"The troops of the north."
"How long will he reign?"
"Not very long; he will leave the crown to a prince of his race."
"And when will all this happen?"
"When France shall have been sufficiently punished for the death of his father."
Now see the conclusion of the anonymous writer of 1871: "Henri V has indeed said lately, in a letter which has been universally judged to be of very great importance: 'I am the heir'; but he has not said: 'I am the immediate heir' If Louis XVII exists, his proposition is true; he is the heir, after the immediate heir, since, according to Martin, this true heir, who must come in an extraordinary manner, led by troops from the north, who have already frightfully punished France, is to reign only a very short time, and leave the crown to a prince of his race, who can only be Henri V." (Grave question.—Louis XVII est-il bien mort?—Roanne, 1871.) Credulous persons are full of subtlety.]
16 ([return])
[ Page 167. Figaro, August 8,1904.]
17 ([return])
[ Page 172. In regard to these charities consult the work of Émile Rousse: La Roche-Guyon: Châtelains, Château et Bourg (Hachette et Cie., 1892). This book,—much more vivid and captivating than this kind of local monographs generally are,—contains a very accurate and very complete history of La Roche-Guyon. I have used it extensively.]