[1] F. A. Regnier de Jarjayes (1745-1822). See P. Gaulot, _Un Complot
sous la Terreur_.
[2] Jean, baron de Batz (1761-1822), attempted to carry off the
dauphin in 1794. See G. Lenôtre, _Un Conspirateur royaliste pendant
la Terreur, le baron de Batz_ (1896).
[3] Charlotte Walpole (c. 1785-1836), an English actress who married
in 1779 Sir Edward Atkyns, and spent most of her life in France. She
expended large sums in trying to secure the escape of the prisoners
of the Temple. See F. Barbey, _A Friend of Marie Antoinette_ (Eng.
ed. 1906).
[4] Antoine Simon (1736-1794) married Marie Jeanne Aladame, and
belonged to the section of the Cordeliers. They owed their position
to Anaxagoras Chaumette, procureur of the Commune, and to the fact
that Simon had prevented one of the attempts of the baron de Batz.
Simon was sent to the guillotine with Robespierre in 1794, and two
years later Marie Jeanne entered a hospital for incurables in the rue
de Sèvres, where she constantly affirmed the dauphin's escape. She
was secretly visited after the Restoration by the duchess of
Angoulême. On the 16th of November 1816, she was interrogated by the
police, who frightened her into silence about the supposed
substitution of another child for the dauphin. She died in 1819. See
G. Lenôtre, _Vieilles maisons, vieux papiers_ (2nd series, 1903).
[5] In a bulletin dated May 17-24, Paris, and enclosed by Francis
Drake (June 17, 1794) at Milan to Lord Grenville, it is stated (Hist.
MSS. Comm. Fortescue Papers at Dropmore, vol. ii. 576-577) that
Robespierre in the night of 23-24 May fetched the king (the dauphin)
from the Temple and took him to Meudon. "The fact is certain,
although only known to the Committee of Public Safety. It is said to
be ascertained that he was brought back to the Temple the night of
24-25th, and that this was a test to assure the ease of seizing him."
This police report at least serves to show the kind of rumour then
current.
LOUIS XVIII. (LOUIS LE DÉSIRÉ) (1755-1824). Louis-Stanislas-Xavier,
comte de Provence, third son of the dauphin Louis, son of Louis XV., and
of Maria Josepha of Saxony, was born at Versailles on the 17th of
November 1755. His education was supervised by the devout duc de la
Vauguyon, but his own taste was for the writings of Voltaire and the
encyclopaedists. On the 14th of May 1771 took place his marriage with
Louise-Marie-Joséphine of Savoy, by whom he had no children. His
position at court was uncomfortable, for though ambitious and conscious
of possessing greater abilities than his brother (Louis XVI.), his scope
for action was restricted; he consequently devoted his energies largely
to intrigue, especially against Marie Antoinette, whom he hated.[1]
During the long absence of heirs to Louis XVI., "Monsieur," as heir to
the throne, courted popularity and took an active part in politics, but
the birth of a dauphin (1781) was a blow to his ambitions.[2] He opposed
the revival of the _parlements_, wrote a number of political
pamphlets,[3] and at the Assembly of Notables presided, like the other
princes of the blood, over a bureau, to which was given the name of the
_Comité des sages_; he also advocated the double representation of the
_tiers_. At the same time he cultivated literature, entertaining poets
and writers both at the Luxembourg and at his château of Brunoy (see
Dubois-Corneau, _Le Comte de Provence à Brunoy_, 1909), and gaining a
reputation for wit by his verses and _mots_ in the salon of the charming
and witty comtesse de Balbi, one of Madame's ladies, who had become his
mistress,[4] and till 1793 exerted considerable influence over him. He
did not emigrate after the taking of the Bastille, but, possibly from
motives of ambition, remained in Paris. Mirabeau thought at one time of
making him chief minister in his projected constitutional government
(see _Corr. de Mirabeau et La Marck_, ed. Bacourt, i. 434, 436, 442),
but was disappointed by his caution and timidity. The _affaire Favras_
(Dec. 1789) aroused great feeling against Monsieur, who was believed by
many to have conspired with Favras, only to abandon him (see Lafayette's
_Mems._ and _Corr. of Mirabeau_). In June 1791, at the time of the
flight to Varennes, Monsieur also fled by a different route, and, in
company with the comte d'Avaray[5]--who subsequently replaced Mme de
Balbi as his confidant, and largely influenced his policy during the
emigration--succeeded in reaching Brussels, where he joined the comte
d'Artois and proceeded to Coblenz, which now became the headquarters of
the emigration.
Here, living in royal state, he put himself at the head of the
counter-revolutionary movement, appointing ambassadors, soliciting the
aid of the European sovereigns, and especially of Catherine II. of
Russia. Out of touch with affairs in France and surrounded by violent
anti-revolutionists, headed by Calonne and the comte d'Artois, he
followed an entirely selfish policy, flouting the National Assembly (see
his reply to the summons of the National Assembly, in Daudet, _op. cit._
i. 96), issuing uncompromising manifestoes (Sept. 1791, Aug. 1792, &c.),
and obstructing in every way the representatives of the king and
queen.[6] After Valmy he had to retire to Hamm in Westphalia, where, on
the death of Louis XVI., he proclaimed himself regent; from here he went
south, with the idea of encouraging the royalist feeling in the south of
France, and settled at Verona, where on the death of Louis XVII. (8th of
June 1795) he took the title of Louis XVIII. At this time ended his
_liaison_ with Mme de Balbi, and the influence of d'Avaray reached its
height. From this time onward his life is a record of constant
wanderings, negotiations and conspiracies. In April 1796 he joined
Condé's army on the German frontier, but was shortly requested to leave
the country, and accepted the hospitality of the duke of Brunswick at
Blanckenberg till 1797, when, this refuge being no longer open to him,
the emperor Paul I. permitted him to settle at Mittau in Courland, where
he stayed till 1801. All this time he was in close communication with
the royalists in France, but was much embarrassed by the conflicting
policy pursued by the comte d'Artois from England, and was largely at
the mercy of corrupt and dishonest agents.[7] At Mittau was realized his
cherished plan of marrying Madame Royale, daughter of Louis XVI., to the
duc d'Angoulême, elder son of the comte d'Artois. From Mittau, too, was
sent his well-known letter to Bonaparte (1799) calling upon him to play
the part of Monk, a proposal contemptuously refused (E. Daudet, _Hist.
de l'émigration_, ii. 371, 436), though Louis in turn declined to accept
a pension from Bonaparte, and later, in 1803, though his fortunes were
at their lowest ebb, refused to abdicate at his suggestion and accept an
indemnity.
Suddenly expelled from Mittau in 1801 by the capricious Paul I., Louis
made his way, in the depth of winter, to Warsaw, where he stayed for
three years. All this time he was trying to convert France to the
royalist cause, and had a "_conseil royal_" in Paris, founded at the end
of 1799 by Royer-Collard, Montesquiou and Clermont-Gallerande, the
actions of which were much impeded by the activity of the rival
committee of the comte d'Artois (see E. Daudet, _op. cit._ ii., and
Remâcle, _Bonaparte et les Bourbons_, Paris, 1899), but after 1800, and
still more after the failure of the royalist conspiracy of Cadoudal,
Pichegru and Moreau, followed by the execution of the duc d'Enghien
(March 1804), and the assumption by Napoleon of the title of emperor
(May 1804), the royalist cause appeared quite hopeless. In September
1804 Louis met the comte d'Artois at Calmar in Sweden, and they issued a
protest against Napoleon's action, but being warned that he must not
return to Poland, he gained permission from Alexander I. again to retire
to Mittau. After Tilsit, however (1807), he was again forced to depart,
and took refuge in England, where he stayed first at Gosfield in Essex,
and afterwards (1809 onwards) at Hartwell in Buckinghamshire. In 1810
his wife died, and in 1811 d'Avaray died, his place as favourite being
taken by the comte de Blacas.[8] After Napoleon's defeats in 1813 the
hopes of the royalists revived, and Louis issued a fresh manifesto, in
which he promised to recognize the results of the Revolution.
Negotiations were also opened with Bernadotte, who seemed willing to
support his cause, but was really playing for his own hand.
In March 1814 the Allies entered Paris, and thanks to Talleyrand's
negotiations the restoration of the Bourbons was effected, Louis XVIII.
entering Paris on the 2nd of May 1814, after issuing the declaration of
St Ouen, in which he promised to grant the nation a constitution
(_octroyer une charte_). He was now nearly sixty, wearied by adversity,
and a sufferer from gout and obesity. But though clear-sighted, widely
read and a good diplomatist, his impressionable and sentimental nature
made him too subject to personal and family influences. His concessions
to the reactionary and clerical party of the _émigrés_, headed by the
comte d'Artois and the duchesse d'Angoulême, aroused suspicions of his
loyalty to the constitution, the creation of his _Maison militaire_
alienated the army, and the constant presence of Blacas made the
formation of a united ministry impossible. After the Hundred Days,
during which the king was forced to flee to Ghent, the dismissal of
Blacas was made one of the conditions of his second restoration. On the
8th of July he again entered Paris, "in the baggage train of the allied
armies," as his enemies said, but in spite of this was received with the
greatest enthusiasm[9] by a people weary of wars and looking for
constitutional government. He was forced to retain Talleyrand and Fouché
in his first ministry, but took the first opportunity of ridding himself
of them when the elections of 1815 assured him of a strong royalist
majority in the chamber (the _chambre introuvable_, a name given it by
Louis himself). At this time he came into contact with the young comte
(afterwards duc) Decazes, prefect of the police under Fouché, and
minister of police in Richelieu's ministry, who now became his favourite
and gained his entire confidence (see E. Daudet, _Louis XVIII. et le duc
Decazes_). Having obtained a ministry in which he could trust, having as
members the duc de Richelieu and Decazes, the king now gave it his loyal
support and did his best to shield his ministers from the attacks of the
royal family. In September 1816, alarmed at the violence of the _chambre
introuvable_, he was persuaded to dissolve it. An attempt on the part of
the Ultras to regain their ascendancy over the king, by conniving at the
sudden return of Blacas from Rome to Paris,[10] ended in failure.
The events and ministerial changes of Louis XVIII.'s reign are described
under the article FRANCE: _History_, but it may be said here that the
king's policy throughout was one of prudence and common sense. His
position was more passive than active, and consisted in giving his
support as far as possible to the ministry of the day. While Decazes
was still in power, the king's policy to a large extent followed his,
and was rather liberal and moderate, but after the assassination of the
duc de Berry (1820), when he saw that Decazes could no longer carry on
the government, he sorrowfully acquiesced in his departure, showered
honours upon him, and transferred his support to Richelieu, the head of
the new ministry. In the absence of Decazes a new favourite was found to
amuse the king's old age, Madame du Cayla (Zoé Talon, comtesse du
Cayla), a protégée of the vicomte Sosthène de la Rochefoucauld and
consequently a creature of the Ultras. As the king became more and more
infirm, his power of resistance to the intrigues of the Ultras became
weaker. The birth of a posthumous son to the duc de Berry (Sept. 1820),
the death of Napoleon (5th of May 1821) and the resignation of Richelieu
left him entirely in their hands, and after Villèle had formed a
ministry of a royalist character the comte d'Artois was associated with
the government, which passed more and more out of the king's hands. He
died on the 16th of September 1824, worn out in body, but still
retaining flashes of his former clear insight and scepticism. The
character of Louis XVIII. may be summed up in the words of Bonaparte,
quoted by Sorel (_L'Europe et la Rév. fr._ viii. 416 footnote), "C'est
Louis XVI. avec moins de franchise et plus d'esprit." He had all the
Bourbon characteristics, especially their love of power, combined with a
certain nobility of demeanour, and a consciousness of his dignity as
king. But his nature was cold, unsympathetic and calculating, combined
with a talent for intrigue, to which was added an excellent memory and a
ready wit. An interesting judgment of him is contained in _Queen
Victoria's Letters_, vol. i., in a letter of Leopold I., king of the
Belgians, to the queen before her accession, dated the 18th of November
1836, "Poor Charles X. is dead.... History will state that Louis XVIII.
was a most liberal monarch, reigning with great mildness and justice to
his end, but that his brother, from his despotic and harsh disposition,
upset all the other had done and lost the throne. Louis XVIII. was a
clever, hard-hearted man, shackled by no principle, very proud and
false. Charles X. an honest man, a kind friend," &c. &c. This seems
fairly just as a personal estimate, though it does not do justice to
their respective political rôles.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.--There is no trustworthy or complete edition of the
writings and correspondence of Louis XVIII. The _Mémoires de Louis
XVIII. recueillis et mis en ordre par M. le duc de D. ..._ (12 vols.,
Paris, 1832-1833) are compiled by Lamothe-Langon, a well-known
compiler of more or less apocryphal memoirs. From the hand of Louis
XVIII. are: _Relation d'un voyage à Bruxelles et à Coblentz_, 1791
(Paris, 1823, with dedication to d'Avaray); and _Journal de
Marie-Thérèse de France, duchesse d'Angoulême, corrigé et annoté par
Louis XVIII._, ed. Imbert de St Amand (Paris, 1896). Some of his
letters are contained in collections, such as _Lettres d'Artwell;
correspondance politique et privée de Louis XVIII., roi de France_
(Paris, 1830; letters addressed to d'Avaray); _Lettres et instructions
de Louis XVIII. au comte de Saint-Priest_, ed. Barante (Paris, 1845);
_Talleyrand et Louis XVIII., corr. pendant le congrès de Vienne,
1814-1815_, ed. Pallain (1881; trans., 2 vols., 1881); see also the
corr. of Castlereagh, Metternich, J. de Maistre, the Wellington
Dispatches, &c., and such collections as _Corr. diplomatique de Pozzo
di Borgo avec le comte de Nesselrode_ (2 vols., 1890-1897), the
correspondence of C. de Rémusat, Villèle, &c. The works of E. Daudet
are of the greatest importance, and based on original documents; the
chief are: _La Terreur Blanche_ (Paris, 1878); _Hist. de la
restauration 1814-1830_ (1882); _Louis XVIII. et le duc Decazes_
(1899); _Hist. de l'émigration_, in three studies: (i.) _Les Bourbons
et la Russie_ (1886), (ii.) _Les Émigrés et la seconde coalition_
(1886), (iii.) _Coblenz_, 1789-1793 (1890). Developed from these with
the addition of much further material is his _Hist. de l'émigration_
(3 vols., 1904-1907). Also based on original documents is E. Romberg
and A. Malet, _Louis XVIII. et les cent-jours à Gand_ (1898). See also
G. Stenger, _Le Retour des Bourbons_ (1908); Cte. L. de Remâcle,
_Bonaparte et les Bourbons. Relations secrèts des agents du cte. de
Provence sous le consulat_ (Paris, 1899). For various episodes, see
Vicomte de Reiset, _La Comtesse de Balbi_ (Paris, 1908; contains a
long bibliography, chiefly of memoirs concerning the emigration, and
is based on documents); J. B. H. R. Capefigue, _La Comtesse du Cayla_
(Paris, 1866); J. Turquan, _Les Favorites de Louis XVIII._ (Paris,
1900); see also the chief memoirs of the period, such as those of
Talleyrand, Chateaubriand, Guizot, duc de Broglie, Villèle, Vitrolles,
Pasquier, the comtesse de Boigne (ed. Nicoullaud, Paris, 1907), the
Vicomte L. F. Sosthène de la Rochefoucauld (15 vols., Paris,
1861-1864); and the writings of Benjamin Constant, Chateaubriand, &c.
General Works.--See the histories of France, the Emigration, the
Restoration and especially the very full bibliographies to chapters
i., ii. and iii. of _Cambridge Modern History_, and Lavisse and
Rambaud, _Hist. générale_, vol. x. (C. B. P.)