Whenever one comes to Paris one is always sure of finding some scandalous drama in progress for the amusement of the public. Yesterday it was the case against Armand Carrel of the National.
M. Carrel did not at all correspond to my expectations. No doubt he was impertinent, but not with that kind of bold and energetic insolence, that verve and talent which impress you even while you are offended with the man himself. The effect of the speech he had written was very feeble, and he made an impression which was positively painful when he tried to speak extempore. It was General Exelmans who vociferated about the assassination of Marshal Ney, and scandalised every one. His manner was that of a drunken man, and was all the more ridiculous as no one could help remembering the platitudes he used to utter during the Restoration; which, I understand, were very cruelly cast up against him last night at the Minister of Marine's party. In the morning in the House of Peers he was supported only by M. de Flahaut, who was in a great state of excitement, and whose behaviour was most improper.
He disgusted everybody by his cries of "Go on! Go on!" addressed to Carrel when the President wished to bring him to an end. It was this encouragement which made Carrel resist M. Pasquier and argue that he had no right to stop him when a member of the Chamber and, in fact, one of his judges, pressed him to continue.
On this occasion I learned from every one that M. de Flahaut was universally detested for his arrogance, ill-temper, acrimony, and ignorance. He will soon become as unpopular as his wife.
M. Pasquier presided with firmness, moderation, dignity, and coolness. I confess, however, that I agree with those who would have preferred him to stop M. Carrel when he spoke of "the young men who had fought gloriously in the troubles of last April," and not when he referred to the case of Marshal Ney. The first question dealt with—material interests—would have found more sympathy both inside and outside the House.
We had a dinner yesterday—a dozen people, my daughter Pauline being the twelfth. It is not a bad thing that she should learn to listen to serious conversation without being bored. She has a good manner in society, where her open countenance and kindly manners seem to please. After dinner people came to pay visits just as if we were Ministers. The fact is that it was Thursday, the reception day at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Marine, and I suppose that people took us on the way going or coming.
Paris, December 19, 1834.—M. le Duc d'Orléans is returned from Brussels; he came to see me yesterday, and invited me to a ball he is giving on the 29th. He stayed only a moment, when he was sent for by the King; the reason for which I learned later.
M. Guizot was the next visitor. He seemed less at his ease than usual, and tried to compose himself by prosing about England, France, and all sorts of things, but he must have found me a very unworthy listener. As a matter of fact, I listened without enthusiasm, for he was extremely tedious, and soon departed.
Madame de Castellane then came, quite out of breath, from M. Molé, in order that I might warn M. de Talleyrand of what was going on. M. le Duc d'Orléans, carried away by the deplorable Flahaut influence, proposed at the opening of the sitting of the House of Peers to-day and the reading of the minutes of last meeting, to protest along with his group against the assassination of Marshal Ney, and to demand the revision of the case. Fortunately, M. Decazes was warned, and went and told M. Pasquier. He rushed to M. Molé, who is one of the twenty-three survivors of the peers who tried the Marshal. There was a great and well-justified tumult in the camp. They went to Thiers, who hastened to the King, who knew nothing of the affair, and was very angry. He sent after his son everywhere, and after a very lively scene he forbade him to do anything. His great argument was as follows: "If you demand that Marshal Ney's case shall be re-opened, what will you say to any Carlist peer who comes (as some one very well may) and asks that the verdict against Louis XVI.—which was assassination if you like!—shall be reversed?" I heard the last part of the affair from M. Thiers, who came to see M. de Talleyrand quite at the end of the morning. Bertin de Veaux, who had got wind of the thing, also arrived quite out of breath.
Finally, the King's good sense prevailed and put a stop to this nice business. But that it should ever have entered any one's head to propose such a thing is one of the extraordinary features of this age!