BOOK VII[1]

THE MEMOIRS OF FRANÇOIS RENÉ

VICOMTE DE CHATEAUBRIAND

SOMETIME AMBASSADOR TO ENGLAND

BEING A TRANSLATION BY ALEXANDER TEIXEIRA DE MATTOS

OF THE MÉMOIRES D'OUTRE-TOMBE WITH ILLUSTRATIONS

FROM CONTEMPORARY SOURCES. In 6 Volumes. Vol. IV

"NOTRE SANG A TEINT

LA BANNIÈRE DE FRANCE"

LONDON: PUBLISHED BY FREEMANTLE

AND CO. AT 217 PICCADILLY MDCCCCII

CONTENTS

VOLUME IV

BOOK VII 1-30

Changes in the world--The years 1815 and 1816--I am made a peer of

France--My first appearance in the tribune--Various speeches--The

_Monarchie selon la Charte_--Louis XVIII.--M. Decazes--I am struck

off the list of ministers of State--I sell my books and my Valley--My

speeches continued, in 1817 and 1818--The Piet meetings--The

_Conservateur_--Concerning the morality of material interests and that

of duty--The year 1820--Death of the Duc de Berry--Birth of the Duc de

Bordeaux--The market-women of Bordeaux--I cause M. de Villèle and M.

de Corbière to take office for the first time--My letter to the Duc

de Richelieu--Note from the Duc de Richelieu and my reply--Notes from

M. de Polignac--Letters from M. de Montmorency and M. Pasquier--I am

appointed Ambassador to Berlin--I leave for that embassy

BOOK VIII 31-63

The year 1821--The Berlin, Embassy--I arrive in Berlin--M.

Ancillon--The Royal Family--Celebrations for the marriage of the

Grand-duke Nicholas--Berlin society--Count von Humboldt--Herr von

Chamisso--Ministers and ambassadors--The Princess William--The

Opera--A musical meeting--My first dispatches--M. de Bonnay--The

Park--The Duchess of Cumberland--Commencement of a Memorandum on

Germany--Charlottenburg--Interval between the Berlin Embassy and

the London Embassy--Baptism of M. le Duc de Bordeaux--Letter to M.

Pasquier--Letter from M. de Bernstoff--Letter from M. Ancillon--Last

letter from the Duchess of Cumberland--M. de Villèle, Minister of

Finance--I am appointed Ambassador to London

BOOK IX 64-112

The year 1822--My first dispatches from London--Conversation with

George IV. on M. Decazes--The noble character of our diplomacy under

the Legitimacy--A parliamentary sitting--English society--Continuation

of the dispatches--Resumption of parliamentary labours--A ball

for the Irish--Duel between the Duke of Bedford and the Duke of

Buckingham--Dinner at Royal Lodge--The Marchioness Conyngham

and her secret--Portraits of the ministers--Continuation of my

dispatches--Parleys on the Congress of Verona--Letter to M. de

Montmorency; his reply foreshadowing a refusal--A more favourable

letter from M. de Villèle--I write to Madame de Duras--Death of

Lord Londonderry--Another letter to M. de Montmorency--Trip to

Hartwell--Note from M. de Villèle announcing my nomination to the

Congress--The end of old England--Charlotte--Reflexions--I leave

London--The years 1824, 1825, 1826 and 1827--Deliverance of the King

of Spain--My dismissal--The Opposition follows me--Last diplomatic

notes--Neuchâtel, in Switzerland--Death of Louis XVIII.--Coronation of

Charles X.--Reception of the knights of the Orders

BOOK X 113-146

I collect my former adversaries around myself--My public

charges--Extract from my polemics after my fall--Visit to

Lausanne--Return to Paris--The Jesuits--Letter from M. de Montlosier

and my reply--Continuation of my polemics--Letter from General

Sébastiani--Death of General Foy--The Law of Justice and Love--Letter

from M. Étienne--Letter from M. Benjamin Constant--I attain the

highest pitch of my political importance--Article on the King's

saint's-day--Withdrawal of the law on the police of the press--Paris

illuminated--Note from M. Michaud--M. de Villèle's irritation--Charles

X. proposes to review the National Guard on the Champ de Mars--I write

to him: my letter--The review--The National Guard disbanded--The

Elective Chamber is dissolved--The new Chamber--Refusals to

co-operate--Fall of the Villèle Ministry--I contribute towards forming

the new ministry and accept the Roman Embassy--Examination of a reproach

BOOK XI 147-219

Madame Récamier--Childhood of Madame Récamier described by M. Benjamin

Constant--Letter to Madame Récamier from Lucien Bonaparte--Continuation

of M. Benjamin Constant's narrative: Madame de Staël--Madame

Récamier's journey to England--Madame de Staël's first journey to

Germany--Madame Récamier in Paris--Plans of the generals--Portrait

of Bernadotte--Trial of Moreau--Letters from Moreau and Masséna to

Madame Récamier--Death of M. Necker--Return of Madame de Staël--Madame

Récamier at Coppet--Prince Augustus of Prussia--Madame de Staël's

second journey to Germany--The Château de Chaumont--Letter from

Madame de Staël to Bonaparte--Madame Récamier and M. Mathieu de

Montmorency exiled--Madame Récamier at Châlons--Madame Récamier at

Lyons--Madame de Chevreuse--Spanish prisoners--Madame Récamier in

Rome--Albano-Canova: his letters--The Albano fisherman--Madame Récamier

in Naples--The Duc de Rohan-Chabot--King Murat: his letters--Madame

Récamier returns to France--Letter from Madame de Genlis--Letters from

Benjamin Constant--Articles by Benjamin Constant on Bonaparte's return

from Elba--Madame de Krüdener--The Duke of Wellington--I meet Madame

Récamier again--Death of Madame de Staël--The Abbaye-aux-Bois

BOOK XII 220-304

My Embassy to Rome--Three kinds of materials-Diary of the road--Letters

to Madame Récamier--Leo XII. and the Cardinals--The ambassadors--The

old artists and the new artists--Old Roman society--Present manners

of Rome--Town and country--Letter to M. Villemain--Letter to Madame

Récamier--Explanation concerning the memorandum I am about to

quote--Letter to M. le Comte de La Feironnays--Memorandum on Eastern

Affairs--Letters to Madame Récamier--Letter to M. Thierry--Dispatch to

M. le Comte de La Ferronnays--More letters to Madame Récamier--Dispatch

to M. le Comte Portalis--Death of Leo XII.--Dispatch to M. le Comte

Portalis--Letter to Madame Récamier

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

VOL. IV

George IV

The Duc Decazes

The Duc de Berry

Frederica Queen of Hanover

The Duc de Richelieu

The Marquess of Londonderry

Madame Récamier

Pope Leo XII

[Illustration: GEORGE IV.]

THE

MEMOIRS OF CHATEAUBRIAND

VOLUME IV

BOOK VII[1]

Changes in the world--The years 1815 and 1816--I am made a peer of

France--My first appearance in the tribune--Various speeches--The

_Monarchie selon la Charte_--Louis XVIII.--M. Decazes--I am struck

off the list of ministers of State--I sell my books and my Valley--My

speeches continued, in 1817 and 1818--The Piet meetings--The

_Conservateur_--Concerning the morality of material interests and that

of duty--The year 1820--Death of the Duc de Berry--Birth of the Duc de

Bordeaux--The market-women of Bordeaux--I cause M. de Villèle and M.

de Corbière to take office for the first time--My letter to the Duc

de Richelieu--Note from the Duc de Richelieu and my reply--Notes from

M. de Polignac--Letters from M. de Montmorency and M. Pasquier--I am

appointed Ambassador to Berlin--I leave for that embassy.

To fall back from Bonaparte and the Empire to that which followed them

is to fall from reality into nothingness, from the summit of a mountain

into a gulf. Did not everything finish with Napoleon? Ought I to have

spoken of anything else? What person can possess any interest beside

him? Of whom and of what can there be any question after such a man?

Dante alone had the right to associate himself with the great poets

whom he meets in the regions of another life. How can one speak of

Louis XVIII. in the stead of the Emperor? I blush when I think that, at

the present moment, I have to cant about a crowd of petty creatures, of

whom I myself am one, dubious and nocturnal beings that we were on a

stage from which the great sun had disappeared.

The Bonapartists themselves had shrivelled up. Their members had become

bent and shrunk; the soul was lacking to the new universe so soon as

Bonaparte withdrew his breath; objects faded from view from the moment

when they were no longer illuminated by the light which had given them

colour and relief. At the commencement of these Memoirs, I had only

myself to speak of: well, there is always a sort of paramountcy in

man's individual solitude. Later, I was surrounded by miracles: those

miracles kept up my voice; but at this present moment there is no more

conquest of Egypt, no more Battles of Marengo, Austerlitz and Jena, no

more retreat from Russia, no more invasion of France, capture of Paris,

return from Elba, Battle of Waterloo, funeral at St. Helena: what

remains? Portraits to which only the genius of Molière could lend the

gravity of comedy!

While expressing myself upon our worthlessness, I taxed my conscience

home: I asked myself whether I did not purposely incorporate myself

with the nullity of these times, in order to acquire the right to

condemn the others, persuaded though I were _in petto_ that my name

would be read in the midst of all these obliterations. No, I am

convinced that we shall all fade out: first, because we have not in

us the wherewithal to live; secondly, because the age in which we are

commencing or ending our days has itself not the wherewithal to make

us live. Generations mutilated, exhausted, disdainful, faithless,

consecrated to the annihilation which they love, are unable to bestow

immortality; they have no power to create a renown; if you were to nail

your ear to their mouth, you would hear nothing: no sound issues from

the heart of the dead.

One thing strikes me, however: the little world to which I am now

coming was superior to the world which succeeded it in 1830; we were

giants in comparison with the society of maggots that has engendered

itself.

The Restoration offers at least one point in which we can find

importance: after the dignity of one man, that man having passed, there

was born again the dignity of mankind. If despotism has been replaced

by liberty, if we understand anything of independence, if we have lost

the habit of grovelling, if the rights of human nature are no longer

disregarded, we owe these things to the Restoration. Wherefore also I

threw myself into the fray in order, as far as I could, to revive the

species when the individual had come to an end.

Come, let us pursue our task! Let us descend, with a groan, to myself

and my colleagues. You have seen me amid my dreams; you are about to

see me in my realities: if the interest decreases, if I fall, reader,

be just, make allowance for my subject!

[Sidenote: I am made a peer of France.]

After the second return of the King and the final disappearance of

Bonaparte, the Ministry being in the hands of M. le Duc d'Otrante and

M. le Prince de Talleyrand, I was appointed president of the electoral

college of the Department of the Loiret. The elections of 1815 gave

the King the _Chambre introuvable._[2] I was carrying all the votes

at Orleans, when I received the Order which called me to the House

of Peers[3]. My active career had hardly commenced, when it suddenly

changed its course: what would it have been if I had been sent to the

Elective Chamber? It is fairly probable that that career would, in

the event of my success, have ended in the Ministry of the Interior,

instead of taking me to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. My habits and

manners were more in touch with the peerage, and, although the latter

became hostile to me from the first moment, by reason of my Liberal

opinions, it is nevertheless certain that my doctrines concerning the

liberty of the press and against the vassalage to foreigners gave the

Noble Chamber the popularity which it enjoyed so long as it suffered my

opinions.

I received, at my entrance, the only honour which my colleagues ever

did me during my fifteen years' residence in their midst: I was

appointed one of the four secretaries for the session of 1816. Lord

Byron met with no more favour when he appeared in the House of Lords,

and he left it for good: I ought to have returned to my deserts.

My first appearance in the tribune was to make a speech on the

irremovability of the judges[4]: I applauded the principle, but

censured its immediate application. At the Revolution of 1830, the

members of the Left who were most devoted to that revolution wished to

suspend the irremovability for a time.

On the 22nd of February 1816, the Duc de Richelieu brought us the

autograph will of the Queen. I ascended the tribune, and said:

"He who has preserved for us the will of Marie-Antoinette[5] had bought

the property of Montboisier: himself one of Louis XVI.'s judges, he

raised in that property a monument to the memory of the defender of

Louis XVI., and himself engraved on that monument an epitaph in French

verse in praise of M. de Malesherbes. This astonishing impartiality

shows that all is misplaced in the moral world."

On the 12th of March 1816, the question of the ecclesiastical

pensions[6] was discussed:

"You would," I said, "refuse an allowance to the poor vicar who

devotes the remainder of his days to the altar, and you would accord

pensions to Joseph Lebon[7], who struck off so many heads; to François

Chabot[8], who asked for a law against the Emigrants of so simple a

character that a child might lead them to the guillotine; to Jacques

Roux[9], who, refusing at the Temple to receive Louis XVI.'s will,

replied to the unfortunate monarch:

"'My only business is to take you to your death.'"

A bill had been introduced into the Hereditary Chamber relating to the

elections. I declared myself in favour of the integral renewal of the

Chamber of Deputies. It was not until 1824, being then a minister, that

I passed it into law.

It was also in this first speech on the law governing elections, in

1816[10], that I said, in reply to an opponent:

"I will not refer to what has been said about Europe watching our

discussions. Speaking for myself, gentlemen, I doubtless owe to the

French blood that flows in my veins the impatience which I experience

when, in order to influence my vote, people talk to me of opinions

existing outside my country; and, if civilized Europe tried to impose

the Charter on me, I should go to live in Constantinople."

[Sidenote: The Chamber of Peers.]

On the 9th of April 1816, I introduced a motion to the Chamber relating

to the Barbary Powers. The house decided that there was cause for its

discussion. I was already thinking of combating slavery, before I

obtained that favourable decision from the Peers, which was the first

political intervention of a great Power on behalf of the Greeks:

"I have seen the ruins of Carthage," I said to my colleagues; "I have

met among those ruins the successors of the unhappy Christians for

whose deliverance St. Louis sacrificed his life. Philosophy can take

its share of the glory attached to the success of my motion and boast

of having obtained in an age of light that for which religion strove in

vain in an age of darkness."

I found myself in an assembly in which my words, for three-fourths of

the time, turned against myself. One can move a popular chamber; an

aristocratic chamber is deaf. With no gallery, speaking in private

before old men, dried-up remains of the old Monarchy, of the Revolution

and of the Empire, anything that rose above the most commonplace seemed

madness. One day, the front row of arm-chairs, quite close to the

tribune, was filled with venerable peers, one more deaf than the other,

their heads bent forward, and holding to their ears a trumpet with the

mouth turned towards the tribune. I sent them to sleep, which is very

natural. One of them dropped his ear-trumpet; his neighbour, awakened

by the fall, wanted politely to pick up his colleague's trumpet; he

fell down. The worst of it was that I began to laugh, although I was

just then speaking pathetically on some subject of humanity, I forget

what.

The speakers who succeeded in that Chamber were those who spoke

without ideas, in a level and monotonous tone, or who found terms of

sensibility only in order to melt with pity for the poor ministers. M.

de Lally-Tolendal thundered in favour of the public liberties: he made

the vaults of our solitude resound with the praises of three or four

English Lord Chancellors, his ancestors, he said. When his panegyric

of the liberty of the press was finished, came a "but" based upon

"circumstances," which "but" left our honour safe, under the useful

supervision of the censorship.

The Restoration gave an impulse to men's minds; it set free the thought

suppressed by Bonaparte: the intellect, like a caryatic figure relieved

of the entablature that bent its brow, lifted up its head. The Empire

had struck France with dumbness; liberty restored touched her and gave

her back speech: oratorical talents existed which took up matters where

the Mirabeaus and Cazalès had left them, and the Revolution continued

its course.

My labours were not limited to the tribune, so new to me. Appalled at

the systems which men were embracing and at France's ignorance of the

principles of representative government, I wrote and had printed the

_Monarchie selon la Charte._ This publication marked one of the great

epochs of my political life: it made me take rank among the publicists;

it served to determine opinion on the nature of our government. The

English papers praised the work to the skies; among us, the Abbé

Morellet even could not recover from the transformation of my style and

the dogmatic precision of the truths.

The _Monarchie selon la Charte_ is a constitutional catechism: from

it have been taken the greater part of the propositions which are put

forward as new to-day. Thus the principle that "the King reigns but

does not govern" is found fully set forth in Chapters IV., V., VI. and

VII. on the Royal Prerogative.

The constitutional principles having been laid down in the first part

of the _Monarchie selon la Charte_, I examine in the second the systems

of the three ministries which till then had followed upon one another,

from 1814 to 1816; in this part are brought together predictions

too well verified since and expositions of doctrines at that time

unperceived. These words appear in Chapter XXVI., in the Second Part:

"It passes as unquestionable, in a certain party, that a

revolution of the nature of our own can end only by a change

of dynasty; others, more moderate, say by a change in the

order of right of succession to the Crown."

As I was finishing my work, appeared the ordinance of the 5th of

September 1816[11]: this measure dispersed the few Royalists assembled

to reconstruct the Legitimate Monarchy. I hastened to write the

_Postscript_, which caused an explosion of anger on the part of M. le

Duc de Richelieu and of Louis XVIII.'s favourite, M. Decazes.

[Sidenote: Seizure of my pamphlet.]

The _Postscript_ added, I ran to M. Le Normant, my publisher's. On

arriving, I found constables and a police-commissary making out

instruments. They had seized parcels and affixed seals. I had not

defied Bonaparte to be intimidated by M. Decazes: I objected to the

seizure; I declared that, as a free Frenchman and a peer of France, I

would yield only to force. The force arrived and I withdrew. I went

on the 18th of September to Messieurs Louis-Marthe Mesnier and his

colleague, notaries-royal; I protested in their office and called upon

them to register my statement of the fact of the apprehension of my

work, wishing to ensure the rights of French citizens by means of this

protest M. Baudé[12] followed my example in 1830.

I next found myself engaged in a rather long correspondence with M.

the Chancellor, M. the Minister of Police and M. the Attorney-General

Bellart[13], until the 9th of November, on which day the Chancellor

informed me of the order made in my favour by the Court of First

Instance, which placed me in possession of my seized work. In one of

his letters, M. the Chancellor told me that he had been distressed to

see the dissatisfaction which the King had publicly expressed with my

work. This dissatisfaction arose from the chapter in which I stood

up against the establishment of a minister of General Police in a

constitutional country.

In my account of the journey to Ghent, you have seen Louis XVIII.'s

value as a descendant of Hugh Capet; in my pamphlet, _Le Roi est mort:

vive le roi!_[14] I have told the Prince's real qualities. But man is

not a simple unit: why are there so few faithful portraits? Because the

model is made to pose at such or such a period of his life; ten years

later the portrait is no longer like.

Louis XVIII. did not see far the objects before or around him; all

seemed fair or foul to him according to the way he looked at it.

Smitten with his century, it is to be feared that "the most Christian

King" regarded religion only as an elixir fit for the amalgam of drugs

of which royalty is composed. The licentious imagination which he had

received from his grandfather[15] might have inspired some distrust of

his enterprises; but he knew himself and, when he spoke in a positive

manner, he boasted (well knowing it), while laughing at himself. I

spoke to him one day of the need of a new marriage for M. le Duc de

Bourbon, in order to bring back the race of the Condés to life. He

strongly approved of that idea, although he cared very little about the

sad resurrection; but in this connection he spoke to me of the Comte

d'Artois, and said:

"My brother might marry again without changing anything in the

succession to the throne: he would only make cadets. As for me,

I should only make elders; I do not want to disinherit M. le Duc

d'Angoulême."

And he drew himself up with a capable and bantering air; but I had no

intention of denying the King any power.

Selfish and unprejudiced, Louis XVIII. desired his peace of mind at any

price: he supported his ministers so long as they held the majority; he

dismissed them so soon as the majority was shaken and his tranquillity

liable to be upset: he did not hesitate to fall back when, to obtain

the victory, he ought to have taken a step forward. His greatness was

patience: he did not go towards events; events came to him.

Without being cruel, the King was not humane; tragic catastrophes

neither astonished nor touched him; he was satisfied with saying to the

Duc de Berry, who apologized for having had the misfortune to disturb

the King's sleep by his death:

"I have finished my night."

Nevertheless, this quiet man would fly into horrible rages when

annoyed; and also, this cold, unfeeling Prince had attachments which

resembled passions: thus there succeeded each other in his intimacy the

Comte d'Avaray, M. de Blacas, M. Decazes[16]; Madame de Balbi[17],

Madame de Cayla[18]. All these beloved persons were favourites;

unfortunately they have a great deal too many letters in their hands.

Louis XVIII. appeared to us in all the profundity of historic

tradition; he showed himself with the favouritism of the ancient

royalties. Does the heart of our isolated monarchs contain a void which

they fill with the first object they light upon? Is it sympathy, the

affinity of a nature analogous to their own? Is it a friendship which

drops down to them from Heaven to console their greatnesses? Is it a

leaning for a slave who gives himself body and soul, before whom one

conceals nothing, a slave who becomes a garment, a plaything, a fixed

idea bound up with all the feelings, all the tastes, all the whims

of him whom it has subdued and whom it holds under the empire of an

invincible fascination? The viler and closer a favourite has been,

the less easily is he to be dismissed, because he is in possession of

secrets which would put one to the blush if they were divulged: the

chosen one derives a dual force from his own baseness and his master's

weaknesses.

When the favourite happens to be a great man, like the besetting

Richelieu[19] or the undismissable Mazarin[20], the nations, while

detesting him, profit by his glory or his power; they only change a

wretched king _de jure_ for an illustrious king _de facto._

[Sidenote: The Duc Decazes.]

So soon as M. Decazes was made a minister, the carriages blocked

the Quai Malaquais in the evenings to set down in the new-comer's

drawing-room all that was noblest in the Faubourg Saint-Germain. The

Frenchman may do what he pleases, he will never be anything but a

courtier, no matter of whom, provided it be a power of the day.

Soon there was formed, on behalf of the new favourite, a formidable

coalition of stupidities. In democratic society, prate about liberties,

declare that you see the progress of the human race and the future of

things, adding to your speeches a few Crosses of the Legion of Honour,

and you are sure of your place; in aristocratic society, play whist,

utter commonplaces and carefully-prepared witticisms with a grave and

profound air, and the fortune of your genius is assured.

Born a fellow-countryman of Murat[21], but of Murat without a kingdom,

M. Decazes had come to us from the mother of Napoleon[22]. He was

familiar, obliging, never insolent; he wished me well; I do not know

why, I did not care: thence came the commencement of my disgraces. That

was to teach me that one must never fail in respect to a favourite. The

King loaded him with kindnesses and credit, and subsequently married

him to a very well-born person, daughter to M. de Sainte-Aulaire[23].

It is true that M. Decazes served royalty too well; it was he who

unearthed Marshal Ney in the mountains of Auvergne, where he had hidden

himself.

Faithful to the inspirations of his throne, Louis XVIII. said of M.

Decazes:

"I shall raise him up so high that the greatest lords will be envious

of him."

This phrase, borrowed from another king, was a mere anachronism: to

raise up others, one must be sure of not descending; now, at the time

when Louis XVIII. arrived, what were monarchs? If they could still make

a man's fortune, they could no longer make his greatness; they had

become merely their favourites' bankers.

[Illustration: Duc Decazes.]

Madame Princeteau[24], M. Decazes' sister, was an agreeable, modest and

excellent person; the King had fallen in love with her prospectively.

M. Decazes, the father, whom I saw in the throne-room in full dress,

sword at side, hat under his arm, made no success, however.

At last, the death of M. le Duc de Berry increased the ill-will on both

sides and brought about the favourite's fall. I have said that "his

feet slipped in the blood[25]," which does not mean, Heaven forbid!

that he was guilty of the murder, but that he fell in the reddened pool

that formed under Louvel's knife.

I had resisted the seizure of the _Monarchie selon la Charte_ to

enlighten misled royalty and to uphold the liberty of thought and of

the press; I had frankly embraced our institutions, and I remained

loyal to them.

These broils over, I remained bleeding from the wounds inflicted on

me at the appearance of my pamphlet. I did not take possession of

my political career without bearing the scars of the blows which I

received on entering upon that career: I felt ill at ease in it, I was

unable to breathe.

[Sidenote: I am deprived of my place.]

Shortly afterwards, an Order[26] countersigned "Richelieu" struck me

off the list of ministers of State, and I was deprived of a place

till then reputed irremovable; it had been given me at Ghent, and the

pension attached to that place was withdrawn from me: the hand which

had taken Fouché struck me.

I have had the honour to be thrice stripped for the Legitimacy: first,

for following the sons of St. Louis into exile; the second time, for

writing in favour of the principles of the Monarchy, as "granted;" the

third, for keeping silence on a baleful law at the moment when I had

just caused the triumph of our arms. The Spanish Campaign had given

back soldiers to the White Flag, and, if I had been kept in power, I

should have carried back our frontiers to the banks of the Rhine.

My nature made me quite indifferent to the loss of my salary; I came

off with going on foot again and, on rainy days, driving to the Chamber

of Peers in a hackney-coach. In my popular conveyance, under the

protection of the rabble that surged around me, I re-entered into the

rights of the proletariat of which I formed part: from my lofty chariot

I looked down upon the train of kings.

I was obliged to sell my books; M. Merlin put them up to auction at

the Salle Sylvestre in the Rue des Bons-Enfants[27]. I kept only

a little Greek Homer, whose margins were covered with attempts at

translation and remarks in my handwriting. Soon it became necessary to

take energetic measures; I asked M. the Minister of the Interior for

leave to raffle my country-house. The lottery was opened at the office

of M. Denis, notary. There were ninety tickets at 1000 francs each:

the numbers were not taken up by the Royalists; the Dowager Madame la

Duchesse d'Orléans[28] took three numbers; my friend, M. Lainé, the

Minister of the Interior, who had countersigned the Order of the 5th of

September and consented in the Council to the striking off of my name,

took a fourth ticket under a false name. The money was returned to the

subscribers; M. Lainé, however, refused to withdraw his 1000 francs; he

left it with the notary for the poor.

Not long after, my Vallée-aux-Loups was sold, as they sell the

furniture of the poor, on the Place du Châtelet. I suffered much by

this sale; I had become attached to my trees, planted and, so to speak,

full-grown in my memories. The reserve was 50,000 francs; it was

covered by M. le Vicomte de Montmorency[29], who alone dared to bid one

hundred francs higher: the Vallée was knocked down to him[30]. He has

since inhabited my retreat. It is not a good thing to meddle with my

fortunes: that man of virtue is no more.

After the publication of the _Monarchie selon la Charte_ and at the

opening of the new session in the month of November 1816, I continued

my contests. In the House of Peers, in the sitting of the 23rd of that

month, I moved a proposition to the effect that the King be humbly

begged to order an investigation into the proceedings at the last

elections. The corruption and violence of the Ministry during those

elections were flagrant.

In giving my opinion on the Bill relating to Supply (21 March 1817),

I spoke against Clause II. of that Bill: it had to do with the State

forests which they proposed to appropriate for the Sinking Fund, in

order afterwards to sell one hundred and fifty thousand hectares. These

forests consisted of three kinds of properties: the ancient domains of

the Crown, a few commanderies of the Order of Malta, and the remainder

of the goods of the Church. I do not know why, even to-day, I find a

sad interest in my words; they bear some resemblance to my Memoirs:

"With all due deference to those who have administered only during our

troubles, it is not the material security but the ethics of a people

that constitute the public credit. Will the new owners make good the

titles of their new property? To deprive them there will be quoted

to them instances of inheritances of nine centuries taken away from

their former possessors. Instead of those inalienable patrimonies in

which the same family outlived the race of the oaks, you will have

unfixed properties in which the reeds will scarcely have time to

spring up and die before they change masters. The homes will cease to

be the guardians of domestic morality; they will lose their venerable

authority; rights-of-way open to all comers, they will no longer be

hallowed by the grandfather's chair and the cradle of the new-born

child.

"Peers of France, it is your cause that I am pleading here, not mine: I

am speaking to you in the interests of your children; I shall have no

concern with posterity; I have no sons; I have lost my father's fields,

and a few trees which I have planted will soon cease to be mine."

[Sidenote: The Comte de Villèle.]

Because of the resemblance of opinions, then very keen, an intimacy had

been established between the minorities of the two Chambers. France

was learning representative government. As I had been foolish enough

to take it literally and make a real passion of it, to my prejudice, I

supported those who took it up, without troubling my head as to whether

their opposition was not prompted by human motives rather than by a

pure love like that which I felt for the Charter: not that I was a

simpleton, but I idolized my lady-love and would have gone through fire

to carry her off in my arms. It was during this constitutional attack

that I came to know M. de Villèle[31], in 1816. He was calmer; he

overcame his ardour; he, too, aimed at conquering liberty, but he laid

siege to it according to rule. He opened the trenches methodically: I,

who wanted to carry the place by assault, advanced to the escalade, and

often found myself flung back into the ditch.

I met M. de Villèle first at the Duchesse de Lévis'. He became the

leader of the Royalist Opposition in the Elective Chamber, as I was

in the Hereditary Chamber. He had as a friend his colleague M. de

Corbière[32]. The latter never left his side, and people used to speak

of "Villèle and Corbière" as they speak of "Orestes and Pylades" or

"Euryalus and Nisus."

To enter into fastidious details about persons whose names one will

not know to-morrow would be an idiotic vanity. Obscure and tedious

commotions, which one considers of immense interest and which interest

nobody, bygone intrigues, which have decided no important event, should

be left to those devoutly happy persons who imagine themselves to be,

or to have been, the object of the world's attention.

Nevertheless, there were proud moments in which my contentions with

M. de Villèle seemed to me personally like the dissensions of Sulla

and Marius, of Cæsar and Pompey. Together with the other members

of the Opposition, we went pretty often to spend the evening in

deliberation at M. Piet's[33], in the Rue Thérèse. We arrived looking

extremely ugly, and sat down round a room lighted by a flaring lamp.

In this legislative fog, we talked of the Bill introduced, of the

motion to be made, of the friend to be pushed into the secretaryship,

the questorship, the different committees. We were not unlike the

assemblies of the early Christians, as depicted by the enemies of the

Faith: we broached the worst news; we said that things were going to

turn, that Rome would be troubled by divisions, that our armies would

be routed.

M. de Villèle listened, summed up, and drew no conclusions; he was a

great aid in business: a prudent mariner, he never put to sea in a

storm and, though he would cleverly enter a known harbour, he would

never have discovered the New World. I often observed, in the matter

of our discussions concerning the sale of the goods of the clergy,

that the best Christians among us were the most eager in defense of

the constitutional doctrines. Religion is the well-spring of liberty:

in Rome, the _flamen dialis_ wore only a hollow ring on his finger,

because a solid ring had something of a chain; in his clothing and on

his head-dress the pontiff of Jupiter was forbidden to suffer a single

knot.

After the sitting, M. de Villèle would go away, accompanied by M.

de Corbière. I studied many personalities, I learnt many things, I

occupied myself with many interests at those meetings: finance, which

I always understood, the army, justice, administration initiated me

into their several elements. I left those conferences somewhat more

of a statesman and somewhat more persuaded of the poverty of all that

knowledge. Throughout the night, between sleeping and waking, I saw the

different attitudes of the bald heads, the different expressions of the

faces of those untidy and ungainly Solons. It was all very venerable,

truly; but I preferred the swallow which woke me in my youth and the

Muses who filled my dreams: the rays of the dawn which, striking

a swan, made the shadows of those white birds fall upon a golden

billow; the rising sun which appeared to me in Syria in the stem of a

palm-tree, like the phoenix' nest, pleased me more.

I felt that my fighting in the tribune, in a closed Chamber, and in the

midst of an assembly which was unfavourable to me, remained useless

to victory, and that I required another weapon. The censorship being

established over the periodical daily newspapers, I could fulfil my

object only by means of a free, semi-daily paper, with the aid of which

I would at once attack the system of the Ministers and the opinions

of the Extreme Left printed in the _Minerve_ by M. Étienne[34]. I was

staying at Noisiel with Madame la Duchesse de Lévis, in the summer of

1818, when my publisher, M. Le Normant, came to see me. I told him

of the idea which I had in mind; he caught fire, offered to run all

risks and undertook all expenses. I spoke to my friends, Messieurs de

Bonald[35] and de La Mennais[36], and asked them if they would take

part: they agreed, and the paper was not long in appearing under the

title of the _Conservateur._[37]

The revolution worked by this paper was unexampled: in France, it

changed the majority in the Chambers; abroad, it converted the spirit

of the Cabinets.

In this way the Royalists owed to me the advantage of issuing from

the state of nullity into which they had fallen with peoples and

kings. I put the pen into the hands of France's greatest families.

I decked out the Montmorencys and the Lévises as journalists; I

called out the arriere-ban; I made feudality march to the aid of the

liberty of the press. I had got together the most brilliant men of the

Royalist party, Messieurs de Villèle, de Corbière, de Vitrolles[38],

de Castelbajac[39], etc. I could not help blessing Providence every

time that I spread the red robe of a prince of the Church over the

_Conservateur_ by way of a cover, and that I had the pleasure to read

an article signed in full: "The Cardinal de La Luzerne[40]." But it

came to pass that, after I had led my knights on the constitutional

crusade, so soon as they had conquered power by the deliverance of

liberty, so soon as they had become Princes of Edessa, of Antioch, of

Damascus, they locked themselves up in their new States with Eleanor of

Aquitaine[41], and left me out in the cold at the foot of Jerusalem,

where the infidels had recaptured the Holy Sepulchre.

[Sidenote: The _Conservator._]

My polemical warfare began in the _Conservateur_ and lasted from 1818

to 1820, that is to say, until the re-establishment of the censorship,

for which the death of the Duc de Berry was the pretext. During this

first period of my polemics, I upset the old Ministry and placed M. de

Villèle in power.

After 1824, when I again took up my pen in pamphlets and in the

_Journal des Débats_, the positions were changed. And yet, what did

those futile trifles matter to me, who had never believed in the time

in which I lived, to me, who belonged to the past, to me, who had no

faith in kings, no conviction with regard to the peoples, to me, who

have never troubled about anything, except dreams, and then only on

condition that they lasted but a night!

The first article in the _Conservateur_[42] describes the position of

things at the moment when I entered the lists. During the two years

for which the paper lasted, I had successively to treat of accidents

of the day and to examine interests of importance. I had occasion to

criticize the dastardliness of that "private correspondence" which the

Paris police was publishing in London. This "private correspondence"

might calumniate, but could not dishonour: that which is base has not

the power of debasing; honour alone is able to inflict dishonour.

"Anonymous calumniators," I said, "have the courage to say who you are;

a little shame is soon over; add your names to your articles: it will

be only one contemptible word the more."

I used sometimes to laugh at the ministers, and I gave vent to that

ironical propensity which I have always reproved in myself.

Finally, under date 5 December 1818, the _Conservateur_ contained a

serious article on the morality of interests and on that of duty: it

was this article, which made a stir, that gave birth to the phrase of

"moral interests" and "material interests," first put forward by me,

and subsequently adopted by everybody. Here it is, much abridged; it

rises above the compass of a newspaper, and it is one of my works to

which my reason attaches some value. It has not aged, because the ideas

which it contains are of all time:

"The ministry has invented a new morality, the morality of

interests; that of duties is abandoned to fools. Now this

morality of interests, of which it is proposed to make the

ground-work of our government, has done more to corrupt the

people in a space of three years than the Revolution in a

quarter of a century.

"That which destroys morality in the nations and, with

that morality, the nations themselves is not violence, but

seduction; and by seduction I mean all that is flattering and

specious in any false doctrine. Men often mistake error for

truth, because each faculty of the heart or the mind has its

false image: coldness resembles virtue, reasoning resembles

reason, emptiness resembles depth, and so on.

"The eighteenth century was a destructive century; we

were all seduced. We distorted politics, we strayed into

guilty innovations while seeking a social existence in the

corruption of our morals. The Revolution came to rouse us: in

pushing the Frenchman out of his bed, it flung him into the

tomb. Nevertheless, the Reign of Terror is, perhaps, of all

the epochs of the Revolution, that which was least dangerous

to morality, because no conscience was forced: crime appeared

in all its frankness. Orgies in the midst of blood, scandals

that ceased to be so by dint of being horrible: that is all.

The women of the people came and worked at their knitting

round the murder-machine as round their fire-sides: the

scaffolds were the public morals and death the foundation

of the government. Nothing was clearer than the position

of every one: there was no talk of 'speciality,' nor of

'practicality,' nor of a 'system of interests.' That

balderdash of little minds and bad consciences was unknown.

They said to a man, 'You are a Royalist, a nobleman, rich:

die;' and he died. Antonelle[43] wrote that no count had

been found against certain prisoners, but that he had

condemned them as aristocrats: a monstrous frankness, which,

notwithstanding, allowed moral order to subsist; for society

is not ruined by killing the innocent as innocent, but by

killing him as guilty.

"Consequently, those hideous times are times of great acts of

self-devotion. Then women went heroically to the scaffold;

fathers gave themselves up for their sons, sons for their

fathers; unexpected assistance was introduced into the

prisons, and the priest who was being hunted consoled the

victim by the side of the executioner who failed to recognise

him.

[Sidenote: On moral interests.]

"Morality, under the Directory, had to combat the corruption

of morals rather than of doctrines; license prevailed. Men

were hurled into pleasures as they had been heaped up in

the prisons; they forced the present to advance joys on the

future, in the fear of seeing a revival of the past. Every

man, not having yet had time to create himself a home, lived

in the street, on the public walks, in the public rooms.

Familiarized with the scaffolds, and already half cut off

from the world, they did not think it worth the trouble to go

indoors. There was question only of arts, balls, fashions;

people changed their ornaments and clothes as readily as they

would have stripped themselves of their lives.

"Under Bonaparte the seduction commenced again, but it was a

seduction that carried its own remedy: Bonaparte seduced by

means of the spell of glory, and all that is great carries a

principle of legislation within itself. He conceived that it

was useful to allow the doctrine of all peoples to be taught,

the morality of all times, the religion of eternity.

"I should not be surprised to hear some one reply:

"'To base society upon a _duty_, is to build it on a fiction;

to place it in an _interest_, is to establish it in a

reality.'

"Now it is precisely _duty_ which is a fact and _interest_

a fiction. _Duty_, which takes its source in the Godhead,

descends first into the family, where it establishes a real

affinity between the father and the children; from there,

passing into society and dividing into two branches, in the

political order it rules the relations of the king and the

subject; in the moral order it establishes the tie of service

and protection, of benefits and gratitude.

"Duty is therefore a most positive fact, since it gives to

human society the only lasting existence that the latter can

have.

"Interest, on the contrary, is a fiction when it is taken as

people take it to-day, in its physical and rigorous sense,

since it is no longer in the evening what it was in the

morning; since it changes its nature at each moment; since,

founded on fortune, it has fortune's fickleness.

"By the morality of interest, every citizen is at enmity

with the laws and the government, because in society it is

always the great number that suffers. People do not fight for

abstract ideas of order, of place, of the mother-land; or,

if they fight for them, it is because they attach ideas of

_sacrifice_ to them; then they emerge from the morality of

interest to enter into that of duty: so true is it that the

existence of society is not to be found outside that sacred

limit.

"He who does his duty gains esteem; he who yields to his

interest is but little esteemed: it was very like the century

to draw a principle of government from a source of contempt!

Bring up politicians to think only of what affects them, and

you shall see how they will dress out the State; by that

means you will have only corrupt and hungry ministers, like

those mutilated slaves who governed the Lower Empire and who

sold all, remembering that they themselves had been sold.

"Mark this: interests are powerful only so long as they

prosper; when times are harsh, they become enfeebled. Duties,

on the contrary, are never so energetic as when they are

painful to fulfil. When times are good, they grow lax. I like

a principle of government which grows great in misfortune:

that greatly resembles virtue.

"What can be absurder than to cry to the people:

"'Do not be devoted! Have no enthusiasm! Think only of your

interests!'

"It is as though one were to say to them:

"'Do not come to our assistance, abandon us if such be your

interest.'

"With this profound policy, when the hour of devotion shall

have come, each one will shut his door, go to the window, and

watch the Monarchy pass[44]."

Such was this article on the morality of interest and the morality of

duty.

On the 3rd of December 1819, I again mounted the tribune of the Chamber

of Peers: I raised my voice against the bad Frenchmen who were able to

give us as a motive for tranquillity the watchfulness of the European

armies:

"Had we need of guardians? Were they still going to talk of

circumstances? Were we again, by means of diplomatic notes, to receive

certificates of good conduct? And should we not only have changed a

garrison of Cossacks for a garrison of ambassadors?"

From that time forward, I spoke of the foreigners as I have since

spoken of them in the Spanish War; I was thinking of our delivery at a

moment when even the Liberals contended with me. Men opposed in opinion

make a deal of noise to attain silence! Let a few years arrive, and the

actors will descend from the stage and the audience no longer be there

to hiss or applaud them.

[Sidenote: Murder of the Duc de Berry.]

I had gone to bed, on the evening of the 13th of February, when the

Marquis de Vibraye[45] came in to me to tell me of the assassination

of the Duc du Berry. In his haste, he did not tell me the place where

the event had occurred. I dressed hurriedly and stepped into M. de

Vibraye's carriage. I was surprised to see the coachman take the Rue

de Richelieu, and still more astonished when he stopped at the Opera:

the crowd about the approaches was immense. We went up, between two

lines of soldiers, through the side-door on the left, and, as we were

in our peers' coats, we were allowed to pass. We came to a sort of

little ante-room: the space was obstructed with all the people of

the palace. I pushed my way as far as the door of a box and found

myself face to face with M. le Duc d'Orléans. I was struck with an

ill-disguised expression of jubilation in his eyes, across the contrite

countenance which he assumed: he saw the throne nearer at hand. My

glance embarrassed him: he left the spot and turned his back to me.

Around me, they were telling the details of the crime, the man's name,

the conjectures of the different participants in the arrest; they were

excited, busy: men love anything theatrical, especially death, when

it is the death of one of the great. Each person who came out of the

blood-stained laboratory was asked for news. They heard General A. de

Girardin[46] relate how, having been left for dead on the battle-field,

he had nevertheless recovered from his wounds; this one was hoping

and consoling himself, that other was repining. Soon contemplation

overcame the crowd, a silence fell; from the inside of the box came a

dull sound: I held my ear laid to the door; I distinguished a rattle;

the sound ceased: the Royal Family had received the last breath of a

grandson of Louis XIV.! I entered at once.

Let the reader picture to himself an empty playhouse, after the

catastrophe of a tragedy: the curtain raised, the orchestra deserted,

the lights extinguished, the machinery motionless, the scenery fixed

and smoke-blackened, the actors, the singers, the dancers vanished

through the trap-doors and secret passages!

I have, in a separate work, given the life and death of M. le Duc de

Berry. My reflections made at that time are still true to-day:

"A son of St. Louis, the last scion of the Elder Branch,

escapes the crosses of a long banishment and returns to

his country; he begins to taste happiness; he indulges the

hope of seeing himself revive, of at the same time seeing

the monarchy revive in the children that God promises him:

suddenly he is struck down in the midst of his hopes, almost

in the arms of his wife. He is going to die, and he is not

full of years! Might he not accuse Heaven, ask It why It

treats him with such severity? Ah, how pardonable it would

have been in him to complain of his destiny! For, after all,

what harm did he do? He lived familiarly among us in perfect

simplicity, mingled in our pleasures and assuaged our pains;

already six of his relations have perished: why murder him

also, why seek out him, innocent, him so far from the throne,

twenty-seven years after the death of Louis XVI.? Let us

learn to know better the heart of a Bourbon! That heart, all

pierced by the dagger, was not able to find a single murmur

against us: not one regret for life, not one bitter word was

uttered by the Prince. A husband, son, father and brother, a

prey to every anguish of the mind, to every suffering of the

body, he does not cease to ask pardon for 'the man,' whom he

does not even call his assassin! The most impetuous becomes

suddenly the gentlest character. It is a man attached to

existence by every tie of the heart, it is a prince in the

flower of his youth, it is the heir to the fairest kingdom on

earth that is dying: and you would think that it was a poor

wretch who loses nothing here below."

[Illustration: Duc de Berry.]

The murderer Louvel was a little man with a dirty and sorry face, such

as one sees by the thousand on the Paris streets. He had something

of the cur; he had a snarling and solitary air. It is probable that

Louvel was not a member of any society: he was one of a sect, not of a

plot; he belonged to one of those conspiracies of ideas, the members

of which may sometimes come together, but most frequently act one by

one, according to their individual impulse. His brain fed on a single

thought, even as a heart slakes its thirst on a single passion. His act

was consequent upon his principles: he would have liked to kill the

whole Dynasty at one blow. Louvel has his admirers even as Robespierre

has his. Our material society, the accomplice of every material

enterprise, soon destroyed the chapel raised in expiation of a crime.

We abhor moral sentiment, because in it we behold the enemy and the

accuser: tears would have appeared a recrimination; we were in a hurry

to deprive a few Christians of a cross to weep at.

On the 18th of February 1820, the _Conservateur_[47] paid the tribute

of its regrets to the memory of M. le Duc de Berry. The article

concluded with this verse of Racine's:

Si du sang de nos rois quelque goutte échappée[48]!

Alas, that drop of blood now flows away on foreign soil!

[Sidenote: Fall of the Ministry.]

M. Decazes fell. The censorship followed and, notwithstanding

the assassination of the Duc de Berry, I voted against it. The

_Conservateur_ refusing to be soiled by it, that paper came to an end

with the following apostrophe to the Duc de Berry:

"O Christian Prince, worthy son of St. Louis, illustrious

scion of so many kings, before descending into your last

resting-place, receive our last homage! You loved, you read a

work which the censorship is about to destroy. You sometimes

told us that that work was saving the Throne: alas, we were

not able to save your days! We are about to cease to write

at the moment when you cease to exist: we shall have the

sorrowful consolation of connecting the end of our labours

with the end of your life[49]."

M. le Duc de Bordeaux saw the light on the 29th of September 1820.

The new-born was called "the child of Europe[50]" and "the child of

miracle[51]," while waiting to become the child of exile.

Some time before the Princess' confinement, three market-women of

Bordeaux, in the name of all the ladies their companions, had a cradle

made, and chose me to present them, their cradle and themselves, to

Madame la Duchesse de Berry. Mesdames Dasté, Duranton and Aniche

came to see me. I hastened to ask the gentlemen in attendance for a

ceremonial audience. Suddenly, M. de Sèze thought that this honour was

his by right: it was said that I should never succeed at Court. I was

not yet reconciled with the Ministry, and I did not seem worthy of the

office of introducer of my humble ambassadresses. I got out of this

great negociation, as usual, by paying their expenses.

All this became an affair of State; the pother found its way into

the papers. The Bordeaux ladies were aware of this, and wrote me the

following letter on the subject:

"BORDEAUX, 24 _October_ 1820.

"MONSIEUR LE VICOMTE,

"We owe you our thanks for the kindness which you have had

to lay our joy and our respects at the feet of Madame la

Duchesse de Berry: this time at least you will not have been

prevented from being our interpreter. We heard with the

greatest concern of the stir which M. le Comte de Sèze has

made in the newspapers, and, if we have kept silence, it

is because we feared to give you pain. Still, monsieur le

vicomte, none is better able than yourself to do homage to

truth and to undeceive M. de Sèze as to our real intentions

in our choice of an introducer to Her Royal Highness. We make

you the offer to state all that has passed in a newspaper of

your own choosing; and, as no one has the right to choose a

guide for us, and as we had been pleased to think until the

last moment that you would be that guide, what we shall state

in this respect will necessarily silence all tongues.

"That is what we have determined upon, monsieur le vicomte;

but we thought it our duty to do nothing without your

consent. Rely upon it that we will most gladly publish the

handsome way in which you behaved towards everybody in the

matter of our presentation. If we are the cause of the

mischief, we are quite ready to redress it.

"We are, and always shall be,

"Monsieur le vicomte,

"Your most humble and most respectful servants,

"Wives DASTÉ, DURANTON, ANICHE."

[Sidenote: the new Ministry.]

I replied to these generous ladies, who were so unlike the great ladies:

"I thank you, my dear ladies, for the offer you make me to

publish in a newspaper all that has happened with regard to

M. de Sèze. You are excellent Royalists, and I also am a good

Royalist: we must remember before all that M. de Sèze is an

honourable man, and that he has been the defender of our

King. That fine action is not wiped out by a little movement

of vanity. So let us keep silence: I am content with your

good accounts of me to your friends. I have already thanked

you for your excellent fruits: Madame de Chateaubriand and I

eat your chesnuts every day and talk of you.

"Now permit your host to embrace you. My wife sends you a

thousand messages, and I remain

"Your servant and friend,

"CHATEAUBRIAND.

"Paris, 2 November 1820."

But who thinks of these futile discussions to-day? The joys and

feasts of the christening are far behind us. When Henry was born, on

Michaelmas Day, did not people say that the archangel was going to

trample the dragon under foot? It is to be feared, on the contrary,

that the flaming sword was drawn from its scabbard only to drive out

the innocent from the earthly paradise and to guard its gates against

him.

However, the events which were becoming complicated determined nothing

yet. The assassination of M. le Duc de Berry had brought about the fall

of M. Decazes[52], which was not effected without heart-breakings. M.

le Duc de Richelieu would not consent to afflict his aged master, save

on a promise from M. Molé[53] to give M. Decazes a mission abroad. He

set out for the Embassy in London, where I was to replace him[54].

Nothing was finished. M. de Villèle remained in seclusion with his

fatality, M. de Corbière. I on my side offered a great obstacle.

Madame de Montcalm[55] never ceased urging me towards quiet: I was

much inclined for it, sincerely wishing only to retire from public

life, which encroached upon me and for which I entertained a sovereign

contempt. M. de Villèle, although more supple, was not at that time

easy to deal with.

There are two ways to become a minister: one abruptly and by force, the

other by length of time and by dexterity; the first was not for M. de

Villèle's use: craftiness excludes energy, but is safer and less liable

to lose the ground which it has gained. The essential point in this

manner of arriving is to accept many blows and to be able to swallow

a quantity of bitter pills: M. de Talleyrand made great use of this

dietary of second-rate ambitions. Men generally rise to office through

their mediocrity and remain there through their superiority. This

conjunction of antagonistic elements is the rarest thing, and it is for

that reason that there are so few statesmen.

M. de Villèle had precisely the commonplace qualities that cleared the

ground for him: he allowed noise to be made around him, in order to

gather the fruits of the alarm that caught hold of the Court. Sometimes

he would deliver warlike speeches, in which, however, a few phrases

allowed a glimmer of hope to pass of the existence of an approachable

nature. I thought that a man of his stamp ought to commence by entering

public life, no matter how, and in a not too alarming position. It

seemed to me that what he needed was first to be a minister without

portfolio, in order one day to obtain the premiership itself. That

would give him a reputation for moderation, he would be dressed exactly

to suit him; it would become evident that the parliamentary leader of

the Opposition was not an ambitious man, since he consented to make

himself so small in the interests of peace. Any man who has once been a

minister, no matter by what right, becomes one again: a first ministry

is the stepping-stone to the second; the individual who has worn the

embroidered coat retains a smell of portfolio by which the offices find

him again sooner or later.

Madame de Montcalm had told me, from her brother, that there was no

longer any ministry vacant, but that, if my two friends were willing

to enter the Council as ministers of State without portfolio, the King

would be charmed, promising something better later. She added that,

if I consented to go so far, I should be sent to Berlin. I answered

that that made no difference; that, for myself, I was always ready

to leave and that I would go to the devil, in the event of the kings

having any mission to their cousin to fulfil; but that I would not,

however, accept exile, unless M. de Villèle accepted his entrance into

the Council. I should also have liked to place M. Lainé with my two

friends. I took the treble negociation upon myself. I had become the

master of political France through my own powers. Few people doubt that

it was I who made M. de Villèle's first ministry and who drove the

Mayor of Toulouse into the arena.

[Sidenote: Under the Duc de Richelieu.]

I found an invincible obstinacy in M. Lainé's character. M. de Corbière

did not want to become a mere member of the Council; I flattered him

with the hope of also obtaining the Public Instruction. M. de Villèle,

giving way only with repugnance to my desires, at first raised a

thousand objections; his good wits and his ambition at last decided

him to set forward: everything was arranged. Here are the irrefutable

proofs of what I have just related; wearisome documents of those little

facts which have justly passed into oblivion, but useful to my own

history:

"20 _December_[56], _half-past three._

"To M. LE DUC DE RICHELIEU

"I have had the honour to call on you, monsieur le duc, to

report on the state of things: all is going admirably. I have

seen the two friends: Villèle at last consents to enter the

Council as minister secretary of State, without portfolio,

if Corbière consents to enter on the same terms, with the

Directorship of Public Instruction. Corbière, on his side,

is willing to enter on those conditions, provided Villèle

approves. And so there are no difficulties left Complete your

work, monsieur le duc; see the two friends; and, when you

have heard what I am writing to you from their own mouths,

you will restore to France her internal peace, even as you

have given her peace with the foreigners.

"Permit me to submit one more idea to you: would you think it

very inconvenient to make over to Villèle the directorship

vacant through the retirement of M. de Barante[57]? He

would then be placed in a more equal position with his

friend. Still, he told me positively that he would consent

to enter the Council without portfolio, if Corbière had the

Public Instruction. I say this only as a means the more of

completely satisfying the Royalists and of ensuring for

yourself an immense and steady majority.

"I will lastly have the honour of pointing out to you that

the great royalist meeting takes place to-morrow evening at

Piet's, and that it would be very useful if the two friends

could to-morrow evening say something which would calm any

effervescence and prevent any division.

"As I, monsieur le duc, am outside all this movement, you

will, I hope, see in my assiduity no more than the loyalty of

a man who desires his country's good and your successes.

"Pray accept, monsieur le duc, the assurance of my high

regard.

"CHATEAUBRIAND."

"_Wednesday._

"I have just written to Messieurs de Villèle and de Corbière,

monsieur, and I have asked them to call on me this evening,

for one must not lose a moment in so useful a piece of

work. I thank you for having pushed on the business so

rapidly; I hope that we shall come to a happy conclusion. Be

persuaded, monsieur, of the pleasure I feel at owing you this

obligation, and receive the assurance of my high regard.

"RICHELIEU."

"Permit me, monsieur le duc, to congratulate you on the

happy issue of this great business, and to applaud myself

for having had some part in it. It is very desirable that

the Orders should appear to-morrow; they will put a stop to

all opposition. I can be of use to the two friends in this

respect.

"I have the honour, monsieur le Duc, to renew to you the

assurance of my high regard.

"CHATEAUBRIAND."

"_Friday._

"I have received with extreme pleasure the note which M. le

Vicomte de Chateaubriand has done me the honour to write to

me. I believe that he will have no cause to regret having

trusted to the King's goodness, and, if he will permit me to

add, to the desire which I have to contribute to whatever may

be agreeable to him. I beg him to receive the assurance of my

high regard.

"RICHELIEU."

[Sidenote: Ministerial negociations.]

"_Thursday._

"You are doubtless aware, my noble colleague, that the

business was settled at eleven o'clock yesterday evening, and

that all is arranged on the terms agreed between yourself and

the Duc de Richelieu. Your intervention has been most useful

to us; let thanks be given you for this preliminary step

towards an improvement which must henceforth be looked upon

as probable.

"Ever yours for life,

"J. DE POLIGNAC[58]."

"PARIS, _Wednesday, 20th December,

"Half-past eleven at night._

"I have just called on you, noble viscount, but you had

retired: I have come from Villèle, who himself returned late

from the conference which you prepared for him and told him

of. He asked me, as your nearest neighbour, to let you know

that Corbière also wished to tell you, on his side, that the

affair which you really conducted and managed during the day

is definitely settled in the simplest and shortest manner:

he without portfolio, his friend with the Instruction. He

seemed to think that one might have waited a little longer

and obtained better conditions; but it was not seemly to

gainsay an interpreter and negociator like yourself. It is

you really who have opened the entrance to this new career

to them: they reckon on you to make it smooth for them.

Do you, on your side, during the short time that we shall

still have the advantage of keeping you among us, speak to

your more spirited friends to second, or at least not to

oppose the plans for union. Good-night. I once more make

you my compliment on the promptness with which you conduct

negociations. You must settle Germany in the same way, so as

to return sooner to the midst of your friends. I personally

am delighted to see your position so much simplified.

"I renew all my sentiments to you.

"M. DE MONTMORENCY."

"I enclose, monsieur, a request addressed by one of the

King's Body-guards to the King of Prussia: it has been handed

to me and recommended by a field-officer of the Guards. I beg

you, therefore, to take it with you and to make use of it if,

when you have felt your ground a little in Berlin[59], you

think that it is of a nature to obtain some success.

"I have great pleasure in taking this occasion to

congratulate myself as well as you on this morning's

_Moniteur_[60], and to thank you for the part which you have

taken in this fortunate issue, which, I hope, will have the

happiest influence on the affairs of our France.

"Pray receive the assurance of my high regard and of my

sincere attachment.

"PASQUIER."

This series of notes is sufficient evidence that I am not boasting;

it would bore me too much to be the fly on the coach; the pole or the

coachman's nose are not places where I have ever had any ambition

to sit: whether the coach reaches the top or rolls to the bottom

matters little to me. Accustomed to live hidden in my own recesses, or

momentarily in the wide life of the centuries, I had no taste for the

mysteries of the ante-chamber. I do not enter readily into circulation

like a piece of current money; to escape, I withdraw myself nearer

to God: a fixed idea that comes from Heaven isolates you and kills

everything around you.

[Footnote 1: This book was written in Paris in 1839, and revised 22

February 1845.--T.]

[Footnote 2: "On an occurrence when the chamber, or a deputation of it,

brought to Louis XVIII. some extravagant expression of its loyalty and

love of kings, the monarch observed, no one can now tell whether in

sincerity or irony, that such a chamber was _introuvable_, apparently

impossible to find or replace. The epithet was too good to be lost;

and the Chamber of 1815 was known to its contemporaries, and will be

remembered in French history, as the _Chambre introuvable_" (EYRE

CROWE, _History of the Reigns of Louis XVIII. and Charles X._).--T.]

[Footnote 3: The Order nominating the Vicomte de Chateaubriand to the

Chamber of Peers is dated 17 August 1815.--B.]

[Footnote 4: 19 December 1815.--B.]

[Footnote 5: Edme Bonaventure Courtois (1756-1816), member of

the Convention for the Department of the Aube. He took charge of

Robespierre's papers, including the will of Marie-Antoinette, after the

9 Thermidor, and published a notable report on them in January 1795.

All the papers in Courtois' possession were seized by the police in

January 1816.--T.]

[Footnote 6: Enjoyed by the priests who had taken wives.--B.]

[Footnote 7: Joseph Lebon (1769-1795), was curate of Neuville, near

Arras, when the Revolution broke out. In 1792, he was sent to the

Convention, where he signalled himself by his violence. In 1793, he was

sent to the Pas-de-Calais as commissary of the Convention, established

the Reign of Terror at Arras, and instituted a tribunal which caused

thousands of heads to fall in a few months. Lebon was accused by the

inhabitants of Cambrai, after the 9 Thermidor, and guillotined on the

9th of October 1795.--T.]

[Footnote 8: François Chabot (1759-1794) was a Capuchin friar at Rhodez

at the outbreak of the Revolution. He was successively elected to the

Legislative Assembly and the Convention, voted for all the violent

and bloody measures taken at that time, and became a leading member

of the Club des Jacobins. Chabot was guillotined at the instance of

Robespierre on the 5th of April 1794---T.]

[Footnote 9: Jacques Roux (_d._ 1794), was, in 1789, a priest of the

Parish Church of St. Nicholas, and dubbed himself Preacher to the

Sans-Culottes. He was sentenced to death by the Revolutionary Tribunal

on the 15th of January 1794, and committed suicide with a knife on

hearing the sentence pronounced.--T.]

[Footnote 10: 3 April 1816.--B.]

[Footnote 11: This ordinance, published in the _Moniteur_ of the 7th of

September, dissolved the Chamber of 1815, which Louis XVIII. himself

had called the Undiscoverable Chamber.--B.]

[Footnote 12: Jean Jacques Baron Baudé (1792-1862). In his quality as

editor of the _Temps_, he signed the protest of the journalists against

the ordinances of July 1830, and had his protest registered before

notaries. Baudé was Prefect of Police from 26 December 1830 to 25

February 1831, and allowed the mob to sack the Archbishop's Palace and

the Church of Saint-Germain-l'Auxerrois. He also sat in the Chamber of

Deputies, where we shall meet him again.--B.]

[Footnote 13: Nicolas François Bellart (1761-1826) had distinguished

himself by defending a large number of the victims of the Revolution.

He was appointed Attorney-General by the Restoration, and was principal

counsel for the prosecution in the trial of Marshal Ney.--T.]

[Footnote 14: Paris: Le Normant the Elder, 1824.--B.]

[Footnote 15: Louis XV. was the most licentious king that ever sat on

the throne of France.--T.]

[Footnote 16: Élie Duc Decazes (1780-1860), Prefect of Police (July

1815), Minister of the General Police (September 1815), peer of France,

with the title of count (September 1816), Minister of the Interior

(1818), and President of the Council (1819). In 1820, he left office

to take up the Embassy in London, with the title of duke, and retained

it till 1822. In 1834, he succeeded the Marquis de Sémonville as Grand

Referendary of the Chamber of Peers.--B.]

[Footnote 17: Anne Jacoby Comtesse de Balbi (_circa_ 1758-1842), _née_

de Caumont La Force, lady-in-waiting to the Comtesse de Provence,

later Joséphine Queen of France (1780), a favourite of the Comte de

Provence, later Louis XVIII., until the Comte d'Avaray supplanted her

at Coblentz.--T.]

[Footnote 18: Zoé Victoire Comtesse de Cayla (1785-1852), _née_ Talon

du Boullay-Thierry, favourite to Louis XVIII. from 1819 till the King's

death in 1824.--T.]

[Footnote 19: Armand Jean du Plessis, Cardinal Duc de Richelieu

(1585-1642), governed France without interruption from 1623 to

1642.--T.]

[Footnote 20: Jules Cardinal Mazarin (1602-1661) succeeded Richelieu as

Prime Minister, remaining in power, with two short intervals, until the

day of his death. Each of the two cardinals, therefore, governed France

for nineteen years.--T.]

[Footnote 21: Murat was born near Cahors, the Duc Decazes near

Libourne, both in Gascony.--T.]

[Footnote 22: M. Decazes had been private secretary to Madame Mère

under the Empire.--B.]

[Footnote 23: M. Decazes had married, in 1805, a daughter of the

Comte Muraire, First President of the Court of Appeal. She died

in the following year. In August 1818, he married Mademoiselle de

Sainte-Aulaire, grand-daughter, through her mother, of the last

reigning Prince of Nassau-Saarbrück. In consideration of this marriage,

the King of Denmark gave him the title of duke, with the domain of

Glücksbjerg.--B.]

[Footnote 24: Marie Princeteau (1787-1879), _née_ Decazes, sister to

the Duc Decazes, and for some time favourite of Louis XVIII. For an

obvious reason, she, Madame de Balbi and Madame de Cayla are better

described as the King's favourites than as his mistresses.--T.]

[Footnote 25: In an article in the _Conservateur_, dated 3 March 1820

(vol. VI., p. 476).--B.]

[Footnote 26: 20 September 1816.--B.]

[Footnote 27: Chateaubriand's library was sold on the 29th of April

1817 and the following days.--B.]

[Footnote 28: Louise Marie Adélaide Duchesse d'Orléans (1753-1821),

daughter of the Duc de Penthièvre, married to Égalité in 1769, divorced

in 1792.--T.]

[Footnote 29: Matthieu Jean Félicité Vicomte, later Duc de

Montmorency-Laval (1767-1826), Minister of Foreign Affairs from 1821 to

1822, a member of the French Academy (1825), and tutor to the Duc de

Bordeaux (1825).--T.]

[Footnote 30: The Vallée-aux-Loups is now the property of M.

le Duc de La Rochefoucauld-Doudeauville, whose mother was a

Montmorency-Laval.--B.]

[Footnote 31: Jean Baptiste Guillaume Marie Anne Séraphin Joseph Comte

de Villèle (1773-1854) placed himself at the head of the Royalist

Opposition in 1816. In 1820, after the fall of the Duc Decazes, he

entered the Ministry without a portfolio and, in 1821, became Minister

of Finance. In 1822, he was made President of the Council, with the

title of count. He remained in power until 1828, when he made way for

M. de Martignac, and was raised to the peerage. The Comte de Villèle

retired into private life after the Revolution of July.--T.]

[Footnote 32: Jacques Joseph Guillaume François Pierre Comte de

Corbière (1766-1853) attached his political fortunes entirely to

those of Villèle. They were both ministers together: Corbière of the

Interior, Villèle of Finance; Louis XVIII. made them both counts,

and Charles X. peers of France, on the same day. Both retired to the

country after the Revolution of 1830, and they died within a few months

of one another.--B.]

[Footnote 33: Jean Pierre Piet-Tardiveau (1763-1848), member of the

Chamber of Deputies from 1815 to 1819 and from 1820 to 1828. He

entertained the ultra-Conservative party for many years at No. 8, Rue

Thérèse, where he lived.--B.]

[Footnote 34: Charles Guillaume Étienne (1778-1845), dramatic author,

publicist and politician. He became a member of the French Academy in

1811. Under the Empire, he had been the head of the literary division

of the newspaper police; whereas, under the Restoration, he became an

ardent "Liberal," attacking the Bourbons in the _Minerve française_

and the _Constitutionnel._ Étienne was a member of the Chamber of

Deputies from 1820 to 1824 and from 1827 to 1830. Louis-Philippe

raised him to the peerage in 1839. The _Minerve française_, founded

in 1818, nine months before the _Conservateur_, appeared once a week,

but on uncertain days: in this way, not being an absolutely periodical

publication, it escaped the censorship.--B.]

[Footnote 35: Louis Gabriel Ambroise Vicomte de Bonald (1754-1840),

member of the French Academy (1816) and a peer of France (1823), which

latter dignity he resigned in 1830.--T.]

[Footnote 36: Abbé Félicité Robert de Lamennais (1782-1854), a

distinguished Royalist writer, was converted to the democratic cause

after 1830, when he attacked not only the Monarchy but the Church,

which had condemned one of his writings. He played a small part in

politics in 1848, but died forgotten and was, at his own wish, buried

without religious rites.--T.]

[Footnote 37: The _Conservateur_ first appeared in October 1818 and

lasted until March 1820, appearing in numbers of three printed sheets

on irregular days, like the _Minerve._ It was, therefore, not a daily

paper, and both Royalists and Liberals in this way succeeded in

avoiding the censorship, which affected only periodicals.--B.]

[Footnote 38: Eugène François Auguste d'Armand, Baron de Vitrolles

(1774-1854). Napoleon made him a baron in 1812. He became connected

with Talleyrand and the Duc de Dalberg, tried to organize a rising in

the South during the Hundred Days, and was arrested and imprisoned.

He was elected to the Chamber in 1815, and in 1816 became one of the

active agents of the personal policy of the Comte d'Artois. The latter,

as Charles X., appointed him Minister Plenipotentiary to Florence

(December 1827) and a peer of France (January 1828). The fall of the

Elder Branch restored him to private life, although he was momentarily

compromised in the Duchesse de Berry's rising in the Vendée (1832), and

imprisoned for a few days.--B.]

[Footnote 39: Marie Barthélemy Vicomte de Castelbajac (1776-1868),

an enthusiastic Royalist, sat in the Chamber of Deputies from 1819

to 1827, in which latter year he was raised to the peerage. M. de

Castelbajac withdrew completely from public life after the Revolution

of July.--B.]

[Footnote 40: César Guillaume Cardinal de La Luzerne (1738-1821),

Bishop of Langres from 1770 to 1789, created a cardinal in 1817.--T.]

[Footnote 41: Eleanor of Aquitaine, Queen of France and later of

England (_circa_ 1122-1203), was married at the age of fifteen to Louis

VII. King of France, whom she accompanied to the Holy Land in 1147.

Here she distinguished herself by the levity of her conduct, so much so

that, in 1152, Louis obtained a divorce and Eleanor, two years later,

married Henry Count of Anjou and Duke of Normandy, soon to become

Henry II. King of England. The second marriage was no happier than the

first.--T.]

[Footnote 42: _Réflexions sur l'état intérieur de la France_ (22

October 1818): _Conservateur_, vol. I., p. 113.--B.]

[Footnote 43: A _ci-devant_ marquis and ex-deputy in the Legislative

Assembly. He sat as a juror in the Revolutionary Tribunal during the

trials of the Queen and of the Girondins.--B.]

[Footnote 44: _Conservateur_, vol. I., p. 466.--B.]

[Footnote 45: Anne Victor Denis Hubault, Marquis de Vibraye

(1766-1843), was a cavalry officer at the time of the Revolution,

emigrated in 1791, and returned in 1814, when he became a colonel and

aide-de-camp to Monsieur, later Charles X. He was created a peer on the

17th of August 1815, on the same day as Chateaubriand; was promoted to

major-general in 1823; and left the Upper Chamber at the Revolution of

1830, so as not to take the oath to the new Sovereign.--B.]

[Footnote 46: Alexandre Comte de Girardin (1776-1885) served with

distinction under Napoleon and was by Louis XVIII. appointed Master

of the Hounds, an office which he retained till 1830. M. Émile

de Girardin, the celebrated editor of the _Presse_, through whom

the _Mémoires d'Outre-tombe_ were originally published, was his

illegitimate son.--B.]

[Footnote 47: _Conservateur_, vol. VI., p. 382. The article is by

Chateaubriand.--B.]

[Footnote 48: "From the blood of our kings but a small drop

escaping."--_Athalie_, act I., sc. 1.--T.]

[Footnote 49: Chateaubriand's article, dated 3 March 1820: the

_Conservateur_, vol. VI., p. 471.--B.]

[Footnote 50: By the Papal Nuncio, in his congratulatory address,

pronounced in the name of the Diplomatic Body.--B.]

[Footnote 51: By Lamartine, in his ode, the _Naissance du duc de

Bordeaux._--B.]

[Footnote 52: M. Decazes resigned on the 17th of February. The

_Moniteur_ of the 21st of February published three Orders, signed on

the preceding day: the first accepting M. Decazes' resignation, the

second appointing M. le Duc de Richelieu President of the Council, and

the third conferring upon M. Decazes the title of duke and of minister

of State.--B.]

[Footnote 53: This is a clerical error. The Minister of Foreign Affairs

in February 1820 was M. Pasquier. M. Molé, under the Restoration, held

only the office of Minister of Marine, and that at an earlier date,

from 1817 to 1818.--B.]

[Footnote 54: The Duc Decazes was appointed Ambassador to England on

the 20th of February 1820. He held that position until the 9th of

January 1822.--B.]

[Footnote 55: Sister to the Duc de Richelieu, and a very close friend

of Chateaubriand's.--B.]

[Footnote 56: 20 December 1820.--B.]

[Footnote 57: Prosper Brugière, Baron de Barante (1782-1866), had sent

in his resignation as Director-general of Indirect Taxation, a post

which at that time carried a salary of one hundred thousand francs.--B.]

[Footnote 58: Prince Jules de Polignac (1780-1847) had been made a peer

of France in 1816, but long refused to take the oath to the Charter,

which he considered injurious to the interests of religion and the

Monarchy, and did not consent to take his seat until the Pope had

raised his scruples. He was for some time Ambassador in London, and, in

August 1829, became Premier of the ill-fated Ministry which, in 1830,

brought about the downfall of the Royal House of France.--T.]

[Footnote 59: Chateaubriand had been appointed Envoy Extraordinary

and Minister Plenipotentiary to the Court of Berlin (_Moniteur_, 30th

November 1820).--B.]

[Footnote 60: Announcing the appointment of M. de Corbière and M. de

Villèle as members of the Council.--B.]

The Memoirs of François René Vicomte de Chateaubriand sometime Ambassador to England, Volume 4 (of 6) Mémoires d'outre-tombe volume 4 · 第 1 / 9 章