M. de Vitrolles, after delivering this important message, asked the Prince M. de Talleyrand's question and received this reply: "I remember the incident perfectly, and M. de Talleyrand's account is entirely correct."
As we were informed that M. de Vitrolles had related this anecdote to several people, we thought it our duty to appeal to his memory and his loyalty; to justify this expression of loyalty it must be said that after the revolution of July 1830 M. de Vitrolles had broken off his relations with M. de Talleyrand and had criticised his actions very severely. Hence the tone of hostility and bitterness which is perceptible in the letter from M. de Vitrolles which we propose to insert here; we think that this hostility will be nothing but a guarantee both for the reader and for ourselves, of the sincerity with which M. de Vitrolles has made his declaration, and of the authenticity of the passage in the Memoirs of M. de Talleyrand. The slight differences which will be noticed in the story as given by M. de Talleyrand and as it appears in the letter from M. de Vitrolles can be naturally explained as the result of lapse of time which has affected the memories of the two narrators. The fact, however, remains certain that M. de Talleyrand in July 1789 believed that the revolutionary movement could be stopped, was strong enough to say what he thought and bold enough to undertake the task of checking it. He is not, perhaps, the only man who boasted of it later, but we think that we have shown at least that he did not boast wrongly. The following is the letter from M. de Vitrolles:
The Baron de Vitrolles to M. de Bacourt.
Paris, April 6, 1852.
Sir,—As you have placed some value upon the testimony which I can give with respect to a special incident in the life of M. de Talleyrand, I think that I cannot better satisfy your wish than by copying here what I wrote many years ago in a narrative of the events of 1814.
"When the Emperor of Russia and the Prince de Talleyrand had realised that the presence of the King's brother invested with power as a Lieutenant-General of the Realm became necessary, and when I started to induce Monsieur to come to Paris, I had several interviews on this subject with the President of the Provisional Government (the Prince de Talleyrand). In the last conversation at the moment of departure we discussed the forms and conditions under which Monseigneur was to be received: after a moment's silence the Prince de Talleyrand continued with his gentle smile and in a tone which was intended to be careless and almost indifferent:
"'I beg you to ask the Comte d'Artois if he remembers the last opportunity that I had of seeing him. It was in the month of July 1789, and the Court was at Marly. Three or four of my friends had been startled like myself by the rapidity and violence of the movement which was sweeping men's minds away, and we resolved to inform King Louis XVI. of the real state of affairs of which the Court and the Ministers seemed to be ignorant. We requested His Majesty to be so kind as to receive us. We were anxious that this audience should be kept secret in his interests as well as our own. We were informed that the King had commissioned his brother, the Comte d'Artois, to receive us, and an appointment was given us at Marly in the residence which the Comte d'Artois occupied alone. We arrived there at midnight.'
"M. de Talleyrand told me the precise date and the names of the friends who accompanied him; they were members of the National Assembly and of that minority of nobles who had joined the Third Estate, but I have forgotten both the date and the names.
"'When we came before the Comte d'Artois,' continued M. de Talleyrand, 'we told him with full frankness the state of affairs and of the country as we saw it. We told him that it was a delusion to suppose that the movement that had begun in men's minds could be easily laid to rest. Procrastination, negotiation, and a few concessions were not the means of averting the danger which threatened France, the Throne, and the King. The true means were a strong display of the royal authority wisely and prudently exerted. We knew the ways and means, and our position allowed us to undertake the task and to guarantee success, if the King's confidence called us to act. The Comte d'Artois listened very carefully and fully appreciated our representations, perhaps with the idea that we were exaggerating the danger of the situation and our own powers of improving it; but, as he told us, he had been ordered by the King only to hear us and to bring to him the information which we wished to impart; he could give us no answer and had no power to pledge the King's will or word. At that point we requested the Comte d'Artois to tell the King that if the step we were taking in all good conscience and good faith was not appreciated, if it had no consequence and led to no result, Monseigneur must not be astonished if we followed the new current of national progress, in impotence to stand against the torrent which threatened to sweep everything away. Ask Monsieur, if you please,' repeated M. de Talleyrand, 'if the conversation of that night has remained in his memory; it was just before the time when he left France.'
"I admired the cleverness of the man who could find in one of these recollections an explanation an excuse and almost a justification for the whole of his revolutionary life. He would have found many other similar excuses to justify different and even contrary circumstances. When I heard this story, which was related with a kind of indifference and childlike simplicity, I ventured to doubt whether the recollections of Monsieur would be in complete correspondence with the words I had just heard. However, when I performed M. de Talleyrand's commission at Nancy, Monseigneur told me without going into details that he had not forgotten the incident and that my reminder of the circumstance was in entire harmony with the truth."