for Charles X. points to something more than lassitude: we are bound to behold in it the progress of democratic ideas and the assimilation of ranks. At an earlier period, the fall of a king of France would have been an enormous event: time has lowered the monarch from the height on which he was placed, has brought him nearer to us, has diminished the space which separated him from the class of the people. If men felt little surprise at meeting the son of St. Louis on the high-road like everybody else, this was due not to a spirit of hatred or system, but quite simply to the sense of social levelling which has penetrated men's minds and which has acted upon the masses without their knowing it.

[Sidenote: Charles X. at Cherbourg.]

A curse, Cherbourg, upon thy ill-omened precincts! It was near Cherbourg that the wind of anger threw Edward III. to ravage our country[323]; it was not far from Cherbourg that the wind of an enemy's victory shattered Tourville's fleet[324]; it was at Cherbourg that the wind of a deceptive prosperity drove Louis XVI. toward his scaffold[325]; it was at Cherbourg that the wind from I know not what shore carried away our last Princes. The coast of Great Britain, on which William the Conqueror[326] landed, witnessed the disembarkation of Charles the Tenth without lance or pennon: he went to Holyrood to find the memories of his youth[327] hung upon the walls of the Stuart palace like old engravings made yellow by time.

I have depicted the Three Days as they unrolled themselves before my eyes: hence a certain contemporary colour, true at the passing moment, false after the moment has passed, is diffused over my picture. There is no revolution so prodigious but, described from minute to minute, will find itself reduced to the slightest proportions. Events issue from the womb of things, even as men from the womb of their mothers, accompanied by the infirmities of nature. Misery and greatness are twin sisters: they are born together; but where the confinement is a vigorous one, misery at a certain period dies, and greatness alone survives. To judge impartially of the truth that is to remain, we must therefore place ourselves at the point of view from which posterity will contemplate the accomplished fact.

Getting away from the meannesses of character and action of which I had been a witness, taking only what will remain of the Days of July, I said with justice in my speech in the Chamber of Peers:

"The people having armed themselves with their courage and their intelligence, it was found that those 'shopkeepers' could breathe freely amidst the smoke of gunpowder, and that it required rather more than 'four soldiers and a corporal' to subdue them. A century could not have ripened the destinies of a nation so completely as the three last suns that have shone over France."

In fact, the people properly so-called were brave and generous on the day of the 28th. The Guards had lost more than 300 men killed and wounded; they did ample justice to the poor classes, who alone fought on that day and among whom were mingled men who were foul-minded, but who were unable to dishonour them. The pupils of the Polytechnic School, who left their school too late on the 28th to take part in the fighting, were placed by the people at their head on the 29th with admirable simplicity and ingenuousness.

Champions who had been absent from the strife sustained by the people came to join their ranks on the 29th, when the greatest danger was past; others, likewise victors, first joined the conquering side on the 30th and 31st.

On the side of the troops, things were very much the same; only the soldiers and officers were engaged: the staff, which had once deserted Bonaparte at Fontainebleau, kept to the heights of Saint-Cloud, watching from which side the wind blew the smoke of the powder. They pressed on each other's heels at Charles X.'s levee; not a soul was present at his couchee.

The moderation of the plebeian classes equalled their courage; order resulted suddenly from confusion. One must have seen the half-naked workmen, posted on sentry at the gate of the public gardens, preventing other ragged workmen from passing, to form an idea of the power of duty which had seized upon the men who remained the masters. They could have paid themselves the price of their blood and allowed themselves to be tempted by their wretchedness. One did not, as on the 10th of August 1792, see the Swiss massacred in their flight. All opinions were respected; never, with a few exceptions, was victory less abused. The victors carried the wounded Guards through the crowd, crying:

"Respect brave men!"

If a soldier came to die, they said:

"Peace to the dead!"

The fifteen years of the Restoration, under a constitutional government, had given rise among us to that spirit of humanity, lawfulness and justice which twenty-five years of the revolutionary and warlike spirit had been unable to produce. The law of force introduced into our manners seemed to have become the common law.

The consequences of the Revolution of July will be memorable. This Revolution has pronounced a decree against all thrones: to-day, kings will be able to reign only by force of arms; a sure means for a moment, but incapable of enduring: the time of successive janissaries is ended.

[Sidenote: Thoughts on the Three Days.]

Neither Tacitus nor Thucydides could give us a good description of the events of the Three Days; it would need Bossuet to explain to us the events in the order of Providence: a genius that saw all, but without overstepping the limits set to its reason and its splendour, like the sun which moves between two dazzling boundaries and which the Orientals call the "Slave of God."

Let us not seek so near at hand the motive powers of a movement placed so far away; the mediocrity of mankind, mad terrors, inexplicable disagreements, hatreds, ambitions, the presumption of some, the prejudice of others, secret conspiracies, buying and selling, well or ill-advised measures, courage or the absence of courage: all these things are the accidents, not the causes, of the event. When people say that they no longer wanted the Bourbons, that these had become hateful because they were supposed to have been forced upon France by the foreigner, this lofty disgust explains nothing satisfactorily.

The movement of July has not to do with politics properly so-called: it has to do with the social revolution which is never idle. By the concatenation of this general revolution, the 28th of July 1830 is only the inevitable sequel of the 21st of January 1793. The work of our first deliberative assemblies had been suspended; it had not been finished. In the course of twenty years, the French had accustomed themselves, like the English under Cromwell, to be governed by other masters than their old sovereigns. The fall of Charles X. is the consequence of the decapitation of Louis XVI., even as the dethronement of James II. is the consequence of the murder of Charles I. The Revolution seemed to die away in the glory of Bonaparte and in the liberties of Louis XVIII., but its germ was not destroyed: lodged at the bottom of our manners, it developed when the faults of the Restoration gave it fresh heat, and soon it burst forth.

The counsels of Providence are revealed in the anti-monarchical changes that are taking place. That superficial minds should see merely a scuffle in the Revolution of the Three Days is quite simple; but reflective men know that an enormous step forward has been taken: the principle of the sovereignty of the people has been substituted for the principle of the royal sovereignty, the hereditary monarchy changed into an elective monarchy. The 21st of January taught that one could dispose of a king's head; the 29th of July has shown that one can dispose of a crown. Now, any truth, good or bad, which manifests itself, remains the acquisition of the crowd. A change ceases to be unheard of, or extraordinary; it no longer presents itself to the mind or the conscience as impious, when it results from an idea that has become popular. The Franks used to exercise the sovereignty collectively; next they delegated it to a few chiefs; then those chiefs confided it to one alone; then this sole chief usurped it for the benefit of his family. Now men are going back from the hereditary royalty to the elective royalty, and from the elective royalty they will glide into the republic. That is the history of society; these are the stages by which the government comes from the people and returns to it.

Let us, then, not believe that the work of July is a superfetation of a day; let us not imagine that Legitimacy is going to come incontinently to re-establish succession by right of primogeniture: let us neither try to persuade ourselves that July will suddenly die a natural death. No doubt, the Orleans Branch will not take root: it is not to produce that result that so much blood, calamity and genius has been expended during the last half-century! But July, if it do not bring about the final destruction of France with the ruin of all her liberties, will bear its natural fruit: that fruit is democracy. The fruit will perhaps be bitter and blood-red; but the Monarchy is an outlandish graft, which will not take on a republican stem.

And so let us not confound the improvised King with the Revolution from which he sprang by chance: the latter, such as we see it, is acting in contradiction with its principles; it seems to have been born without the power to live, because it is punished with a throne: but let it only drag on a few years, this Revolution, and what will have come and gone will change the data that remain to be known. Grown-up men die, or no longer see things as they used to see them; adolescents attain the age of reason; new generations recruit corrupt generations; the linen soaked in the sores of a hospital, when met by a great stream, soils only the water that flows below those corruptions: down stream and up stream, the current keeps or resumes its limpidity.

[Sidenote: The monarchy of July.]

July, free in its origin, produced only a fettered monarchy; but the time will come when, rid of its crown, it will undergo the transformations which are the law of existences; then it will live in an atmosphere befitting its nature.

The errors of the Republican Party, the illusions of the Legitimist Party are both deplorable and go beyond democracy and royalty: the first thinks that violence is the only means of success; the second thinks that the past is the only harbour of safety. Now, there is a moral law which rules society, a general legitimacy which dominates the particular legitimacy. This great law and this great legitimacy are the enjoyment of the natural rights of man, ruled by his duties; for it is the duty that creates the right, and not the right that creates the duty; the passions and the vices relegate us to the class of slaves. The general legitimacy would have had no obstacle to overcome, if it had kept, as belonging to the same principle, the particular legitimacy.

For the rest, one observation will suffice to make us understand the prodigious and majestic might of the family of our old sovereigns; I have already said it and can not repeat it too often: all the royalties will die with the French Royalty.

In fact, the monarchical idea is wanting at the very moment when the monarch is wanting; we find nothing left around us but the democratic idea. My young King will carry away in his arms the monarchy of the world. It is a good ending.

When I was writing all this on what the Revolution of 1830 might be in the future, I had a difficulty in defending myself against an instinct which spoke to me in contradiction to my argument. I took this instinct for the impulse of my dislike of the troubles of 1830; I distrusted myself and, perhaps, in my too loyal impartiality, I exaggerated the future which the Three Days might bring forth. Well, ten years have passed since the fall of Charles X.: has July sat down? We are now at the commencement of December 1840: to what a depth has France sunk! If I could find any pleasure in the humiliation of a government of French origin, I should experience a sort of pride in re-reading, in the _Congrès de Vérone_, my correspondence with Mr. Canning: certainly it differs from that which has just been communicated to the Chamber of Deputies. Whose is the fault? Is it that of the elected Prince? Is it that of the incapacity of his ministers? Is it that of the nation itself, whose character and genius seem to be exhausted? Our ideas are progressive; but do our manners support them? It would not be surprising if a people which has existed fourteen centuries and which has ended that long career with an explosion of miracles should have come to an end. If you read these Memoirs to their conclusion, you will see that, while doing justice to all that has seemed fine to me in the various epochs of our history, I am of opinion that, in the last result, the old society is coming to an end[328].

Here ends my political career. This career ought also to close my Memoirs, since nothing is left for me but to sum up the experiences of my course. Three catastrophes have marked the three preceding parts of my life: I saw Louis XVI. die during my career as a traveller and a soldier; at the end of my political career, Bonaparte disappeared; Charles X., in falling, closed my political career.

I have fixed the period of a revolution in literature, and, in the same way, in politics, I have formulated the principles of representative government: my diplomatic correspondence is worth quite as much, I think, as my literary compositions. It is possible that both are worth nothing at all, but it is certain that they are of equal value.

In France, in the tribune of the House of Peers and in my writings, I exercised so great an influence that I first placed M. de Villèle in office and that, later, he was forced to retire in the face of my opposition, after he had made himself my enemy. All this is proved by what you have read.

The great event of my political career is the Spanish War. It was for me, in this career, what the _Génie du Christianisme_ had been in my literary career. My destiny picked me out to entrust me with the mighty venture which, under the Restoration, might have set in regular order the world's progress towards the future. It took me out of my dreams, and transformed me into a leader of facts. It set me down to play at a table at which were seated, as my adversaries, the two first ministers of the day, Prince Metternich and Mr. Canning: I won the game against both of them. All the serious minds which the Cabinets at that time numbered agreed that they had met a statesman in me[329]. Bonaparte had foreseen it before them, in spite of my books. I am entitled therefore, without boasting, to believe that the politician in me equalled the writer; but I attach no value to political renown: that is why I have allowed myself to speak of it.

[Sidenote: End of my political career.]

If, at the time of the Peninsular Enterprise, I had not been flung aside by deluded men, the course of our destinies would have changed: France would have resumed her frontiers, the equilibrium of Europe would have been re-established; the Restoration, becoming glorious, might have lived a long time yet, and my diplomatic work would also have marked a stage in our history. Between my two lives, there is only a difference of result. My literary career, completely accomplished, has produced all that it had to produce, because it depended on myself alone. My political career was suddenly stopped in the midst of its successes, because it depended on others.

Nevertheless, I admit that my politics were applicable only to the Restoration. When a transformation takes place in principles, societies and men, what was good yesterday becomes antiquated and lapsed to-day. With regard to Spain, the relations between the Royal Families having ceased, owing to the abolition of the Salic Law, there is no longer a question of creating impenetrable frontiers beyond the Pyrenees; we must accept the field of battle which Austria and England may one day open up to us there; we must take things at the point to which they have come and abandon, not without regret, a firm but reasonable line of conduct, the certain benefits of which were, it is true, long-dated. I feel conscious of having served the Legitimacy as it should be served. I saw the future as clearly as I see it now; only I wished to reach it by a less dangerous road, so that the Legitimacy, which was essential to our constitutional instruction, might not stumble in a precipitous course. To-day, my plans are no longer realizable: Russia is going to turn elsewhere. If, as things now are, I were to enter the Peninsula, whose spirit has had time to change, it would be with other thoughts: I should occupy myself only with the alliance of the nations, suspicious, jealous, passionate, uncertain and variable though it be, and should not dream of relations between the kings. I should say to France:

"You have left the beaten track for the path of precipices: very well, explore its wonders and its perils. Come to us, innovations, enterprises, discoveries! Come, and let arms, if necessary, favour you! Where is there anything new? In the East? Let us march there! Where can we direct our courage and our intelligence? Let us hasten thither! Let us place ourselves at the head of the great rising of the human race; let us not allow ourselves to be outstripped; let the French name go before the others on this crusade, as of old it did to the Tomb of Christ!"

Yes, if I were admitted to my country's councils, I would try to be of use to it in the dangerous principles which it has adopted: to restrain it at present, would mean to condemn it to a base death. I should not be satisfied with speeches: adding works to faith, I should prepare soldiers and millions, I should build ships, like Noe, to make prevision for the deluge, and, if I were asked why, I should answer:

"Because such is France's good pleasure."

My dispatches would warn the Cabinets of Europe that nothing shall stir on the globe without our intervention; that, if the world's shreds are to be distributed, the lion's share shall fall to us. We should cease humbly to ask our neighbours for leave to exist; the heart of France would beat freely, no hand would dare to lay itself upon that heart to count its throbbings; and, since we are seeking new suns, I should dart towards their splendour and no longer await the natural rise of dawn.

God grant that these industrial interests, in which we are to find a prosperity of a new kind, may deceive nobody, that they may prove as fruitful, as civilizing as the moral interests whence the old society issued! Time will teach us whether they be not the barren dreams of those sterile intellects which lack the faculty of rising above the material world.

[Sidenote: With the Legitimacy.]

Although my part finishes with the Legitimacy, all my wishes are for France, whatever be the powers which her improvident whim may lead her to obey. As for myself, I ask for nothing more; I would wish only not too long to outlive the ruins which lie crumbling at my feet. But one's years are like the Alps: scarce has one surmounted the first, before others rise before one. Alas, those last and higher mountains are uninhabited, arid and topped with snow!

[Footnote 263: This book was written in Paris, in August and September 1830, and revised in December 1840.--T.]

[Footnote 264: Michel Chevalier (1806-1879), who later achieved distinction as the promoter of the Treaty of Commerce between France and England.--T.]

[Footnote 265: Ulysse Trélat (_b._ 1795), a well-known mad-doctor and politician. He was Minister of Public Works for six weeks in 1848.--T.]

[Footnote 266: Jean Baptiste Teste (1780-1852), a famous lawyer, went to Belgium after the Second Restoration and became attorney-general to King William I. of the Netherlands. He returned to France at the outbreak of the Revolution and filled several ministerial offices during the reign of Louis-Philippe.--T.]

[Footnote 267: Augustin Guinard has already been mentioned as being among the first to enter the Tuileries on the 29th of July (_supra_, p. 109).--T.]

[Footnote 268: Charles Hingray (1797-1870), a bookseller and politician, and a consistent Radical.--T.]

[Footnote 269: Louis François Auguste Cauchois-Lemaire (1789-1861), a French publicist, founder of the _Nain jaune_ (1814) and author of an _Histoire de la révolution de Juillet_ (1841). He continued his opposition to the Monarchy after the Revolution of July.--T.]

[Footnote 270: The Battle of Jemmapes (6 November 1792), in which Dumouriez defeated the Austrians under the Duke of Saxe-Teschen. Louis-Philippe, then Duc de Chartres, was present at the battle as a lieutenant-general, and is said to have decided the victory, which led to the occupation of Belgium.--T.]

[Footnote 271: The Battle of Valmy (20 September 1792), in which the French under Kellermann, acting under the orders of Dumouriez, repulsed the Prussians, led by the Duke of Brunswick. In this battle, which produced an immense moral effect, the Duc de Chartres also distinguished himself.--T.]

[Footnote 272: Here the _Souvenirs_ of the Duc de Broglie agree with the _Mémoires d'Outre-tombe._ M. de Broglie says:

"Posted up on M. Laffitte's own door, on the Bourse, and in all the
public places, one read a placard worded as follows:

"'Charles X. cannot return to Paris: he has shed the blood of the
people.

"'The Republic would expose us to horrible divisions; it would
embroil us with Europe.

"'The Duc d'Orléans is a Prince devoted to the cause of the
Revolution.

"'The Duc d'Orléans has never fought against us.

"'The Duc d'Orléans was at Jemmapes.

"'The Duc d'Orléans has worn the national colours, the Duc
d'Orléans alone can wear them still.

"'The Duc d'Orléans has declared himself: he accepts the Charter as
we have always desired and understood it.

"'He will hold his crown at the hands of the French People.'

"This last phrase was immediately modified as follows on a second
placard:

"'The Duc d'Orléans makes no declaration: he awaits our will; let
us proclaim that will: he will accept the Charter as we have always
desired and understood it.'"

The Duc de Broglie adds:

"Whence did these placards proceed? We know to-day that they were
the work of Messieurs Thiers and Mignet, and that Paulin the
bookseller, strong in the support of his friends, gave attention to
the printing and the posting. Was M. Laffitte in the secret? There
is reason to presume so."(_Souvenirs du feu Duc de Broglie_,
vol. III.)--B.]

[Footnote 273: Ary Scheffer (1785-1858), the Dutch painter. He was appointed painting-master to the Orleans children, in 1821, and remained on a very intimate footing with the Orleans Family throughout.--T.]

[Footnote 274: Madame Adélaïde (1777-1847), younger sister of Louis-Philippe. She exercised a great ascendant over that Monarch's mind, was his adviser during the whole of his reign, and her death plunged him into a state of dejection which facilitated the Revolution of 1848. She accumulated a large fortune, which she bequeathed to her nephews.--T.]

[Footnote 275: The Duc d'Orléans occupied a royal residence at Neuilly which was demolished in 1848.--T.]

[Footnote 276: The Marquis de Sémonville, as Grand Referendary, had a set of official apartments at the Luxembourg.--T.]

[Footnote 277: Epicurus (342 B.C.--270 B.C.), the Greek philosopher.--T.]

[Footnote 278: Captain Le Motha is the original of the officer immortalized by Alfred de Vigny in the last and admirable episode of his _Servitude et grandeur militaires_, entitled, _La Vie et la mort du capitaine Renaud._--B.]

[Footnote 279: Antoine Louis Marie de Gramont, Duc de Guiche (1755-1836), emigrated to England during the Revolution and, as "Captain Gramont," served in the 10th Hussars. He returned to France with the Duc d'Angoulême as first aide-de-camp, and was created a peer of France in June 1814. He took the oath of allegiance to the new Government after the Revolution of July, and remained a peer till his death.--B.]

[Footnote 280: M. de Guernon-Rainville, who was at Saint-Cloud at that time, thus describes this deplorable scene in his Journal:

"The Prince and the marshal were alone in the green drawing-room at
Saint-Cloud; the explanations of the Duc de Raguse did not satisfy
the Dauphin, who exclaimed:

"'Do you mean to betray us too?'

"At these words, the marshal laid his hand on the hilt of his
sword. The Prince saw the movement, rushed forwards and, trying
to snatch the sword from its scabbard, wounded his hand slightly;
then, flinging the sword on the floor, he seized the marshal by
the collar, threw him on a sofa, and called to the guards who were
in the next room. At that moment, the officer on duty, hearing the
noise, opened the door of the drawing-room; the Prince ordered him
to place the marshal under arrest in his room.

"The King, hearing of this strange scene, reproached the Dauphin
for it, and asked him to become reconciled with the marshal, who
was at once sent for. He made some excuse to the Prince, who
answered:

"'I myself have been in the wrong; but your sword has drawn my
blood, so we are quits....'

"And he offered him his hand."--B.]

[Footnote 281: Charles de Lorraine, Duc de Guise (1571-1640), son of Henri I. Duc de Guise, the second duke who bore the surname of the Balafré.--T.]

[Footnote 282: Antoine Montbreton, Maréchal de Saint-Pol (_circa_ 1550-1593), one of the heads of the League, was assassinated by the Duc de Guise at Rheims, where he had gone to maintain order among the Spanish garrison.--T.]

[Footnote 283: Marcus Junius Brutus (85 B.C.--42 B.C.), one of Cæsar's assassins.--T.]

[Footnote 284: Lucius Junius Brutus, Roman Consul in 509 B.C., after bringing about the expulsion of the Tarquins.--T.]

[Footnote 285: Marie-Amélie Duchesse d'Orléans, later Queen of the French (1782-1866), daughter of Ferdinand I. King of the Two Sicilies, and married to the Duc d'Orléans in 1809.--T.]

[Footnote 286: Ambroise Anatole Augustin Comte, later Marquis de Montesquiou-Fézensac (1788-1878), entered the service as a private in 1806, became a colonel and aide-de-camp to the Emperor in 1814 and, in 1816, aide-de-camp to the Duc d'Orléans. In 1823, he was appointed a lord-in-waiting to the Duchess. He was promoted to brigadier-general in 1831, was a deputy from 1834 to 1841 and, in 1841, was created a peer of France, and a grandee of Spain and a marquis in 1847.--B.]

[Footnote 287: Auguste Marie Baron de Berthois (1787-1870) had served in all the campaigns from 1809 to 1814. He became aide-de-camp to the Duc d'Orléans under the Restoration, and was with him throughout the Days of July. He was promoted to colonel, in 1831, and, later, to brigadier-general. Berthois sat in the Chamber of Deputies from 1832 to 1848.--B.]

[Footnote 288: I give below the text of the two proclamations issued by the Duc d'Orléans and the Chamber of Deputies respectively:

"Inhabitants of Paris!

"The Deputies of France at this moment assembled in Paris have
expressed to me the desire that I should repair to this capital to
exercise the functions of Lieutenant-general of the Kingdom.

"I have not hesitated to come and share your dangers, to place
myself in the midst of your heroic population, and to exert all
my efforts to preserve you from the calamities of civil war and
anarchy.

"On returning to the City of Paris, I wear with pride those
glorious colours which you have resumed and which I myself long
wore.

"The Chambers are going to assemble; they will consider of the
means of securing the reign of the laws and the maintenance of the
rights of the nation.

"The Charter will henceforward be a reality.

"LOUIS-PHILIPPE D'ORLÉANS."

"Frenchmen!

"France is free. Absolute power raised its standard: the heroic
population of Paris has overthrown it. Paris, attacked, has made
the sacred cause triumph, by means which had triumphed in vain in
the elections. A power which usurped our rights and disturbed our
repose threatened at once both liberty and order. We return to the
possession of order and liberty. There is no more fear for acquired
rights, no further barrier between us and the rights which we still
require. A government which may, without delay, secure to us these
advantages is now the first want of our country. Frenchmen, those
of your Deputies who are already in Paris have assembled and, till
the Chambers can regularly intervene, they have invited a Frenchman
who has never fought but for France--the Duc d'Orléans--to exercise
the functions of Lieutenant-general of the Kingdom. This is, in
their opinion, the surest means promptly to accomplish, by peace,
the success of the most legitimate defense.

"The Duc d'Orléans is devoted to the national and constitutional
cause. He has always defended its interests and professed its
principles. He will respect our rights, for he will derive his own
from us. We shall secure to ourselves, by laws, all the guarantees
necessary to strong and durable liberty:

"The re-establishment of the National Guard, with the intervention
of the National Guards in the choice of their officers;

"The intervention of the citizens in the formation of the
departmental and municipal administrations;

"The jury for the transgressions of the press; the legally
organized responsibility of the ministers and of the secondary
agents of the administration;

"The situation and rank of the military legally secured; and

"The re-election of deputies in the place of those appointed
to public offices. Such guarantees will, at length, give to
our institutions, in concert with the head of the state, the
developments of which they have need.

"Frenchmen, the Duc d'Orléans himself has already spoken, and his
language is that which is suitable to a free country:

"'The Chambers,' he says, 'are going to assemble; they will
consider of means to insure the reign of the laws, and the
maintenance of the rights of the nation.

"'The Charter will henceforward be a reality.'"--T.]

[Footnote 289: Louis Philippe, fourth Duc d'Orléans (1725-1785), married, in 1743, to the Princesse Louise de Conti, who died in 1759. In 1773, he married Madame de Montesson, secretly, as his second wife, and passed the last years of his life at Bagnolet in protecting men of letters and artists.--T.]

[Footnote 290: Louis, third Duc d'Orléans (1703-1752), the only quite respectable head of the House of Orléans. He led a life distinguished for its erudition and piety: so much so that he was at one time, although on insufficient grounds, suspected of Jansenism. Louis was married, in 1724, to the Princess Augusta of Baden, who died two years later.--T.]

[Footnote 291: Philip II., second Duc d'Orléans (1674-1723), nephew to Louis XIV. and married in 1692, to his legitimatized daughter, Mademoiselle de Blois, was Regent of France during the minority of Louis XV. ( 1715-1723). The Regent was one of the greatest statesmen that France has seen: his private life was scandalous.--T.]

[Footnote 292: Philip I., first Duc d'Orléans of the second creation (1640-1701), married first, in 1661, to his cousin, the Princess Henrietta of England, who died in 1670, daughter of King Charles I.; secondly, in 1671, to the Princess Charlotte Elizabeth of Bavaria, who died in 1722. It will be seen that, as the descendants of Henry IV., who was the grandfather of Philip I. of Orleans, the Orleans Princes were a younger branch of the House of Bourbon, and that the "Valois" pretensions were utter nonsense. The exact relationship of Louis-Philippe to Charles X. was that of a sixth cousin. The Orleans Princes were Princes of the Blood, but not of France, and were Serene Highnesses down to Louis-Philippe, who was created a Royal Highness by Charles X.--T.]

[Footnote 293: Consisting of a certain number of Republicans who met, musket in hand at a restaurant kept by one Lointier. The principal members of this gathering, including Trélat, Guinard, Charles Teste, Bastide, Poubelle, Charles Hingray, Chevalier and Hubert formed the first rank of the enemies of the Monarchy of July.--B.]

[Footnote 294: Alexandre Edme Baron Méchin (1772-1849), one of the bitterest speakers in the Liberal Opposition during the Restoration. The Government of July made him Prefect of the Nord and a councillor of State.--B.]

[Footnote 295: Jean Pons Guillaume Viennet (1777-1868), a deputy from 1820 to 1837, a peer of France from 1839 to 1848, and a member of the French Academy (1830). He was an indefatigable rhymester; he became the butt of the press, thanks to his ultra-classical and (after 1830) ultra-conservative ideas, and retorted with infinite wit, giving the papers a Roland for their Oliver throughout the duration of the Monarchy of July, from 1830 to 1848.--B.]

[Footnote 296: BLANC: _Histoire de dix ans_, Vol. I.--B.]

[Footnote 297: Pierre Victoire Palma-Cayet (1525-1610), author of the _Chronologie novennaire_, the _Chronologie septennaire_, etc.--T.]

[Footnote 298: This Joubert was the man who, with his friend Dugied, introduced the _Carbonari_ into France. They were both implicated in the so-called Military Conspiracy of the Bazaar, in 1820, and took refuge in Naples. In 1822, Joubert was one of the principal agents of the Belfort Plot. He succeeded in escaping for the second time, to Spain, where he fought against the French and was taken prisoner at the battle of Llers. As he had been twice wounded, he was taken to the Perpignan Hospital, whence Dugied, by means of bribery, procured his escape. He reached Belgium, where he remained till 1830.--B.]

[Footnote 299: Eléonore Louis Godefroy Cavaignac (1801-1845), son of the Conventional, Jean Baptiste Cavaignac, and elder brother to General Eugène Cavaignac. For fifteen years he remained a formidable adversary of the Monarchy of July, fighting it with every weapon and on every ground, in the streets, in the press, in the law-courts, in prison and in exile. He died in harness on the 5th of May 1845.--B.]

[Footnote 300: Marie Anne Joseph Degousée (1795-1862) conspired under the Restoration and under Louis-Philippe, and fought at the barricades in February 1848. He was elected to the Constituent Assembly and supported General Cavaignac's candidature for the Presidency. He failed to secure re-election to the Legislative Assembly and withdrew into private life, resuming his work as a civil engineer.--B.]

[Footnote 301: Gustav Karl Frederik Count Lœwenhielm (1771-1856), the Swedish Minister Plenipotentiary, had been in Paris since 1818.--B.]

[Footnote 302: Sir Charles Stuart, the British Ambassador, had been raised to the peerage as Lord Stuart de Rothesay in 1828. He was Ambassador to the Court of France from 1815 to 1824 and from 1828 to 1830.--T.]

[Footnote 303: This is very nearly what I wrote to Mr. Canning in 1823 (_Cf._ the _Congrès de Vérone_).--_Author's Note._]

[Footnote 304: Russian Ambassador from 1814 to 1835. Pozzo was devoted to Paris, and returned there after his retirement from the London Embassy and diplomatic life in 1839.--T.]

[Footnote 305: Wilhelm Baron von Werther (_d._ 1859), Prussian Minister to Paris from 1824 to 1837 and Prussian Minister of Foreign Affairs from 1837 to 1841. He was the father of Karl Anton Philipp Baron von Werther, who was Ambassador of Prussia and the North German Confederation to Paris from October 1869 until the rupture of diplomatic relations in July 1870.--B.]

[Footnote 306: Henry V. King of France and Navarre (1820-1883), son of the Duc de Berry, was, to the time of his _de jure_ accession, in August 1830, known as Henri Charles Ferdinand Marie Dieudonné d'Artois, Duc de Bordeaux. Later, he assumed the title of Comte de Chambord, by which he was known till his death. He married, in 1846, Maria Teresa Gaetana, daughter of Francis IV. Duke of Modena. Queen Marie-Thérèse died in 1886.--T.]

[Footnote 307: The context would lead the reader to think that Prince Esterhazy was Ambassador to Paris at the time of the Revolution of July. This is not so. The Austrian Ambassador to Paris in 1830 was Count Apponyi.--B.]

[Footnote 308: Pozzo di Borgo was a native of Ajaccio in Corsica. The Blue Ribbon mentioned above was the ribbon of the Order of the Holy Ghost.--T.]

[Footnote 309: Étienne Tardif de Pommeroux, Comte de Bordesoulle (1771-1837), took part in all the wars of the Revolution and the Empire, and rallied to the Bourbons in 1814, accompanying Louis XVIII. to Ghent. He distinguished himself greatly in the Spanish War of 1823 and, on his return, was raised to the peerage. He took the oath of allegiance to Louis-Philippe's Government, and remained a member of the House of Peers till his death.--B.]

[Footnote 310: The sentences here omitted by Chateaubriand ran as follows:

"I charge Lieutenant-general the Vicomte de Foissac-Latour with
this letter to you. He has orders to consult with you as to the
arrangements to be made in favour of those persons who have
accompanied me, as well as those which may be suitable for myself
and the rest of my family.

"We shall afterwards regulate the other measures which may become
necessary in consequence of the change of reign."--T.]

[Footnote 311: Jean François Jacqueminot, later Vicomte de Ham (1787-1865), a colonel of the Empire, and a deputy at the time of the Revolution of July. Louis-Philippe appointed him to various high commands in the National Guard and created him a viscount.--B.]

[Footnote 312: "General Pajol told me, shortly before his death, that, in the course of his long military career, he had never thought himself so near defeat." (MARCELLUS: _Chateaubriand et son temps_, p. 302).--B.]

[Footnote 313: The Duchesse d'Orléans, later Queen of the French, was the sister, the Duchesse de Berry the daughter of Francis I. King of the Two Sicilies.--T.]

[Footnote 314: Saint Hilary Bishop of Poitiers (_d._ 368), honoured on the 14th of January. His chief works are _De Trinitate, De Synodis_ and commentaries.--T.]

[Footnote 315: Louis Clair Comte de Beaupoil de Sainte-Aulaire (1778-1854), brother-in-law to M. Decazes. He sat in the Chamber of Deputies from 1815 to 1829, when, on the death of his father, he entered the Chamber of Peers. He was away from Paris at the time of the Revolution of July, hurried back to Paris, and, after some hesitation, adhered to the new Government and received the Roman Embassy, followed, in 1833, by the Embassy in Vienna and, lastly, by that in London, which he occupied from 1841 to 1847. He was the author of a remarkable Histoire de la Fronde (1827) and, in 1841, was elected a member of the French Academy.--B.]

[Footnote 316: Auxonne Marie Théodose Comte de Thiard de Bissy (1772-1852) was the son of Claude VIII. de Thiard, Comte de Bissy, Lieutenant-general of the King's Armies, Governor of the Town and Castle of Auxonne, Governor of the Palais-Royal and the Tuileries, in Paris, and one of the forty of the French Academy; and nephew of the Comte de Thiard, the King's Commandant in Brittany in 1789, guillotined in 1794, who has been more than once mentioned in Vol. I. of the Memoirs. Auxonne Marie Théodose emigrated in 1791 and served in Condé's Army until 1799. Under the Empire, after being employed by Napoleon in his armies and in diplomacy, he was disgraced, in 1807, and lived in retirement until 1814. He was a representative during the Hundred Days and a deputy from 1820 to 1834 and from 1837 to 1848. Ex-Emigrant and born at the Tuileries though he were, he always sat with the Extreme Left, both under the Restoration and the Government of July.--B.]

[Footnote 317: François Duris-Dufresne (1769-1837) was also an ex-officer. After forming part of the Legislative Body from the Year XII. to 1809, he entered the Chamber of Deputies in 1827 and voted with the Left. He adhered to the Revolution of July and the usurpation of Louis-Philippe; but events soon drove him into the Dynastic Opposition. From 1831 to 1834, he sat with the Extreme Left.--B.]

[Footnote 318: Some editions have "peerage" instead of "country."--T.]

[Footnote 319: The Baron Pasquier had been President of the House of Peers since the 4th of August.--B.]

[Footnote 320: The Baron Louis was Minister of Finance.--B.]

[Footnote 321: The Marquis de Sémonville continued Grand Refendary.--B.]

[Footnote 322: Dupont de l'Eure (1767-1855) had been President of the Imperial Court at Rouen. He became Minister of Justice after the Revolution of 1830, but soon went over to the Opposition, where he won an enormous popularity. In 1848, he was elected, by acclamation, President of the Provisional Government, a position which, owing to his great age, he held only nominally.--T.]

[Footnote 323: Edward III. landed near Cherbourg in 1346, besieged the city and laid waste the surrounding country.--T.]

[Footnote 324: Anne Hilarion de Contentin, Comte de Tourville (1642-1701), was defeated off the Hogue in 1692 by the combined Dutch and English fleets; his own fleet was destroyed.--T.]

[Footnote 325: The famous dyke of Cherbourg, which turned that harbour into a first-class port, was built under Louis XVI.--T.]

[Footnote 326: William I. King of England (1027-1087), surnamed the Conqueror, landed at Pevensey on the 28th of September 1066; Charles X. landed, on the 17th of August 1830, at Spithead.--T.]

[Footnote 327: Holyrood Palace had been the residence of Charles X. during the First Emigration.--T.]

[Footnote 328: Paris, 3 December 1840.--_Author's Note._]

[Footnote 329: _Cf._ the letters and dispatches of the different Courts, quoted in the _Congrès de Vérone_; consult also the _Ambassade de Rome.--Author's Note._]