Yesterday I saw Dr. Ferrus, on his return from Ham. His account of what he found there is as follows: Both the orders and the attitude of the doctors were extremely kind, but it was necessary to find some excuse for action, and the two ex-Ministers who were really ill, MM. de Chantelauze and de Peyronnet, insolently refused to permit a visit from the doctors; while the others, MM. de Polignac and Guernon de Ranville, though very compliant, submissive, and anxious to take advantage of the kindly attitude of the Government, were unfortunately unable to plead any malady. Hence it was necessary to postpone the desired attempt to improve their condition.[ [6]
Paris, February 6, 1836.—Yesterday morning I went to the session of the Chamber of Deputies, with the Countess Bretzenheim, who had invited me to accompany her; there I heard for the first time a speech by M. Thiers; he spoke admirably, in opposition to the much-discussed proposal for the conversion of the stock, so imprudently put forward by M. Humann. While M. Thiers was speaking I thought I noticed him spitting blood several times; I wrote to ask him how he was, and the following is an extract from his reply: "I am exhausted; I did not spit blood, but in those few moments I shortened my life by several days; I have never encountered so strong an opposition of opinion, and an iron will is required to overcome an obstinacy so plain as that displayed by the Chamber. I am very sorry that you should have heard me speak, as the figures must have wearied you, and have given you a poor idea of our public oratory. We should be heard and judged only upon days of excitement, and not when we are discussing accounts. In any case, I am doubtful of the consequences, and were it not for the King I should be inclined to wish that the Ministry would resign. The struggle against such imprudence and foolishness is an unbearable task."
This letter prepared me to some extent for the events of the evening. However, M. Royer-Collard, who came to me in the course of the morning, believed that the Ministry would emerge triumphant, for the reason that the Chamber would find difficulty in using an advantage, if they gained one. He was overcome with admiration for the speech of M. Thiers, and had told him as much in the Chamber. On this occasion they spoke to one another again, for the first time since the discussion of the September laws.
My son, M. de Valençay, came directly from the session of the Chamber of Deputies to dinner with us. He told us of the stupefaction produced in the Chamber by the strange conclusions of Humann, and the excitement of the Ministers because the project for converting the Government stock had been postponed by a majority of two votes only.
The Journal de Paris announced the resignation of the Ministry at a later hour, and General Alava, who had just seen the Duc de Broglie, told us at eleven o'clock in the evening that the King had accepted their resignations, and had sent for MM. Humann and Molé.
At that moment I received the following note from M. Thiers: "We have resigned in full freedom and seriousness. The King knew beforehand, and agreed with every one, and myself in particular, that this result was the inevitable consequence of our intention to oppose the scheme for conversion. Our honour would be compromised if we did not persist in our action and force a new Ministry to take office. It matters not if that Ministry be weak and helpless; the burden of proving the fact will rest upon the Third Party. No other action is possible, either for the King or for ourselves, and would in any case be a deception in the style of Charles X."
Paris, February 7, 1836.—There is no news of the Ministry except the fact of resignation, which is definite. It is thought that M. de Broglie will never take office again, as the animosity of the Chamber is chiefly directed against himself.
M. Thiers made no attempt to oppose resignation; he was actuated rather by the desire to secure an honourable withdrawal and to dissociate himself from colleagues whom he did not like than by any special devotion to the point at issue, though his defence was marked with great skill.
The King summoned M. Humann, who refused, M. Molé, who declined, M. Dupin, who spoke at random—shades of meaning which are worthy of note. In short, nothing has been done, nor can any action be regarded as probable. The friends of M. Molé say that he will no longer be sent from pillar to post or put up with requests, refusals, and vexations such as he experienced in November, and that if people will not submit to his views he will decline to interfere.
Paris, February 8, 1836.—Yesterday I had a call from M. Royer-Collard. He explains the attitude of the Chamber towards the last Ministry as follows: The Ministry had lasted for three years and was worn out, especially the doctrinaire members of it, while the Cabinet had wearied the Chamber by too constantly pressing for decisions and making personal matters Cabinet questions; moreover, the Chamber had gone beyond its powers in the announcement issued at the time when the laws concerning intimidation were passed;[ [7] it had been by no means popular in the provinces, while the disdainful folly of M. de Broglie had filled the cup to overflowing. Finally, as the country was prosperous and peaceful both at home and abroad, the Chamber had thought the moment opportune to enounce its rights and to show the Ministry that it was not indispensable; while a popular question in the provinces had provided it with an opportunity for displaying its power, in which determination it was supported by its political ignorance, which will not allow it to foresee the extent of the crisis. M. Royer-Collard added that the only two Ministers who could have preserved their reputation in the Chamber were MM. Thiers and Duchâtel, but that here again some small period of exile would be necessary.